As an example, the courts have considered whether there is scope for judicial review of a refusal to render diplomatic assistance to a British subject suffering violation of a fundamental right as the result of the conduct of authorities of a foreign state. In R (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2002] EWCA Civ 1598 the mother of a British citizen detained in Guantanamo Bay brought proceedings to compel the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) to make representations on her son's behalf to the United States government. The Court of Appeal recognised that Abbasi had a legitimate expectation of diplomatic assistance, but that the expectation was very limited and the discretion of the FCO very wide. On the facts, the FCO was seen to have done all that was required of it. However, the court stated that there was no reason in principle why an FCO decision (or inaction by the FCO) could not be reviewable in the future, if it could be shown that a decision or inaction was irrational or contrary to a legitimate expectation. However, the court was quite clear that they could not enter into the 'forbidden areas', which included decisions affecting higher foreign policy itself.