BELFAST RB BOOKLET 2020 - Flipbook - Page 30
Ci t y of Belf ast Grand Bl ack Chapt er - Dem onst rat i on Bookl et 2020
Unfortunately, the problem facing the
British military in recent years is the
'judicialisation' of conflict and, in
particular, the displacement of the
Law of Armed Conflict by European
human rights law. British soldiers are
increasingly subject to a different
legal regime than are their American
counterparts. The extension of the
European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR) to the battlefield has
made extensive litigation against
British soldiers inevitable.
LAWFARE is not an easy problem to
resolve. I believe I understand the magnitude
of the challenges and issues involved. But as
the only individual to command the coalitions
in both Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as US
Central Command (responsible for the Middle
East and Central Asia), and as one who
cherished serving on operations together with
British forces for seven and a half of my final
ten years in uniform, I strongly believe we
owe it to the fighting men and women of this
British country to protect them from an abuse
of the legal processes.
It will be for the UK’s next Government
This, in turn, risks promoting a culture of
and
Parliament to decide how best to
risk aversion in the ranks. In Afghanistan, it
respond.
In that deliveration the proposals
undermined the British military’s authority to
outlined
in
this paper should so receive
detain enemy combatants and also to work
with the Afghan government and our NATO serious consideration. Restoring the
primacy of the law of armed conflict must
allies.
be a priority if the UK is to remain a
The unfair pursuit of British
country of military consequence
soldiers and veterans in the
on the world stage, as I fervently
aftermath of operations is
hope it will.
particularly concerning. This
Moreover, this paper explains
practice has caused enormous
how
to achieve this end, by
stress and anxiety on those
derogating from the ECHR and
who are caught up in
limiting the extra territorial
investigations, sometimes years
application
of the UK's Human
or even decades after their combat
Rights
Act
of
1998,
and the paper's
service. The extent to which those who
served decades ago in Northern Ireland, prescription for protecting veterans from
including the highly distinguished soldier abuse in the courts, including measures
and scholar General Sir Frank Kitson specific to Northern Ireland, strike me as
remain exposed to legal risk, is both workable, desirable and well-judged.
Reform will be highly controversial; and
striking and indeed, appalling.
This is not only unfair to those who have a challenge in court is likely; but the
served and sacrificed for their Country it also politicians who aspire to lead also have a
gravely undermines the morale of those responsibility to defend those who
serving now and raises an unnecessary defend the realm. It is a responsibility
they should not neglect.'
concern for potential recruits.
The conduct of military action has been increasingly subject to meritless court action, as well
as in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Enemy combatants and others have
challenged key operational decisions of British forces on active service. These challenges
have abused European human rights law, incorporated into UK law through the Human Rights
Act 1998 or the private law of tort (wrong-doing). However speaking to the same Policy
Exchange on a later date, it was gratifying to note that former Law Lord and Supreme Court
Justice, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, described the prosecutions of NI veterans as
outrageous. Hopefully by the time you read this page, Defence Minister Johnny Mercer's
proposed Bill will have passed in the House of Commons, to negate frivolous prosecutions.
1
IN MEMORY OF THE FALLEN - 28 - AND THE FUTURE OF THE LIVING