
A team from Hilary Meredith Solicitors Ltd put on their...
A summary of the ruling by the Court of Appeal in the recent case of Mansfield v Mansfield (2011).A summary of the ruling by the Court of Appeal...
Injured Cyclists could have their compensation reduced if they choose not to wear a helmet.A summary of the ruling by the High Court in...
British troops accused of breaking the law face more rigorous prosecution in
wholesale changes to the system for preparing cases for courts martial.
The reforms, being implemented by a criminal lawyer rather than a military
figure, come after the collapse of charges over the death of an Iraqi held by
British Forces in Basra.
All military lawyers are to have enhanced training in advocacy skills and
closer links are to be forged with military police to give a better chance of
convictions in serious cases.
The tougher approach to prosecuting members of the Armed Forces who commit
crimes is to be initiated by Bruce Houlder, QC, who took over yesterday as the
first civilian in charge of military prosecutions. Formerly a top criminal
barrister, he becomes independent director of Service prosecutions for all three
Armed Forces, with the amalgamation of the separate prosecuting authorities for
the Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.
His reforms are in response to the acquittal of six soldiers and officers
charged in connection with the beating and death of Baha Musa, an Iraqi
prisoner, in Basra in 2003.
In an interview with The Times, Mr Houlder accused soldiers who gave
evidence at their court martial of showing loyalty to colleagues rather than to
their regiment, meaning that the trial did not establish who was to blame.
He promised "robust" prosecution of members of the Armed Forces accused of
serious crimes but said that there was a significant difference between
personnel deliberately flouting the law and "young soldiers acting to the best
of their ability in time of war who make a terrible mistake".
To ensure that appropriate evidence was acquired in every case, Mr Houlder
said that he would push for a closer working relationship between his
prosecuting authority and the military investigators in the same way that the
Crown Prosecution Service liaised with the police in criminal cases.
He has already spoken to the Provost Marshal, who is in charge of military
investigations, to improve liaison.
Mr Houlder, 61, defended the record of military prosecutions, saying that the
proportion of convictions in courts martial was slightly higher than in civilian
trials, but conceded that high-profile failures had tarnished their image. "An
unfair impression is given, because of the result of a few cases, that
prosecuting authorities have not performed as well as they might, but no one has
been able to show that it was the failure of the prosecution service that led to
those results," he said.
The most notable case was the court martial of five members of The Queen's
Lancashire Regiment (QLR) and two from the Intelligence Corps, all charged with
offences linked to the death of Mr Musa in British military detention in 2003.
Only one, Corporal Donald Payne, of the QLR, was convicted, after pleading
guilty to the war crime of inhuman treatment of Mr Musa and other detainees.
In another case, seven paratroopers were found not guilty in 2005 of
murdering an Iraqi civilian. The judge advocate criticised the weakness of the
prosecution case and the inadequacy of the military investigation.
In the Baha Musa case, Mr Houlder said, there had been evidence of
"regimental amnesia" - what the High Court judge in the court martial in 2007
described as "a closing of the ranks". "Witnesses forgot where their loyalties
lay," he said. "They thought their loyalty lay with the soldiers on trial, not
with the regiment as a whole."
A public inquiry into the death of Mr Musa, led by the retired Lord Justice
of Appeal Sir William Gage, is due to start in the next few months. Witnesses
have been advised that if they tell the truth they will not face prosecution as
a consequence.
Mr Houlder appreciated that the Armed Forces operated in a different
environment and he had written to all commanding officers to reassure them that
although he had no military background, he was fully cognisant of the special
requirements and expectations of an armed forces justice system.
He said that he understood the "paramount importance" of effective discipline
in the Services and that there were many offences, such as absence without leave
and neglect of duty, that had no place in civilian courts. "I can honestly say I
have not faced any expression of resentment about a civilian being appointed to
this job," Mr Houlder said. He has been in office for some months, preparing for
his appointment, drawing up a business plan for the tri-Service prosecuting
authority and visiting bases in the United Kingdom and overseas, including those
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As part of his strategy for creating a robust, more effective prosecuting
authority, Mr Houlder said that he was hoping to persuade the three Service
secretaries who are responsible for career structures to allow his team of 40
prosecuting lawyers to serve for three years, to build up experience.
Although Mr Houlder's appointment started officially yesterday the three
separate prosecuting authorities will not be finally merged until October,
because of the complexities of the Armed Forces Act 2006 that enshrines his role
in law.