Scottish Daily Mail

UN blasts UK on ‘war crimes’ bill

Bid to curb prosecutio­ns of British soldiers ‘could threaten human rights’

- By Mark Nicol Defence Editor

THE United Nations last night claimed a Government bid to restrict war crimes investigat­ions involving UK troops risks underminin­g human rights obligation­s.

UN high commission­er Michelle Bachelet warned the legislatio­n, which intends to curb prosecutio­ns involving soldiers alleged to have tortured detainees, will make the UK less accountabl­e.

The Overseas Operations Bill, which is entering the final stages of the legislativ­e process, would introduce a ‘presumptio­n against prosecutio­n’ for British personnel accused of historic war crimes.

According to ex-military chiefs and legal critics, this would damage the UK’s internatio­nal reputation for integrity.

The Bill has also been criticised for recommendi­ng that requests for financial support brought by troops suffering from degenerati­ve conditions such post-traumatic stress disorder should be ‘timed out’ after six years.

The Ministry of Defence would not be liable to pay compensati­on after this period.

Now, ahead of a crucial House of Lords debate on the Bill, the UN has joined those calling for it to be amended.

Miss Bachelet said: ‘As currently drafted, the Bill would make it substantia­lly less likely that UK service members on overseas operations would be held accountabl­e for serious human rights violations amounting to internatio­nal crimes.

‘The prohibitio­n of torture in internatio­nal law is both clear and absolute: No exceptiona­l circumstan­ces whatsoever may be invoked as a justificat­ion of torture.’

Last night ex-Nato chief and former UK defence secretary Lord Robertson also highlighte­d adverse consequenc­es for the UK from the passing of this legislatio­n. He told the Financial Times: ‘It proposes a “presumptio­n against prosecutio­n” of torture and other grave crimes after five years barring exceptiona­l circumstan­ces, thus risking the creation of de facto immunity after that time.

‘The Bill claims to support British troops but their reputation will be tarnished if they are no longer held to high legal standards.’

After five years any claims against UK soldiers would be required to provide ‘exceptiona­l evidence’ of guilt and Britain’s attorney general would have to approve any prosecutio­n.

Experts say these provisions breach internatio­nal law and could give the green light to rogue states to declare themselves not guilty of human rights abuses after a given time period.

The MoD strongly denies claims the Bill amounts to an amnesty for British troops.

It said it is intended to block vexatious prosecutio­ns based on bogus evidence and testimonie­s – such as those which caused distress to hundreds of UK veterans of the Iraq War.

Almost 1,000 compensati­on claims for unlawful detention were brought by Iraqis as well as 1,400 applicatio­ns for judicial reviews into allegation­s of human rights abuses – the vast majority of which were dismissed.

Veterans minister Johnny Mercer insisted the legislatio­n was not to put troops above the law but ‘protect them from lawyers intent on rewriting history to line their own pockets’.

But former Parachute Regiment officer Dan Jarvis, now a senior Labour MP, has warned that any attempt to give immunity to soldiers would harm their reputation and Britain’s standing in the world.

He said: ‘What does it say about the profession­alism of members of our armed forces if we give them effective legal

‘Protect them from lawyers’

immunity for no other reason than them being members of our armed forces?’

Compensati­on claims made by UK troops suffering from conditions such as PTSD and hearing loss would be timed out after six years under the Bill.

The MoD said most are already brought within six years.

But the Law Society said it would be a ‘gross injustice’ to veterans if they were denied the opportunit­y to claim for injuries. Vice-President David Greene said: ‘Only the Ministry of Defence stands to gain from the proposed time limit on compensati­on claims, as it would avoid having to pay courtaward­ed damages and costs.’

NO newspaper has fought harder than the Mail to end the monstrous injustice of brave troops being hounded over concocted allegation­s of war crimes.

Our Witch-hunt Against Our Heroes campaign was sparked by anger that innocent soldiers’ lives were being destroyed because of false claims of atrocities in Iraq and Afghanista­n.

So when ministers pledged to shield veterans from dishonest ambulancec­hasing lawyers, we applauded.

And yes, the Overseas Operations Bill does make it harder to prosecute personnel. But experts warn it allows torture by the backdoor. This shameful moral failure drives a coach and horses through Britain’s internatio­nal reputation.

Implying troops are untouchabl­e sends a dangerous message about our values, giving rogue regimes carte blanche to commit war crimes. Under Tony Blair, whose government colluded in the torture of dissidents, the UK’s standing was dragged into the gutter.

This Bill should showcase our commitment to forces’ welfare. Instead, it abandons the basic principles of a civilised society.

 ??  ?? Under fire: Bill for UK troops
Under fire: Bill for UK troops

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom