Soldiers’ suspense prolonged as Iraq war abuse inquiry set to be extended
Senior military figures and alleged victims are calling for official investigations to be speeded up
BRITISH soldiers face being investigated until well into the next decade over allegations of abuse dating back to the Iraq war, it emerged yesterday.
The head of the team set up by the Ministry of Defence to investigate abuse admitted that plans to end the inquiry by 2019 were now under review.
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (Ihat) has received more than 700 fresh abuse claims in recent months, even though the inquiry is only looking at ill-treatment and unlawful killings between 2003 and 2009.
Last night, senior military veterans condemned the length of time the investigations were taking. Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, has complained of “ambulance-chasing law firms” bringing thousands of cases against the Ministry of Defence. He said the process “inhibits the operational effectiveness of our troops, because they start to worry about whether they will end up in a court or not”.
Col Tim Collins said the Iraq war had created “an industry” for lawyers to make money out of alleged abuse: “People are taking advantage of a fairminded society, but now somebody needs to draw a line under it.”
Col Richard Kemp, a former army commander, said: “When you bear in mind that the Nuremberg war crimes trials were complete within about a year of the Second World War, that puts it in some kind of context. These cases have been hanging over soldiers for many years… I think the Government has to put more resources to this, it has to be done more urgently.”
Mark Warwick, a former detective in charge of Ihat, said a decision will be taken as to whether the group’s funding will need to be extended beyond 2019. “Over the next 12 to 18 months we will review all the caseload to better understand the picture,” he said.
Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), which represents a number of alleged victims, has claimed that Ihat is “failing to investigate” those responsible for “systemic” abuse. A spokesman said: “PIL has 1,386 cases where the victims all make allegations of torture and illtreatment or of unlawful killings.
“Despite public inquiries, court proceedings ongoing since 2004 and the Ihat team of investigators, there is yet to be a single prosecution resulting from Ihat’s work.”
Concern over the conduct of British forces in Iraq first surfaced with the death of Baha Mousa, a hotel receptionist who was beaten to death while in the custody of the 1st Battalion of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, in 2003. Ihat is still investigating the death, having been asked to review all evidence.
Justice works both ways. If an accused person is found guilty, they should face sanction. If, however, they are innocent, they must be allowed to get on with their lives. In either case, the process of judgment should be as swift as humanly possible. Tragically, this has not been the case for many British soldiers. This newspaper has long documented the activities of legal firms which exploit vexatious claims of Iraq war human rights abuses to make vast sums of money. Last week, Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, told The Sunday Telegraph that “ambulancechasing lawyers” are undermining operational effectiveness by worrying soldiers that they could end up in court just for doing their jobs. Now Mark Warwick, a former police detective in charge of the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (Ihat), has admitted that Ihat has a huge backlog of claims to complete – and that British soldiers face being investigated well into the next decade.
This is unfair. Of course valid accusations of human rights abuse must be interrogated. The imprisonment of Marine A, itself a case fraught with controversy, shows that Britain is serious about holding its personnel to account. But to make someone wait so many years to find out if they have been found guilty seems wrong, while many will ask how the public interest is being served. Ihat has arguably failed to demonstrate common sense. It should have sifted intelligently through the accusations, rather than wasted time on alleged mild infractions. Anyone inclined to infer from the team’s work that the British Army is routinely barbaric or morally equivalent to the Iraqi insurgents will be sorely disappointed.
Investigations into the Iraq war tend to have a long shelf life. The Chilcot Inquiry was announced in 2009 and the world only expects to hear its findings later this year. Perhaps this is a measure of the moral complexity surrounding the conflict, a war that has become a political football. For the soldiers awaiting a decision from Ihat, however, this is no game. As Colonel Richard Kemp, a former Army commander, has noted: “The Nuremberg war crimes trials were complete pretty much within about a year of the Second World War.” The delay in the case of Ihat is historically disproportionate and could itself be regarded as a breach of human rights.