Accused soldiers must have proper support
When British soldiers were sent into southern Iraq over a decade ago, they entered the fog of war. Under orders to keep control of chaos, they found themselves in terrible situations. Individual soldiers who did wrong should face justice. But there must be a common sense, fair way of proceeding. Sadly, what has happened to some soldiers goes well beyond what is necessary and proper.
Today we highlight the case of a major who has been pursued over the death of a 19-year-old Iraqi in 2003 – and not just once. In 2006, the case against him was thrown out after two witnesses were found to lack credibility. He tried to get on with his life. In 2014, however, an ex-girlfriend called him to say that investigators from the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (Ihat) had contacted her and demanded to know if he had ever been abusive. Six months later, Ihat’s people informed his commanding officer that they wanted to arrest the major. Then, last week, the major was told that Ihat had decided to pass his case to the Director of Service Prosecutions with a recommended charge of involuntary manslaughter. It carries a maximum sentence of life in jail.
In a powerful article for this newspaper, Johnny Mercer, the Conservative MP and veteran, writes that there is insufficient support for personnel going through these processes and that what is happening to them amounts to a sacrifice “on an altar of bureaucracy and faux international obligations”. Certainly, Ihat’s reputation has been called into question many times. The vast majority of the nearly 1,500 cases it is working through were brought by a single law firm – Public Interest Lawyers – that has since folded after its legal aid was withdrawn. And today we report that the firm hired to provide civilian investigators to Ihat is believed to have made an enormous profit.
Accusations such as the one facing the major have to be gone over with tremendous care for everyone involved. But what is being done to this man must feel like persecution: keeping a historical case going despite the fact that it has been dropped before. It reflects a failure to sift intelligently through claims and to show due concern towards those under scrutiny. If the prosecutors are going to continue with this case, they must be certain that the evidence is strong enough to justify prolonging this agony.