Indemnifying military commanders
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indemnifying military commanders
Human Rights. Commanders now being flogged insurance.
Military commanders sold insurance for cases against Armed Forces - Telegraph
Military commanders sold insurance for cases against Armed Forces - Telegraph
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
"I was only obeying orders" so you will get a first class defence before being found guilty or will they pay your salary while in prison?
What about killing someone in the course of military action which is subsequently declared an illegal act? Eg an invasion of a sovereign territory by another state.
What about killing someone in the course of military action which is subsequently declared an illegal act? Eg an invasion of a sovereign territory by another state.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,923
Received 2,844 Likes
on
1,215 Posts
So as the conquering army tie you to a post in front of a firing squad you can go to your God confident in the fact that the insurance will pay out for you losing the war.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Telegraph
Military commanders sold insurance for cases against Armed Forces
Military commanders are being sold insurance to protect them against legal action amid concern about battlefield claims from Iraq and Afghanistan, a former defence chief has said.
Lord Boyce, a former Chief of the Defence Staff, said he was concerned about the “increasing legal encirclement of our Armed Forces”.
The cross-bench peer told the Lords there was growing concern in the Forces about "crown immunity – or the lack of it – in warfare situations", fuelled by a surge of cases of alleged abuses in the field, or the use of allegedly inappropriate equipment.
The Ministry of Defence is facing hundreds of claims of alleged abuses from the Iraq and Afghan campaigns. Court rulings that the Government has a legal duty to protect its soldiers’ human rights, even on the battlefield, have raised concerns commanders will be sued if they are found to have taken risks.
Lord Boyce said there were now insurance companies "touting insurance to commanding officers against the possibility of their being involved in litigation at some stage".
One scheme advertised says it is aimed at any commander “who is or may be sued in the UK Courts for negligent acts and or omissions made in the course of his or her military duties.”
The Commanders’ Protection scheme from The Military Mutual includes legal advice and representation, as well as help gathering witnesses and evidence.
A spokesman for the firm said the scheme was still being piloted and tested.
A defence source said compensation cases were almost always brought against the MoD, rather than individuals. Insurance could cover criminal allegations, though the MoD would also provide lawyers in most cases, the source said.
Applying health and safety and human rights legislation to the military could prevent Britain winning wars, the Lords heard.
Lord West, a former First Sea Lord, recalled his own combat experience in the Falklands War as the upper house debated the second reading of the Armed Forces Bill.
He said: “I knew that my anti-aircraft armament was insufficient to counter air attacks so close against land, but it is the duty of military men to fight the war they are in with the equipment they have.
“It is clearly a total nonsense that one can use human rights legislation to drag military leaders through the courts for decisions made in war.
"In combat men kill and are killed on a regular basis fighting for their countries, civilian norms cannot possibly apply, and yet there is a growing tendency, particularly in the European courts, to make judgments as if events on the battlefield were taking place in the halcyon days of peace.
"On the battlefield the right to life is not certain. I remain concerned about a possible wave of litigation, the impact on our people, and our military effectiveness.
Labour's Lord Young of Norwood Green hit out at the "obscene" behaviour of no win-no fee lawyers bringing cases against British personnel.
Military commanders are being sold insurance to protect them against legal action amid concern about battlefield claims from Iraq and Afghanistan, a former defence chief has said.
Lord Boyce, a former Chief of the Defence Staff, said he was concerned about the “increasing legal encirclement of our Armed Forces”.
The cross-bench peer told the Lords there was growing concern in the Forces about "crown immunity – or the lack of it – in warfare situations", fuelled by a surge of cases of alleged abuses in the field, or the use of allegedly inappropriate equipment.
The Ministry of Defence is facing hundreds of claims of alleged abuses from the Iraq and Afghan campaigns. Court rulings that the Government has a legal duty to protect its soldiers’ human rights, even on the battlefield, have raised concerns commanders will be sued if they are found to have taken risks.
Lord Boyce said there were now insurance companies "touting insurance to commanding officers against the possibility of their being involved in litigation at some stage".
One scheme advertised says it is aimed at any commander “who is or may be sued in the UK Courts for negligent acts and or omissions made in the course of his or her military duties.”
The Commanders’ Protection scheme from The Military Mutual includes legal advice and representation, as well as help gathering witnesses and evidence.
A spokesman for the firm said the scheme was still being piloted and tested.
A defence source said compensation cases were almost always brought against the MoD, rather than individuals. Insurance could cover criminal allegations, though the MoD would also provide lawyers in most cases, the source said.
Applying health and safety and human rights legislation to the military could prevent Britain winning wars, the Lords heard.
Lord West, a former First Sea Lord, recalled his own combat experience in the Falklands War as the upper house debated the second reading of the Armed Forces Bill.
He said: “I knew that my anti-aircraft armament was insufficient to counter air attacks so close against land, but it is the duty of military men to fight the war they are in with the equipment they have.
“It is clearly a total nonsense that one can use human rights legislation to drag military leaders through the courts for decisions made in war.
"In combat men kill and are killed on a regular basis fighting for their countries, civilian norms cannot possibly apply, and yet there is a growing tendency, particularly in the European courts, to make judgments as if events on the battlefield were taking place in the halcyon days of peace.
"On the battlefield the right to life is not certain. I remain concerned about a possible wave of litigation, the impact on our people, and our military effectiveness.
Labour's Lord Young of Norwood Green hit out at the "obscene" behaviour of no win-no fee lawyers bringing cases against British personnel.
