GBZ
I’m clear in my mind that Military and International Law isn’t optional.
Good. We agree. It is not optional, be it today, yesterday or tomorrow.
I additionally feel frustration at the UK meja that seems to delight in stoking up emotions over such revelations with the distinct aim of making money and creating more heat than light.
There is no money in reporting, which is all that is happening, these allegations, and sadly in some cases, convictions. It is, unsurprisingly, not something the public wants to hear.
But if the allegations are made, then they have to be reported to ensure that the public is a) aware and b) reassured that such allegations are properly investigated.
That is a key part of the media's role, in my view, probably
the key role, demonstrating to the public that the government, the courts and government bodies, including the forces, are doing their jobs properly.
Quite properly, these allegations cannot be reported as anything other than allegations, until someone has been convicted, and if you have seen anywhere where they have been, I suggest you report them to the judge when the case comes before the courts, so he can declare the offending organisation in contempt of court.
We are currently in the middle of one inquiry into the death of Baha Mousa, a Basra hotel worker, who died after being beaten during a sustained softening up process. The evidence is out there and horrific. I suggest you google Baha Musa and choir and read any of the reports from the current inquiry in that regard.
One soldier admitted inhumane treatment and served a year in jail. No-one else was convicted as a result, and no-one was convicted of manslaughter, because of what the judge condemned as a "closing of ranks" within the regiment involved.
The High Court ordered an inquiry into another case "Danny Boy" earlier this year and the MoD finally announced the inquiry this week.
Lawyers for a number of Iraqis asked for the inquiry because, they alleged, the RMP had failed to investigate allegations that British troops beat and killed prisoners.
The inquiry was only ordered after evidence to the court from a senior RMP officer was found to be seriously flawed and it emerged that someone in the chain of command had tried to withhold from the court Red Cross documents which suggested that Iraqis taken prisoner had been beaten while being held down.
Blame normally ascends the command chain. As a consequence, normally good commanders find themselves answerable for “oversights” that may not have occurred in the comfort of a UK/Europe camp/station/depot.
For a very good reason. Because they have fouled up and are ultimately responsible for what happens on their watch.
I sat through the Bread Basket court martial in early 2005 and it was very clear very early on that the officers who gave the orders and shaped the environment in which the incidents occurred were never investigated and the junior NCOs were left to carry the can.
But in the more recent cases, elements of the chain of command blocked RMP officers from investigating some cases properly, including at least one case where the original RMP investigating officers had very strong suspicions that a murder had taken place. That's not an allegation incidentally, it's a fact, revealed by Lord Goldsmith, the then Attorney-General, in correspondence released to the court.
It's worth bearing in mind that if the RMP had investigated - or had been allowed to investigate - all of the cases that came up properly at the time, there would be far less problem getting the UK courts to dismiss fraudulent claims now. As it is virtually any claim has become almost impossible to deny.
So frankly, I find it difficult to understand why anyone would have any sympathy for those in the chain of command who now find themselves under fire.