The point, as far as I can tell is this, he has been refused leave to remain in the country by the UKBA because he was charged and fined for a disciplinary offence last year. After the 2010 amendment to the Rehabilitation of Offenders act (1974) all convictions, whether spent or not, can be taken into account by the UKBA. Prior to this amendment there were no exceptions, once a conviction was spent, it was spent. So if his offence took place last year or 12 years ago it would still be considered as a criminal conviction by the UKBA.
The real injustice as far as I am concerned is that all punishments awarded under military discipline which lead to a fine or detention are regarded as convictions. A civilian has to be taken to court, tried and found guilty to receive a conviction. During this process they are entitled to professional legal representation.
A member of HM Forces can be charged, the offence heard by and disposed of by their Commanding officer, with no right to legal representation. This means any serviceman or woman who leaves the Forces and has been charged and fined in the 12 months prior to leaving must declare the conviction when applying for a job. How many people know that? And in fact prior to 1st May this year, the rehabilitation period for a conviction leading to a fine was actually 5 years.
I am willing to accept that offences dealt with by a Court Martial should be regarded with the same weight as a Civilian court conviction but a simple charge? Heard by any old commissioned officer without specialist legal training or experience? That is ludicrous.
http://www.ilpa.org.uk/data/resource...s-Act-1974.pdf