Another Conscientious Objector!
Thread Starter
Another Conscientious Objector!
Incomplete and abridged (but still accurate) from todays Sunday Times, page 2:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A Muslim reservist airman is bringing a test case against the MOD after he was disciplined for refusing to take part in the Iraq war on religious grounds.
He was arrested and charged after going AWOL from his RAF base in Suffolk (Wattasham??). He serves as an 'aircraftsman' and medic.
He is appealing on the grounds that his faith forbids him from fighting other muslims. His lawyers will argue that the 'European convention on human rights' gives everyone the right to freedom of religious belief - including military personnel.
Moshin Khan's case is the first of its kind and is likely to become a cause celebre in Britain's muslim community and among those opposed to the conflict.
2 other soldiers from 16 Air Assault Brigade have been sent home from the Gulf after refusing to fight. Unlike Khan, however, they based their objections on moral rather than religious grounds and have not yet been punished for their actions.
In previous conflicts, CO's in HM Armed Forces have been jailed for refusing to fight.
The case is listed to be heard at a summary appeal court hearing before a judge and 2 senior RAF officers at Leeming on 23 June"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT THEN!
Who does this specimen think he is?
You CANNOT take the Queen's shilling for god knows how many years, 'having a laugh and making new friends', as so many seem to join for...... and then pick and choose your battles.
In his arrogance, he could be depriving the front line of a badly needed set of hands. The fighting may have stopped, but the place is far from safe.
Send him to the glasshouse, then claim back all his RAuxAF pay!
Is nothing safe from the bloody European Liberal Court of Social Workers!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A Muslim reservist airman is bringing a test case against the MOD after he was disciplined for refusing to take part in the Iraq war on religious grounds.
He was arrested and charged after going AWOL from his RAF base in Suffolk (Wattasham??). He serves as an 'aircraftsman' and medic.
He is appealing on the grounds that his faith forbids him from fighting other muslims. His lawyers will argue that the 'European convention on human rights' gives everyone the right to freedom of religious belief - including military personnel.
Moshin Khan's case is the first of its kind and is likely to become a cause celebre in Britain's muslim community and among those opposed to the conflict.
2 other soldiers from 16 Air Assault Brigade have been sent home from the Gulf after refusing to fight. Unlike Khan, however, they based their objections on moral rather than religious grounds and have not yet been punished for their actions.
In previous conflicts, CO's in HM Armed Forces have been jailed for refusing to fight.
The case is listed to be heard at a summary appeal court hearing before a judge and 2 senior RAF officers at Leeming on 23 June"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT THEN!
Who does this specimen think he is?
You CANNOT take the Queen's shilling for god knows how many years, 'having a laugh and making new friends', as so many seem to join for...... and then pick and choose your battles.
In his arrogance, he could be depriving the front line of a badly needed set of hands. The fighting may have stopped, but the place is far from safe.
Send him to the glasshouse, then claim back all his RAuxAF pay!
Is nothing safe from the bloody European Liberal Court of Social Workers!
What do you mean by ".....taking the Queen's shilling for God know how many years..."?
There is a significant difference between the volunteers who man the RAuxAF squadrons and personnel called-out under the provisions of the Reserve Forces Act. One is a clear volunteer, the other is being required to respond to a reserve liability which he/she probably never expected to be realised..
I'd be willing to bet that there are quite a few folk around who left under PVR but who have probably have absolutely no idea of their liability for call-out (and/or recall - there is a significant difference) when the appropriate Order is enacted by SoS Def.
There is a significant difference between the volunteers who man the RAuxAF squadrons and personnel called-out under the provisions of the Reserve Forces Act. One is a clear volunteer, the other is being required to respond to a reserve liability which he/she probably never expected to be realised..
I'd be willing to bet that there are quite a few folk around who left under PVR but who have probably have absolutely no idea of their liability for call-out (and/or recall - there is a significant difference) when the appropriate Order is enacted by SoS Def.
I believe that the MoD has sometimes exercised discretion in deciding who to send to (for example) Northern Ireland depending on their religious background and links to that community. I'm surprised that similar discretion wasn't exercised here. Since it wasn't however, there was clearly no option but to charge him. I'm also inclined to wonder what genuine objection a medic would have to going - many COs have given invaluable service in previous conflicts in exactly that role. He may even have had opportunity to help his fellow Moslems.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Over There
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only someone who had served in the past would have any reserve service obligations. The serviceman concerned must therefore have, once, signed up to fight anyone HMG asked him to. Unless his beliefs are a recent change of heart, he shouldn't have joined in the first place.
I'm sure that, even after PVR, no-one has to spend more than 10 years in the Reserves, so the subject must have either fought in GWI, or joined since - either way, being sent to fight a predominantly Muslim nation shouldn't have come as a surprise.
Are we really that short of manpower that retired reservists are being called up alongside the volunteers?
I'm sure that, even after PVR, no-one has to spend more than 10 years in the Reserves, so the subject must have either fought in GWI, or joined since - either way, being sent to fight a predominantly Muslim nation shouldn't have come as a surprise.
Are we really that short of manpower that retired reservists are being called up alongside the volunteers?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's nothing like taking a bit of media hype and hyping it a bit more.
Firstly, The Sunday Times is wrong to describe this as a 'test case'. An appeal, like this one, from an orderly room to the Summary Appeal Court is like an appeal from a magistrates' court to the Crown Court. In other words, decisions of these courts cannot set a legal precedent that is binding upon other courts. Therefore, it ain't a test case.
Secondly, the UK has been a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights since 1951. We even drafted the wording. The Convention has recently been absorbed into English statute law, so that our courts, as well as the European court, can deal with matters under the Convention.
This is The Sunday Times (fast becoming a tabloid in disguise) making mischief out of something pretty trivial. I doubt this Airman's appeal will succeed, as he could have claimed conscientious objection (on religious grounds) through the normal procedure, rather than by going AWOL. Still, we don't know the full circumstances of the case and the man has every right to appeal against his charge, as many service personnel have done before him.
Firstly, The Sunday Times is wrong to describe this as a 'test case'. An appeal, like this one, from an orderly room to the Summary Appeal Court is like an appeal from a magistrates' court to the Crown Court. In other words, decisions of these courts cannot set a legal precedent that is binding upon other courts. Therefore, it ain't a test case.
Secondly, the UK has been a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights since 1951. We even drafted the wording. The Convention has recently been absorbed into English statute law, so that our courts, as well as the European court, can deal with matters under the Convention.
This is The Sunday Times (fast becoming a tabloid in disguise) making mischief out of something pretty trivial. I doubt this Airman's appeal will succeed, as he could have claimed conscientious objection (on religious grounds) through the normal procedure, rather than by going AWOL. Still, we don't know the full circumstances of the case and the man has every right to appeal against his charge, as many service personnel have done before him.
Last edited by Scud-U-Like; 26th May 2003 at 09:18.
Excuse me please.....you put on the uniform, take the pay, take the oath, you take your orders. If it is so wrong to fight other muslims....might he not look to Iran and Iraq....the war in Afghanistan....the wars being fought in Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, and a dozen other places. The only thing he is concientious about is saving his own skin. Whoever suggested Reserves are called out against their will needs his ass kicked till his brain starts working again. They signed the contract....they should read the fine print....the bugles blow...and it is off to war as is your duty. If this is acceptable behaviour in the British Military now....God help us! Desertion during the time of war used to earn the death penalty.....and missing movement as ordered can never be tolerated.
SASless, you misunderstand the UK's concept of 'reserves'. If someone joins the regular armed forces, subsequently decides that it's not for them and decides to leave before their period of regular service has been completed (referred to as 'Premature Voluntary Release'), then they are 'transferred to the reserve' for the balance of their remaining time.
This means becoming a member of the 'RAF Reserve of Airmen' (or Officers, as appropriate). For this they receive no identity card, are paid nothing, receive no training and cannot even use the facilities on their local base.
In the RAF we also have the 'Auxiliaries'. These are part-time volunteers who man certain RAuxAF squadrons. They have a training commitment and are paid whilst on duty. They have identity cards and can use the base facilities. There are no Reserve Air Force flying units, we have no Air National Guard and no Royal Auxiliary Air Force flying units......
Under 'Total Force Concept', we have a certain number of regulars. These can be augmented by the auxiliaries fairly easily. But when the Secretary of State for Defence enacts an Order under the relevant Section of the Reserve Forces Act, many of those who have been 'out' for years will receive a call-out notice giving them a time and date at which to report to a training centre before being sent to the appropriate unit.
With the 'contractorisation' of certain trades, it is increasingly likely that 'call-out' of reservists would be required in time of conflict. A money-saving defence-cutting idea to reduce the number of regulars - but these civilian contractors can't be ordered to do anything which isn't in their contract.
This means becoming a member of the 'RAF Reserve of Airmen' (or Officers, as appropriate). For this they receive no identity card, are paid nothing, receive no training and cannot even use the facilities on their local base.
In the RAF we also have the 'Auxiliaries'. These are part-time volunteers who man certain RAuxAF squadrons. They have a training commitment and are paid whilst on duty. They have identity cards and can use the base facilities. There are no Reserve Air Force flying units, we have no Air National Guard and no Royal Auxiliary Air Force flying units......
Under 'Total Force Concept', we have a certain number of regulars. These can be augmented by the auxiliaries fairly easily. But when the Secretary of State for Defence enacts an Order under the relevant Section of the Reserve Forces Act, many of those who have been 'out' for years will receive a call-out notice giving them a time and date at which to report to a training centre before being sent to the appropriate unit.
With the 'contractorisation' of certain trades, it is increasingly likely that 'call-out' of reservists would be required in time of conflict. A money-saving defence-cutting idea to reduce the number of regulars - but these civilian contractors can't be ordered to do anything which isn't in their contract.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Emirates Living - The Meadows
Age: 79
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beags,
I'm sure that the contract quite clearly states that you can be ordered to deploy on operations as necessary according to the extingencies of the service.
Therefore even if this individual had joined up and decided that it wasn't for him, tough. He should have researched his career choice a touch more thouroughly.
Refusing to fight should be a capital crime because like the good man said there is no greater love than that a man may lay down his life for his country or freinds and family. Equally there is no greater crime than pretending to, training to and then when your back is against the wall walking away.
Hope they throw the book at him.
VT
I'm sure that the contract quite clearly states that you can be ordered to deploy on operations as necessary according to the extingencies of the service.
Therefore even if this individual had joined up and decided that it wasn't for him, tough. He should have researched his career choice a touch more thouroughly.
Refusing to fight should be a capital crime because like the good man said there is no greater love than that a man may lay down his life for his country or freinds and family. Equally there is no greater crime than pretending to, training to and then when your back is against the wall walking away.
Hope they throw the book at him.
VT
Umm no actually. Civilian contracts rarely contain anything about deployment. Even were they to the civilian is quite able to breach the contract and say stuff that for a game of soldiers with minimal legal penalty.
WWW
WWW
VT - the liabilities for an individual under the RFA are well laid out......If individuals know about their liability, of course, it should come as no surprise to them to if they are required to deploy once they've completed refresher training.
Not to respond to a call-out notice is an offence under the RFA, whereas conscientious objection by someone serving whether reservist, auxiliary or regular may not be per se. The difficulty is having cast-iron proof that the person called-out deliberately refused to respond to their call-out notice.
Not to respond to a call-out notice is an offence under the RFA, whereas conscientious objection by someone serving whether reservist, auxiliary or regular may not be per se. The difficulty is having cast-iron proof that the person called-out deliberately refused to respond to their call-out notice.
Last edited by BEagle; 30th May 2003 at 04:03.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Geriatrica, UK
Posts: 1,003
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So there are some who would allow a Muslim to be a CO in a conflict against other Muslims. And to do so whilst serving in the UK Armed Forces and subject to UK Military Law. And UK Military Law is based on UK Civil Law and gives no one Religious Faction special status over another.
Would those who find favour with this think it is therefore alright for Christians and Jews to seek CO status in conflicts against other Christians and Jews?
Try it and see how far you get.
Would those who find favour with this think it is therefore alright for Christians and Jews to seek CO status in conflicts against other Christians and Jews?
Try it and see how far you get.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I notice the result of this case didn't get much press coverage, probably because the outcome was unsensational, the Judge Advocate acknowledged the sincerity of the appellant's beliefs and the appellant lost :
Case Report
Case Report
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: A bit of a gypsy of late!
Age: 55
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
should send him to a bloody muslim country then, turban and all.
how can he call himself british yet choose not to fight? military or civilian one should wish to help defend ones country's beliefs.
if his religion states he is not to fight, please explain what all his 'brothers' are doing in iraq, somalia, afghanistan etc etc.
bring back the days of steam ships, short shorts, long socks and the Empire!
what on earth is the military coming too? and please, dont bring on the racist card (no secret cameras here) i am proud to be english. is that a crime?
read the small print, matey!
do not lead, do not follow just get him out of the f**cking way!!
#
isitd
how can he call himself british yet choose not to fight? military or civilian one should wish to help defend ones country's beliefs.
if his religion states he is not to fight, please explain what all his 'brothers' are doing in iraq, somalia, afghanistan etc etc.
bring back the days of steam ships, short shorts, long socks and the Empire!
what on earth is the military coming too? and please, dont bring on the racist card (no secret cameras here) i am proud to be english. is that a crime?
read the small print, matey!
do not lead, do not follow just get him out of the f**cking way!!
#
isitd
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly all this 'read the small print' grips my St.
If people, and yes that includes the military, think what they are being asked to do is fundamentally wrong then they should say no – and they should have the right to do that.
At what point would you say no I-S-I-T-D? Will you always follow orders regardless?
t. If people, and yes that includes the military, think what they are being asked to do is fundamentally wrong then they should say no – and they should have the right to do that.
At what point would you say no I-S-I-T-D? Will you always follow orders regardless?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Gone.........for good this time.
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robo,
Surely a fundamental part of voluntarily being part of a disciplined force is, at times, you have to follow orders without question? Even if that means taking a pot shot at your religious comrades.
Anyone who joins up and then wimps out when they have to go to war are lucky that we are using different rules to those of the 1st World War, where he would almost certainly have been shot at dawn!
I chose not to join up, purely because I dont particularly like jumped up Hitler types shouting at me.
Surely a fundamental part of voluntarily being part of a disciplined force is, at times, you have to follow orders without question? Even if that means taking a pot shot at your religious comrades.
Anyone who joins up and then wimps out when they have to go to war are lucky that we are using different rules to those of the 1st World War, where he would almost certainly have been shot at dawn!
I chose not to join up, purely because I dont particularly like jumped up Hitler types shouting at me.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as the order is lawful and the person giving it has the power and authority to do so then yes, there is a requirement for it to be followed.
If a colonel orders a sgt to shoot a group of POWs, for example, he may have the power, he may have the authority (though I doubt it) but the order is unlikely to be lawful under the Geneva Convention (or International Law).
Not an expert in this, just something I remember from IOT.
No sympathy for the original case, though, thin end .....
STH
If a colonel orders a sgt to shoot a group of POWs, for example, he may have the power, he may have the authority (though I doubt it) but the order is unlikely to be lawful under the Geneva Convention (or International Law).
Not an expert in this, just something I remember from IOT.
No sympathy for the original case, though, thin end .....
STH