tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post4041364419634811321..comments2024-03-20T17:53:33.153-04:00Comments on Global Military Justice Reform: Weaknesses of UK military justice system raised in the House of LordsEugene R. Fidellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14694139458443207131noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post-91463735332508224512014-07-06T19:55:38.580-04:002014-07-06T19:55:38.580-04:00I for one, am very glad to hear that this is final...I for one, am very glad to hear that this is finally being debated. The circumstances for establishing a Service Justice System are changing completely to leave an outdated second rate justice system despite not having an overseas requirement. <br /><br />Why have an inferior Justice System operating in parallel if there is no real requirement? The Service Justice System falls short in every aspect in comparison to the British Justice System. The military lack a specialist police, (with any IPCC oversight) and will not investigate a rape or sexual assault as effectively as a dedicated specialist "sapphire unit." The Service police forces lack the experience of their counterparts.<br /><br />A prosecuting authority that is forced to recruit "in house" from a small selection of Officers, who may leave the forces after only a few years will suffer in recruitment, where the CPS will not.<br /><br />The reason the Court Martial boards are small is because the Service Justice System would fall apart if a dozen officers were required to comprise a jury for every trial. The Service Justice system is teetering on the brink of being overwhelmed, if at every Summary Hearing the accused were to opt for their right to Court Martial the system would once more fall apart. This ensures Summary Hearings remain, which are corrupt kangaroo courts with no over sight resided over by Officers with no legal training or experience, hearing criminal cases in the same process as disciplinary offences.<br /><br />I can provide documented evidence that the Army mislead Bale Baleiwai as to the nature of his criminal record (the poor guy had a conviction for assault and battery and didn't even realise what he pled guilty to. He was later acquitted at Court Martial.) This case lead to a memo being sent army wide reminding staff, that if someone is charged with a criminal offence at Summary Hearing they will have a Criminal record. Sadly, this is not an isolated occurrence, at lower levels, all to often the Service Justice system is run by unqualified Service Personnel confusing Criminal and Disciplinary issues. Time for a change.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01504917535638730419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post-44650912452400110362014-07-02T05:03:58.629-04:002014-07-02T05:03:58.629-04:00I am afraid that Lord Thomas displayed a lack of k...I am afraid that Lord Thomas displayed a lack of knowledge of the current system of military justice when addressing their lordships. First, the position under English law has changed dramatically since the case of Martin. A civilian would now be tried by a board comprising only civilians and sentence would be passed by the judge advocate alone. Secondly, he was quite wrong to suggest that the Judge Advocate takes no part in sentencing service personnel when Part 7 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 says the opposite - indeed gives him the casting vote. That is so whether there has been a trial or a plea of guilty. Michael Elsom, Assistant Judge Advocate GeneralAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com