tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post8003661851588258611..comments2024-03-20T17:53:33.153-04:00Comments on Global Military Justice Reform: Jurisdictional issue to be heard in federal court in Washington, D.C.Eugene R. Fidellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14694139458443207131noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post-84497304641168275852020-02-11T08:23:48.552-05:002020-02-11T08:23:48.552-05:00Posted for Global Military Justice Reform contribu...Posted for Global Military Justice Reform contributor Anthony Paphiti:<br /><br />Jurisdiction exists under the British Military Justice System, in ss.67 and 68 AFA 2006, for those who committed “a Service offence” while subject to Service law (i.e., a military person) or subject to Service discipline (e.g., a civilian dependant) to be brought back for trial by Court Martial. This is subject to a 6 month time bar (ss.55-58) for charging former member of a regular or reserve force and Service civilians. For offences which occurred beyond the 6-month time bar, the fiat of the Attorney General is required in accordance with section 61(2), in which case a “person who is reasonably suspected of having committed, a Service offence may be arrested by a Service policeman ” (s.67). See the recent case of The Queen on the application of Daniel Shuttlewood -v- Ministry Of Defence: [2019] EWHC 1209 (Admin), QBD, 28 March 2019 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2019/1209.html<br /><br />A British Military Court would not otherwise have the power to court martial a retired military service-member.Eugene R. Fidellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14694139458443207131noreply@blogger.com