The Decaux Principles and the House of Lords

Lord Thomas of Gresford OBE QC

Lord Thomas of Gresford OBE QC asked the following question in the House of Lords on October 23, 2017:

My Lords, I, too, welcome the Minister’s Answer and the prospect of a review. I want to ask her about the United Nations’ 2006 Decaux principles. On 7 June this year, the United Nations special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, in his report to the United Nations Human Rights Council, called on states to ensure that the jurisdiction of military tribunals is limited to military offences committed by active members of the military, in order to protect an individual’s ordinary rights to fair trial and due process. Does the Minister agree that Section 42 of the 2006 Act, which provides for military tribunals trying civil cases, is inconsistent with principle 8 of the Decaux principles: that military courts may try military personnel only for offences of a strictly military matter?

The text of the entire discussion -- "Reviewing the Armed Forces Act 2006 and serious offences committed by members of the armed forces" -- in the House of Lords can be found here. Video can be found here, beginning at 15:00:50.

For your military justice bookshelf

Wing Cdr (Ret) U C Jha, IAF

Global Military Justice Reform contributor Wing Cdr (Ret) U C Jha has written a new edition of his book on the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act: Indian Military Domestic Deployment: Armed Forces Special Powers Act and Human Rights. Details here. Congratulations!

Comparative conviction rates: probative?

CBC News has run a substantial article about the prosecution of sex assault in the Canadian Forces. One point the piece makes is that there conviction rate for courts-martial is about half that of civilian courts. But the military data base is small -- arguably too small to permit meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Excerpt:

"The rate of conviction isn't a measure of success in any prosecution service, whether it's a military prosecution service or a civilian criminal justice system across the country," said Col. Bruce MacGregor in an interview with CBC News.

His annual reports, tabled in Parliament, show that between April 1, 2014, and March 31, 2017, there were 17 courts martial where the accused faced one or more charges of sexual assault.

Those resulted in four guilty verdicts, eight not guilty findings, four cases in which charges were stayed and one case that was withdrawn.

That amounts to a conviction rate of slightly more than 23 per cent.

In civilian courts, the rate of conviction for sexual assault was 43 per cent in 2014-15, according to Statistics Canada.

Military justice system review planned in UK

BT reports:

An independent review of the British military justice system, including the controversial use of majority verdicts in courts martial, is to be carried out, the Government has announced.

The Tory administration said the move was aimed to ensure the system “was effective as it can be for the 21st century”.

It follows calls for the court martial system to be brought into line with the civil courts, with the right for the most serious cases, such as rape and murder, to be tried by a jury and overseen by a judge.

The consultation will apparently not be conducted in public. Editor's note: that sounds like a self-inflicted wound in an era of transparency.

Why was this case sent to a military court?

Suspected members of a terrorist cell have been charged in a Bahraini military court. Details here. Only a few months ago the country amended its legislation to permit such courts to try civilians. Doing so violates contemporary human rights norms.