OVERSEAS OPERATIONS BILL

Michelle Bachelet, a UN high commissioner, condemned the proposed UK Overseas Operations Bill. She took exception to the bill’s inclusion of a ‘presumption against prosecution’ for those soldiers facing claims of maltreatment after a period of five years unless there was ‘exceptional evidence’ of guilt. Furthermore, the Attorney General would have to approve any prosecution.

Michelle Bachelet said: ‘As currently drafted, the bill would make it substantially less likely that UK service members on overseas operations would be held accountable for serious human rights violations amounting to international crimes. The prohibition of torture in international law is both clear and absolute. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be invoked as a justification of torture.’

Lord Robertson, a former chief of NATO and former UK Defence Secretary, said: ‘The Bill claims to support British troops but their reputation will be tarnished if they are no longer held to high legal standards.’

Opponents of the Bill claim it breaches international law and might encourage rogue states to also deny any breach of human rights five years after any abuse. As if rogue states are too nervous to do as they do without following a UK precedent – they are not.

The purpose of the Bill was to prevent the sort of vexatious claims invented against UK troops as had happened, for example, following the Iraq war, when lawyers earned lots of fees by encouraging Iraqis to make complaints against British troops.

Many Generals also opposed the Bill, claiming it would breach international law. Lord Dannatt said: ‘It is only right and proper that the UK stays within international law and sets an example internationally.’

That the Tories were losing interest in treating British troops properly has been evident for years. Matters came to a head in 2016 when British soldiers were seriously considering forming a union to defend their interests. Theresa May, the then prime minister, responded by holding a photo opportunity with top brass at Downing Street.

Two hundred beleaguered soldiers were threatening a judicial review. Investigators had turned up at soldiers’ homes or barracks and demanded information and threatened arrest. In one case, they arrived at an ex-girlfriend’s home to question her as to whether her former partner was abusive, had tattoos or spoke in his sleep. Six soldiers had even been arrested. Allegations had arisen as a result of the deployment of the British army to both Iraq and Afghanistan.

In December 2016, Phil Shiner, of the now defunct law firm Public Interest Lawyers (PIL), pleaded guilty to a series of misconduct charges relating to abuse claims made against British soldiers in Iraq. PIL was responsible for the vast majority of the 3,000 abuse claims submitted to the IHAT (Iraqi Historical Investigations Team), even alleging murder and mistreatment. Iraqi agents were being paid large sums of money to secure allegations, the majority of which were obviously bogus. IHAT had been set up as a consequence of the Human Rights Act. PIL pocketed many millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money in legal aid. PIL also forwarded files on British troops to the International Criminal Court. Shiner was hauled before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal despite the fact that in 2007, Shiner had been named solicitor of the year by the Law Society.

Not surprisingly, one result of the Tories’ approach was that it had become increasing difficult to get new recruits.

Sir Michael Fallon, the then Defence Secretary, said: ‘IHAT was established in order to prevent this country being hauled in front of the International Criminal Court. We have to investigate these allegations.’

Despite the problems caused by abstract theories about human rights, in December 2016, the May Government abandoned supposed plans to scrap the Human Rights Act. The Tory 2005 manifesto pledged to ‘review’ the Act, and the 2010 manifesto pledged to ‘replace the Human Rights Act with a UK Bill of Rights’.

However, now, in 2021, objections from lawyers and the UN has proved sufficient for the Tories to decide to carry on as we are.

The UK has taken back control from the EU, only to subordinate its sovereignty to another unaccountable globalist elite.