Key Facts

• Phil Shiner and his law firm Public Interest Lawyers brought 1,400 judicial reviews and 234 compensation claims against troops.
• Between 2003 and 2009, 1,130 compensation claims were made against armed forces personnel.
• The Bill aims to protect service members from repeated investigations and legal actions initiated by ambulance chasers.
• The Bill ensures adherence to article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
• Clauses 1 to 7 introduce conditions on prosecution for certain offences, with a five-year threshold beyond which prosecutions are exceptional unless new evidence emerges.
• Sexual offences are excluded from the provisions but other serious crimes like torture and murder remain prosecutable.
• The Bill introduces thresholds before a decision to prosecute is progressed after five years.
• The Attorney General's consent is required for prosecutions in England and Wales if deemed necessary by the prosecutor.
• Clauses introduce new factors for courts to consider when deciding claims beyond three-year limits, with an absolute maximum of six years.
• Clause 12 amends the Human Rights Act to impose a duty to consider derogating from human rights obligations during significant military operations.
• Rosie Winterton is managing time allocation for speakers during the debate.
• Back-Bench contributions are limited to five minutes initially.
• The statement critiques the Bill's breach of the armed forces covenant.
• It highlights problems arising from conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• John Healey acknowledges the need to fix flaws in the system but insists on seeing the issue in perspective.
• The Bill aims to provide greater certainty regarding vexatious claims and prosecution of historical events.
• Over the past 15 years, there have been 25 cases brought by injured British troops against the MOD for every one case brought by alleged victims against our troops.
• There were 3,400 allegations in Iraq and Operation Northmoor examined 675 criminal allegations from 159 people in Afghanistan.
• The Bill introduces a presumption against prosecution for all crimes except sexual violence.
• Legal experts argue that the Bill will be a significant barrier to justice, potentially breaching international conventions such as the Geneva convention, the convention against torture, and the European convention on human rights.
• John Healey highlights the importance of upholding unequivocal commitment to international law.
• The Bill creates higher hurdles for civil cases after three years.
• There have been at least 195 cases of troops affected by the Bill since 2007.
• The Royal British Legion has reinforced concerns about the armed forces covenant breach.
• The issue was first raised by the former Defence Committee Chair in 2013.
• Tobias Ellwood is a current member of the armed forces and previously served in Northern Ireland.
• The Bill does not cover veterans currently under investigation or those who served in Northern Ireland.
• The statement acknowledges the sincerity with which Ministers have approached fixing issues related to service personnel but criticizes the Bill's effectiveness.
• The MP mentions cases of firms seeking to profit from legal claims against former service personnel.
• The Bill is criticized for not providing an independent investigative body or accountability mechanisms.
• The Bill is criticised by military legal and political figures including Nicholas Mercer, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, and Field Marshal Lord Guthrie.
• Stewart McDonald has engaged in dialogue with the Minister for Veterans who stated he was not the 'king of good ideas'.
• The Lyons review on service justice is ongoing.
• The Bill is seen as creating a presumption against prosecution for a class of defendants.
• It places one group above others in the eyes of the law, which is unprecedented in domestic legal systems in England and Wales or Scotland.
• No other country has a version of this Bill on their statute book.
• The Bill aims to address abuses faced by service personnel and veterans.
• Clause 6 defines relevant offences but excludes sexual offences.
• Jarvis highlights the exclusion of war crimes like torture from the bill's scope.
• The Bill aims to prevent unsound cases from being repeatedly investigated.
• Three reports on Iraq, Northern Ireland, and a broader panorama were produced by the Defence Committee between February 2017 and July 2019.
• Professor Richard Ekins proposed restoring the former scope of the Human Rights Act and the application of the European Convention on Human Rights.
• The Bill excludes arguments about prosecutions in Northern Ireland.
• There were 900 cases for Afghanistan and Iraq between 2003 and 2009, but the nature of these cases is unclear.
• Kevan Jones was a Minister during the time of problematic case investigations.
• Clause 3 of the Bill refers to 'exceptional demands and stresses' in cases after five years.
• 3,400 allegations were made about servicemen and servicewomen.
• 65% of these allegations came from Public Interest Lawyers company.
• The Ministry of Defence paid out £40 million for fallacious claims and another £10 million on Operation Northmoor.
• The Bill imposes a presumption against prosecution after five years.
• Since 2002, the MOD has faced over 1,400 judicial review claims and more than 2,000 civil claims relating to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• At least 70% of 3,400 allegations of unlawful killings have been filtered out as spurious by the Iraq Historic Allegations Team.
• The Bill aims to provide legal protection against civil claims for personal injury and death.
• 94% of all claims since 2007 have been settled within five years.
• The long stop applies to when legacy issues such as hearing loss, PTSD, and physical illness first come to light.
• There are approximately 2.2 million veterans in the UK.
• The Bill aims to curb baseless claims against veterans and stop lawfare.
• Critics argue it protects service personnel from wrongdoing, but the MP clarifies there is no de facto immunity for crimes committed.
• The requirement for prosecutors to consider the circumstances of warfare is welcomed.
• The Bill was introduced on March 18th.
• Veterans who served in Northern Ireland are seeking equal treatment as those serving overseas.
• There are concerns about investigations being burdensome and cumbersome for veterans.
• The Bill is seen as breaking international law.
• Human rights groups oppose the Bill due to its potential contravention of international humanitarian and human rights law.
• Redress warns that the Bill risks creating impunity for serious offences, including torture.
• Thousands of allegations of torture and mistreatment against British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan have been lodged.
• The International Criminal Court prosecutor determined there was a basis to allegations that UK armed forces committed war crimes in Iraq.
• The Bill places a duty on future Governments to consider deviation from the European convention on human rights for significant overseas military operations.
• Budget cuts to criminal investigations are criticized by Webbe.
• 3,500 veterans suffer from homelessness according to No Homeless Veterans campaign.
• The Bill introduces a presumption against prosecution after five years of service.
• Operation Northmoor dismissed 90% of investigations into allegations, with none referred for prosecution.
• Mirfield hosts the largest remembrance parade outside London.
• Anderson served in Kosovo and was involved in operations where rules of engagement were critical.
• The Bill aims to provide reassurance to troops that they can operate without fear of prosecution decades later.
• Anderson criticizes the 'lawfare culture' as damaging to the military.
• Labour is determined to protect troops’ rights to justice from the Ministry of Defence.
• The Bill introduces a six-year time limit on claims for personal injuries and/or death.
• Many cases have developed PTSD or other mental health issues years post-service.
• The presumption against prosecution in the Bill extends beyond battlefield scenarios to peacekeeping operations and terrorism-related operations.
• Hundreds of cases linked to UK extraordinary rendition have been identified by the House’s Intelligence and Security Committee.
• Sexual offences have been excluded from the remit of the Bill, but torture has not.
• The Bill allows the Secretary of State to derogate from article 15 of the ECHR under certain circumstances.
• Concerns raised about concentration of power in Executive hands on matters pertaining to states of emergency.
• A commitment was given that there would be equal treatment for Northern Ireland veterans by the end of this year.
• The speaker served as a reservist in Afghanistan.
• The Al-Sweady inquiry found most claims against British military were based on lies.
• RAF Cranwell trains the next generation of officers.
• The Bill does not provide immunity from prosecutions for serious crimes, including torture.
• Prosecutors must consider exceptional grounds for bringing prosecutions after a five-year period has expired.
• Similar protections are needed for veterans who served in Northern Ireland.
• The narrative of vexatious prosecutions is rejected by the speaker.
• References are made to the Stormont House agreement from 2015.
• The triple lock provision undermines accountability and legitimacy, according to the speaker.
• Laurence Robertson has been in the House for 23 years.
• The Bill aims to protect UK armed forces from vexatious claims and prosecution long after conflicts end.
• Joanna Cherry raises concerns about the 'triple lock' measure potentially shielding perpetrators of serious crimes like torture.
• The Bill is criticized for failing to provide greater legal protections for forces personnel.
• Liberty argues the Bill will effectively decriminalize torture and breaches of international law.
• Civil provisions in the Bill set a six-year hard limit on claims, which Osborne believes could deny veterans access to justice.
• France has a 30-year time limit for serious crimes.
• In the USA, time limits are exempted for the law of war and serious crimes or murder.
• Over the past 15 years, there have been 25 cases brought by injured British troops against the MOD for every one case brought by alleged victims against our forces.
• The Bill risks breaching the armed forces covenant and rolling back on employment rights of service personnel.
• A six-year limit for bringing civil claims is introduced in the Bill, which prevents troops who suffer injury from taking cases to court.
• The Bill aims to protect service personnel from historical prosecutions and vexatious civil claims.
• There is a commitment to equal treatment for Northern Ireland veterans who served on Op Banner.
• No time bar exists for offences such as murder under the Bill.
• The Bill has been read a Second time.
• Ayes: 331, Noes: 77.