Jump to content

Should ex servicemen be immune from prosecution?

Recommended Posts

If a serviceman commits a crime, he should be subject to the law like anyone else.

 

I would take into consideration the situation at the time of the crime, understanding that the service person may have been under great stress and worried about their safety,

 

If a soldier shoots an innocent civilian in a war zone, this is not as great a crime as if I were to walk onto the street and shoot the poster above me.  This should be reflected in both the decision to prosecute and the sentencing if found guilty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Fair enough, but presumably then we should also be investigating and prosecuting those who gave the orders and those who then covered it up.  Which presumably goes right to the top of the political establishment at the time.  Ultimately the army was there due to political decisions and acting on behalf of parliament.

Blanket?  So if they do for example, decide to torture some enemy prisoner, or even a British civilian,  that should never be prosecuted?

Yes I agree. And if those with power are never punished then that's no deterrent to further abuses being committed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Penistone999 said:

Of course ex servicemen should be immune from prosecution. 

I really disagree with this. 

However,  when the fact that loyalist and republican paramilitaries can be given amnesties under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement and ex British soldiers are being pursued for prosecution - I understand how why some might think that unfair

Edited by Mister M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think servicemen should be immune. Being a soldier doesn't give you carte blanche to murder and I don't think the passage of time makes any difference.

 

I think this is a populist move on his part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tinfoilhat said:

Which, given the circumstances, is a bit tricky. 

It's not even NI - there were plenty of bent and or racist coppers doing Lord knows what back then across the UK. Different times.

I agree it might be difficult to prove.

28 minutes ago, JamesR123 said:

If a serviceman commits a crime, he should be subject to the law like anyone else.

 

I would take into consideration the situation at the time of the crime, understanding that the service person may have been under great stress and worried about their safety,

 

If a soldier shoots an innocent civilian in a war zone, this is not as great a crime as if I were to walk onto the street and shoot the poster above me.  This should be reflected in both the decision to prosecute and the sentencing if found guilty.

Like any crime the circumstances would need to be taken into account.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, JamesR123 said:

If a serviceman commits a crime, he should be subject to the law like anyone else.

 

I would take into consideration the situation at the time of the crime, understanding that the service person may have been under great stress and worried about their safety,

 

If a soldier shoots an innocent civilian in a war zone, this is not as great a crime as if I were to walk onto the street and shoot the poster above me.  This should be reflected in both the decision to prosecute and the sentencing if found guilty.

It's not necessarily a crime at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There wont be many service people willing to do the governments undercover dirty work (hit jobs & pre-meditated killings) if they don't get some sort of guaranteed immunity from future prosecution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There needs to be a cut off date for prosecution.  Soldiers shouldn’t be prosecuted for historical crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mister M said:

I really disagree with this. 

However,  when the fact that loyalist and republican paramilitaries can be given amnesties under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement and ex British soldiers are being pursued for prosecution - I understand how why some might think that unfair

A number of loyalists and republicans are under investigation as new evidence arises. This false information about amnesties keeps being spread 

 

BRIEFING PAPER
CBP 8352, 19 March 2019
Investigation of Former Armed Forces Personnel who served in Northern Ireland

 

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8352

 

Prosecutions of Armed Forces personnel during the Troubles

Any fatalities involving the Armed Forces were investigated by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) at the time and, in some cases, prosecutions were brought against military personnel.
In most cases those fatalities were a direct result of operations and “centred around the key issue of whether the soldier had the right to open fire in the particular circumstances pertaining at the time”. This resulted in a number of convictions, although in the majority of cases the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland directed that there was no case to answer, or the defendants were acquitted at trial.

 

Good Friday Agreement and “On the Runs”

 

The 1998 Good Friday Agreement made no provision for the investigation or prosecution of former members of the Armed Forces, focusing instead upon the early release of prisoners affiliated to
5 Commons Library Briefing, 19 March 2019


paramilitary organisations.

 

There was no amnesty for crimes which had not yet been prosecuted.


From 2000 to 2014, the UK Government operated an administrative scheme by which individuals suspected of terrorism crimes in Northern Ireland could find out whether they were at risk of arrest or prosecution if they returned to the UK. The collapse of a trial in 2014 led to a judge-led review. The report of that review criticised the scheme for systematic failings, but emphasised that it did not constitute an amnesty or immunity from prosecution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where a crime has been committed there should be due process & no one should be immune from prosecution of that crime. Who is to say though that what happened was criminal?
Putting pensioners through the courts though is disgusting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Black Brick said:

Where a crime has been committed there should be due process & no one should be immune from prosecution of that crime. Who is to say though that what happened was criminal?
Putting pensioners through the courts though is disgusting.

That's exactly what a court is for right, to say whether what happened was criminal or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, that the role of the Crown prosecution Service

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.