Overseas Operations Bill


The Overseas Operations Bill risks Britain’s reputation

UPDATED: 29 September

THE OOP was introduced to parliament last week and the controversial element is the introduction of a time limit to prosecutions of British troops who commit crimes while on active service overseas.  A limit of 5 years will be introduced but also, and less reported, a six year limit on soldiers themselves being able to claim against the MoD for things like PTSD or hearing loss [Forces.net 22 September 2020].  The bill seeks to derogate the UK from the European Convention of Human Rights, see the bill itself (pdf).

It must be said straight away that the vast majority of service personnel behave honourably in the service of their country and literally risk their lives in so doing.  Some receive serious injuries from things like IEDs which can result in the loss of limbs or blindness.  The MoD has been culpable of sending troops into theatre with inadequate equipment which has resulted in needless additional injury.

The last few years have seen a series of allegations of ‘vexatious claims’ by legal firms allegedly putting together spurious or exaggerated ones.  One such firm was run by Phil Shiner who’s licence to practice was taken away by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal [Law Society Gazette, 2 February 2017].

Despite this, we should be concerned as a nation if our soldiers are involved in torture or mistreatment of prisoners.  These should always be investigated if only for the reason of why we go to war in the first place which is to promote our notions of justice, the rule of law and treating people decently regardless of race, religion or gender.  We can hardly complain about countries such as Egypt, Iran, most of the Gulf states and China who do practise torture more or less routinely, if we ourselves do not root out such practices ourselves.

An inconvenient fact not it seems noted in our media yet, is that the UK is a signatory of the UN Convention Against Torture which provides an obligation on the UK not to apply statutes of limitation to allegations of torture and has a continuing obligation to investigate them which cannot be time-limited [Redress 18 March 2020].  

THE British government has repeatedly stressed it does not engage in torture but was found to have allowed rendition flights to come through the UK.  Documents were also found after the collapse of Libya which showed the government’s complicity in this practice.  This has led to a case against the former Home Secretary Jack Straw.

Kate Allen has said in response to the bill:

What does it say about the UK’s armed forces to suggest that they need immunity from prosecution for acts of torture and other serious crimes? [Daily Mirror 22 September 2020]

That some – a minority – of our service people have behaved badly is not in dispute.  That some legal cases may have been vexatious is also probably true.  But the overriding considerations are the integrity of the nation and to be seen in the world as an exemplar of human rights and good behaviour.  Apologists say it will still be possible to bring such a case after the period of 5 years has elapsed.  Indeed, the wording of the bill does allow that.  One wonders why in that case is there a need for the bill?  To limit claims against the MoD has been described as ‘devastating’ by a partner in the law firm Hugh James [22 September 2020].  

In a previous post, we drew attention to the Attorney General Suella Braverman’s seemingly relaxed view of the use of torture, an astonishing attitude for the nation’s most senior law officer to have.  Our attitude to this abhorrent practice should be unequivocal.  We do not do it, we do not condone it and if any of our people engage in it, we will investigate and prosecute regardless if five or more years have gone by.

UPDATE: 29 September 2020.  In the above link to our post about the Attorney General, we took at face value the background claimed by Suella Braverman.  These claims have been investigated by the Observer journalist Nick Cohen who has cast doubt on many of them.  He and other journalists have tried to authenticate these various claims of relevant experience and have so far, been unable to do so.  

0

Death penalty report: August – September


Our latest monthly death penalty report is available thanks to group member Lesley for the work in compiling it.  Note that China is the world’s largest executioner but the details are a state secret.

Report, August- September (Word)

1

Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe


More bad news

[8 September 2020]

We have just heard the sad and troubling news that Nazanin has been re-arrested by the Iranian authorities.  We do not know the charge.  It appears to be part of the effort by the Iranian government to put pressure on the British government concerning a debt they allege we should pay concerning tanks which were paid for but not supplied.  Amnesty said it was part of their ‘cruel political games’.  We do not have further details at present.

We have added Fortify Rights web address in the list of links at the bottom of the site.  

0

Death penalty report July – August


We attach the latest monthly death penalty report compiled by group member Lesley.

Report (Word)

Majai Matiop Ngong who’s death penalty has been suspended is featured in the report 

Edited: 13 August

0

Sudan: teenager’s death sentence quashed


Good news from Sudan
Amnesty’s Urgent Action successful

Following the South Sudan Court of Appeal’s decision on 14 July to quash the death sentence imposed on Magai Matiop Ngong because he was a child at the time of the crime, and to send his case back to the High Court to rule on an appropriate sentence, and his removal from death row on 29 July, Amnesty International’s Director for East and Southern Africa, Deprose Muchena said:

We welcome the Court of Appeal’s decision to quash Magai Matiop Ngong’s death sentence because under South Sudan and international law a child cannot be sentenced to death. Magai is one of the lucky ones.

At least two other people, who were children at the time of the crime, have been executed in the country since May 2018; their lives extinguished as well as all the hopes their families had for them.

The South Sudanese government must fully comply with national and international laws which prohibit the use of the death penalty against anyone below 18 years of age at the time the crime was committed. The authorities must abolish this cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

Background
In its annual letter writing campaign, Write for Rights, Amnesty International prioritized the case of Magai mobilizing its global membership to write to President Salva Kiir to commute the death sentence. More than 765,000 people around the world took action, calling on President Salva Kiir to commute Magai’s death sentence, and expressing their solidarity with Magai.

South Sudan is one of four countries in Sub-Saharan Africa that carried out executions in 2018 and 2019.

Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception regardless of the nature of the crime, the characteristics of the offender, or the method used by the state to carry out the execution.

Amnesty International post 27 July 2020.  Thanks to all those who wrote letters or sent emails for this action.  See our monthly death penalty update.

1

Saudi Arabia:


Juvenile under sentence of death

[This is a post from Reprieve]

Mohammed al-Faraj was 15 when he was arrested while leaving a bowling alley in Medina, Saudi Arabia.  He was tortured into confessing to ‘crimes’ linked to non-violent protesting, including attending a funeral at the age of 9.
By any measure he was a child when these so-called ‘crimes’ took place.

He should not have been arrested and he certainly should not be facing a death sentence today.  On April 26, Saudi Arabia announced a royal decree that would end the use of death sentences for children like Mohammed.  Yet, a loophole in this decree means that the judge in Mohammed’s case will still be able to sentence him to death. [1]
Reprieve has just taken on Mohammed’s case.  We are going to need to build up his campaign for justice quickly.

Reprieve needs your help to make sure the international spotlight is on Saudi Arabia.  We know they are sensitive to their public image right now, and we can use that to make sure they do not sentence Mohammed to death.

Please share Mohammed’s story today Facebook link or Twitter link

Together, the Reprieve community brings hope to people like Mohammed who have no one else to turn to.  Thank you for being a part of this community.

[1] “Saudi Arabia Says It Will Stop Executing Children. But Read the Small Print | Opinion,” Newsweek (May 18, 2020).  See below:

Newsweek link

See our monthly death penalty report

1

Film: Clemency


There is a majority of people in the UK who, for certain crimes, would like to see a return of the death penalty according to YouGov.  The current home secretary, Priti Patel, has said the same on Question time although she now resiles from this.  People in favour of the penalty should watch this film.

It concerns a female warden (governor in UK parlance) who is in charge of a prison where people are executed.  Directed by a woman, Chinonye Chukwu and starring Alfre Woodard it illustrates the tension of those in charge of actually carrying out the gruesome task.  At the start of the film, the execution process is botched and it takes quite a while for the prisoner to die, painfully.

The film charts the tension the warden experiences: on the one hand the desire to be professional and to do a good job and on the other, the doubts about the process itself.  This tension is reflected in her marriage where her husband leaves her for a while.

In Hollywood terms, it is quite unusual.  Firstly, because women feature a lot in the making of it.  Secondly, no background music which allows the natural tension to build.  The camera is allowed to linger on certain scenes and there is no frantic scene changes which are so irritating in much drama these days.  Lastly, the drama is carried along by Woodard’s expressions and face rather than just dialogue.

It is truly a powerful and quite unique film and makes the fundamental point that the process of executions damages all who are involved in it.

Amnesty is opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances.  It does not deter and levels in violence in US states with the penalty is little different to those with it.  Mistakes, which are frequent, cannot afterwards be rectified.  The process, with appeals lasting years – the average in the US is 10 years – is expensive.  It is applied unfairly with a disproportionate number of black people on death row.  An examination of the trial of Kris Maharaj in Florida is also worth a read.

The group publishes a monthly report on the penalty around the world.

Meanwhile, the pace of executions in America continues with the Justice Dept. executing three people in four days, matching the total number the US government had conducted in the previous 3 decades (Washington Post).   This is part of the ‘law and order’ promise by the President despite serious misgivings by many Americans about the fairness of the process and think it needs a complete overhaul.

The film is available on streaming services.

19 July 2020

 

0

Nazanin Ratcliffe


July, 2020

The shameful saga of Nazanin Ratcliffe continues and she is under house arrest with the risk of going back to prison at any moment.  She keeps a bag packed for the eventuality.  You can read the current situation in full on this link from Change.org.  If you haven’t signed the petition perhaps you might consider doing so on the link.

0

Death penalty report


The monthly death penalty report is now available thanks to group member Lesley for preparing it.  Note that China is the world’s largest executioner of its citizens but details are a state secret.

June – July 2020 (Word)

3

Billy Wardlow executed


Billy Wardlow was executed in Texas yesterday, 8 July 2020, despite massive campaign for clemency

Billy Joe Wardlow was executed on Wednesday night in Huntsville, Texas for a murder committed in 1993 when he was 18.  The campaign has focused on his age at the time of the murder arguing that at 18, he was still immature.  The campaign on his behalf was turned down by the Supreme Court.  Since 2005, the Supreme Court has held that the death sentence is unconstitutional for those who are 17 or younger, partly because of their ‘still undefined identity.’

The USA is the only country in the Americas which retains the penalty in some states at least.  In fact, the use of the penalty is in steady decline in the States even in Texas, the state with the highest number of executions (548 since 1976).  It is because of a series of factors.  More programmes on TV showing mistakes and miscarriages of justice have had an effect.  The cost of carrying out executions and years of appeals meaning large numbers spend years on death row.  Difficulties in obtaining drugs for lethal injections with European firms refusing to supply them.

According to a 2018 BBC report ‘the death penalty wouldn’t have survived in America if it weren’t for evangelical Christians’.  This is according to Shane Claiborne a Christian activist.  By contrast, the Pope has condemned the use of the penalty.

One aspect of the abolition debate is whether it is effective or not in deterring crime.  Some say it is and some not.  The Death Penalty Information Center has produced statistics comparing murder rates between death and non-death penalty states.  The murder rates between 1990 and 2003 shows a lower murder rate for non-death penalty states.  They conclude that states without the penalty fared better over the past decade.

UK

THE debate is interesting because in the UK the idea of re-introducing the penalty still receives a lot of support for certain types of crime.  A 2019 YouGov poll found that ‘Brits want harsher punishments for criminals’ and a balance in favour of the death penalty of 58% (terrorist offences); 57% (multiple murders); 53% (child murders) and 47% (murder of a police officer).  The current Home Secretary Priti Patel is quoted as being in favour of the penalty although she now denies this.  An extract from a Question Time programme in which she says ‘yes I am in support of capital punishment’ is available on this link from the Independent.

It is noteworthy that in the USA where the penalty is still practised, the mood is shifting against its use whereas in the UK, where the penalty was finally abolished in 1969*, there is still a powerful desire to have it restored.

The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.  Amnesty opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception – regardless of who is accused, the nature or circumstances of the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution.

*1973 in Northern Ireland

Sources: Independent; BBC; Texas Tribune; Death Penalty Information Center

 

1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑