Five-year limit on armed forces prosecutions 'does not provide blanket immunity', says MoD

Defence secretary confirms plans for legislation, first reported by The Independent, that human rights groups call 'an insult to survivors'

Caption needed (Getty)

The government has confirmed that it will bring in legislation setting a time limit of five years for members of the armed forces to be prosecuted for human rights abuses while serving in conflicts abroad.

The Independent last week revealed plans to halve the timeframe for litigation from a previously proposed 10 years – a restriction which had already been the subject of controversy and criticism from human rights groups, lawyers and politicians.

The new bill will also restricts to “an absolute maximum of six years” the time limit for civil claims for personal injury or death and for bringing legal action under the Human Rights Act on operations overseas.

Defence officials hold that five years was deemed by government lawyers to be adequate time for evidence to emerge about suspects in a given incident. It will mean, however, that the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, Operations Telic and Herrick, which ended in 2009 and 2014 respectively, will fall outside the time limit.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said the new law will “introduce a presumption that once five years have elapsed from the date of an incident, it will be exceptional for a prosecutor to determine that a service person or veteran should be prosecuted for alleged offences on operations outside the UK.

"The Bill will create a new 'triple lock' in order to give service personnel and veterans greater certainty, including obtaining the consent of the Attorney General before a prosecution can proceed," it added.

The MoD stated that the “legal protection bill … will help to prevent vexatious prosecutions after five years when no new evidence has emerged”, adding that it "does not offer a blanket immunity to the armed forces.”

But there is confusion over what “vexatious litigation” means in this context, with critics claiming it is being used to try and block legitimate attempts at investigations and, in any case, there are already safeguards under existing laws to stop legal action which can be proved to be vexatious.

Defence secretary Ben Wallace said: “For decades the men and women of our armed forces have been faced with the prospect of repeated investigations by inquest and police - despite the vast majority having acted in accordance with the rule of law and often at great personal risk. That is why the government will today legislate to protect our veterans against repeated reinvestigations where there is no new and compelling evidence against them, and to end vexatious claims against our armed forces.”

Veterans minister Johnny Mercer added: “This package of legal measures will reduce the unique pressure faced by personnel who perform exceptional feats in incredibly difficult and complex circumstances. This important next step has gone further than any other government before to protect military personnel”.

However, the move has led to criticism from human rights groups. Steve Crawshaw, the policy and advocacy director of human rights group Freedom From Torture, said: “It was worrying enough that the government wanted to grant effective impunity for torture and other war crimes after 10 years. To reduce the time limit for justice still further is shocking, and an insult to survivors.

“The government claims it believes in the rule of law. These proposals, from what we know of them so far, suggest on the contrary that it is ready to follow Donald Trump and others down the path of attacking the global torture ban which Britain helped to build.”