---

Service Prosecutions

Answer

Further to the reply of the Lord Drayson on 7 November concerning the consultation with the Law Officers in bringing the case of the seven members and former member of the 3rd battalion the Parachute Regiment, the Law Officers are defined as being the Attorney-General and the Solicitor-General who is the Attorney-General’s deputy. Under the Law Officers Act 1997 the Solicitor-General can do anything the Attorney-General can do on my behalf or in my place.The Army Prosecuting Authority took the decision that there should be prosecutions in this case. As three of the accused were no longer serving soldiers it was not possible to prosecute them by court martial without my express consent in accordance with Section 132A of the Army Act 1955. The APA sought my views on the appropriate jurisdiction and my consent to prosecute advising that it considered that there was a realistic prospect of conviction against all the accused on a joint charge of murder and a second charge of violent disorder. I accepted the advice that there was sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and granted my consent to the prosecution of the three soldiers as required.

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

2185; 675 c204WA

Session

2005-06

Related items

Court Martial Judgment
Monday, 7 November 2005
Parliamentary proceedings
House of Lords

Subjects

Death Army Courts martial Civilians Iraq Law officers Prosecutions Peacekeeping operations Parachute Regiment

Link

View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk