Proceeding contribution from Andrew Mackinlay (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 12 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Armed Forces Bill.
Armed Forces Bill
On the former case, I am not going to trespass into sub judice. It is inappropriate for us to mention that case, and I do not feel qualified to talk about it in detail anyway. In respect of General Wall or anyone else, the law has not changed. Every commander has an obligation to pursue the conduct of war in accordance with long-established conventions and jurisdictions, and to have due regard to minimising casualties and deaths, civilian or military. That is nothing new. I am worried that the hon. Gentleman is getting exercised about that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c1183
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Criminal investigation Discipline Appeals Crime Courts Administration of justice Armed forces Armed conflict Courts martial Civilians Inquiries Jurisdiction Homicide Dismissal Powers Prosecutions Military police Officers Military law Standards Low flying Sentencing Trials Service Civilian Court
- Legislation
- Armed Forces Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-07-22 08:48:32 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285616
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285616
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285616