Proceeding contribution from Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 11 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HL) on Armed Forces Bill.
Armed Forces Bill
Before the Minster sits down, he mentioned Clause 126, which is headed: "““Directions by the DSP barring further proceedings””." Given the Attorney-General’s superintendence responsibilities, is there a possibility that an Attorney-General could overturn that decision by the director of service prosecutions to bar further proceedings?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 685 c322
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disciplinary proceedings Discipline Crime Alcoholic drinks Courts Armed forces Arrests Conduct Deployment Aircraft Courts martial Civilians Certification Defence equipment Evidence Eligibility Jurisdiction Drugs Maladministration Misconduct Powers Membership Prosecutions Misuse Public opinion Officers Low flying Young people Trials Rules of procedure Rules of engagement
- Legislation
- Armed Forces Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-04-15 10:41:36 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350763
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350763
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350763