Proceeding contribution from Earl Attlee (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 12 October 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Armed Forces Bill.
Armed Forces Bill
My experience of courts martial is that the judge advocate advises the panel on the appropriate sentence. He tells it what the maximum and the minimum legal sentences are—if there is a minimum. He gives it the tariff and the panel has to decide whether it wants to go to the top or the bottom end of the tariff. In my experience, the judge advocate spends quite a bit of time explaining to the panel what the options are. However, I am undecided on whether to support the noble Lord; I am just saying what happens in my experience.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 685 c375
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Complaints Disciplinary proceedings Children Compensation Armed forces Death Convictions Aircraft Courts martial Desertion Coroners Employment Equality Drugs Harassment Judges International law Qualifications Powers Membership Prosecutions Misuse Staff Officers Prerogative of mercy Miscarriages of justice Military law Military aircraft Sentencing Young people Reserve forces Testing Rules of procedure World War I Time limits Trial in camera
- Legislation
- Armed Forces Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:40:03 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351328
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351328
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_351328