---

Armed Forces Bill

moved Amendment No. 184: After Clause 356, insert the following new clause- ““JUDGE ADVOCATES The Judge Advocate General, judge advocates and deputy judge advocates shall not be subject to service law.”” The noble Lord said: This amendment is inspired by the report of the House of Lords and House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights which was published in July last, shortly before our first day in Committee. The report points out that in the case of Grieves v UK, the European Court of Human Rights criticised naval courts martial. The key issue was that the judge advocate was a serving naval officer who, when not presiding over courts martial, carried out regular naval duties. The court criticised the fact that he was not appointed permanently and stated that the lack of a civilian in the pivotal role of judge advocate deprives a naval court martial of one of the most significant guarantees of independence enjoyed by other courts martial. The finding of the court was that, because of this, the naval court martial could not be seen objectively as independent and impartial. There was therefore a violation of the Article 6 requirement for a fair trial. The committee asked the Minister to confirm whether it is intended that the judge advocate will be a civilian and whether this would be stated on the face of the Bill. This amendment gives the Minister the opportunity to put in the Bill the provision that would make the system that the Government have devised compliant with the European convention. I beg to move.