---

Armed Forces Bill

moved Amendment No. 7: After Clause 359, insert the following new clause- ““FLIGHTS BY FOREIGN AIRCRAFTS AT MILITARY AIRFIELDS (1) The Defence Council may by regulations make provision for the handling of foreign aircraft at military facilities, to ensure that such aircraft are complying with United Kingdom legal requirements and international obligations. (2) Nothing in subsection (1) can absolve the commanding officer from his responsibilities under international treaties.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, I shall be brief in moving Amendment No. 7, not because it is unimportant but because we discussed it at each stage of the Bill when noble Lords were most helpful in developing its language. I considered the suggestions made by the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, on Report about the importance of broadening the scope of the amendment to cover all the services rather than only the commanding officer. While I am sympathetic to that, we have achieved a wording that is focused and appropriate and that received a degree of consensus around the House on Report. The aim of the amendment is to ensure that commanding officers are not put in an impossible position when mysterious foreign aircraft are given clearance to make use of their facilities. I remind noble Lords that such occasions have arisen at Royal Air Force Brize Norton and Royal Air Force Northolt, as we have heard. In getting the language right, I wish to acknowledge the great assistance given by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, in reminding us of the responsibilities of a commanding officer. They cannot be abrogated, which is an important element of the new clause. It makes it possible for the Defence Council to make the necessary regulations in order to clarify what commanding officers should do, although they cannot absolve themselves of their responsibilities under international law. Our debates have inevitably focused specifically on extraordinary rendition and the universal abhorrence of such flights where suspects are transported to distant locations to be interrogated under conditions which amount to torture under the international definitions. I know that we will examine the amendment with that in mind. However, I have made it forward-looking in the sense that it gives the Defence Council the authority to look at other possible violations of international law. One might think of cases where there is a breaking of international sanctions in transferring weapons to a theatre by air or other breaches of international law. This is the opportunity to give commanding officers the appropriate guidance so that they will not find themselves accused of, in the case of extraordinary rendition, helping to facilitate torture or other breaches of international law. Such cases can be brought. In Committee, I referred to a case in Italy where a military officer had been charged in connection with extraordinary rendition. We have argued the case sufficiently and have all reached an agreement—including on the Government Benches—that we abhor extraordinary rendition. This amendment would discharge our responsibilities to people in the military in difficult circumstances commanding military airfields through which flights are being directed under uncertain circumstances. I beg to move.