Armed Forces Bill

No. The hon. Gentleman raised the matter, but then he was not present—no doubt for very important reasons—during 20 minutes of my explanation. It is not fair to other hon. Members for him to return and ignore everything that I have said—if he had sat here, he would still have ignored me, but it would at least have given me a degree of generosity towards him, which I do not feel compelled to extend tonight. I have made it clear that prosecutions will be independent from the chain of command and from Ministers. The investigators in the special investigation branch and the service prosecutors do a professional job, sometimes in the most demanding, difficult and dangerous circumstances—they conduct investigations in conditions in which civilian police would not operate, and they have my admiration and support. The Bill reinforces their relationship with the director of service prosecutions in a similar way to the relationship between their civilian counterparts and the Director of Public Prosecutions. Where the commanding officer is considering what action to take on offences over which he has powers—the hon. Member for Aldershot has raised this point—legal advice will, as now, be available. Under the Bill, he may choose to deal with an offence summarily, or he may decide to refer the matter to the prosecuting authorities, because he does not want to exercise his summary powers and believes that a court martial would be more appropriate. He may discontinue proceedings, but that would not prevent further action by the services at a later stage, if it were justified. If the commanding officer deals with the matter summarily and finds it proved, he will go on to award a punishment. Where he refers the matter to the director of service prosecutions, the director will decide whether to bring a prosecution and what the charge shall be. In all cases tried by court martial, the director of service prosecutions will determine the charge, but the commanding officer will bring it formally by notifying the individual concerned, which, as I have said, will free up and reinforce his role in implementing the CO’s duty of care in ensuring that someone under his command who is subject to proceedings under service law is properly supported and advised. I have spent so much time on that aspect of the Bill because it is central to the military criminal justice system. I want briefly to turn to other matters in the Bill that involve further changes to the current system.