UK Parliament / Open data

Armed Forces Bill

Proceeding contribution from Lord Thomas of Gresford (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 27 April 2016. It occurred during Debate on bills on Armed Forces Bill.

Moved by

Lord Thomas of Gresford

1: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause—

“Majority verdicts

For section 160 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (decisions of Court Martial: finding and sentence) substitute—

“Majority verdicts

(1) The finding of the Court Martial need not be unanimous if—

(a) in a case where there are not less than seven members of the court, five of them agree on the finding;

(b) in a case where there are five members of the court, four of them agree on the finding;

(c) in a case where there are three members of the court, two of them agree on the finding.

(2) The judge advocate shall not vote on the finding.

(3) Where the finding of the Court Martial is guilty, the judge advocate shall not accept the finding unless the President has stated in open court the number who respectively agreed to and dissented from the finding.

(4) The judge advocate shall not accept a non-unanimous finding under subsection (1) unless it appears to the judge advocate that the members of the Court Martial have had such a period of time for deliberation as the judge advocate thinks reasonable having regard to the nature and complexity of the case.””

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
771 c1182 
Session
2015-16
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Back to top