Overseas Operations Bill 'Fulfilling Promise To Our Military'

A former First Sea Lord has warned against making changes to the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill, due to fears it will make it ineffective.

Lord West compared the bill, which is aimed at protecting personnel from vexatious claims, to "lancing a long-standing boil".

The Overseas Operations Bill, which has already cleared the House of Commons, would limit the ability of false and historical allegations arising from deployments by introducing a statutory presumption against prosecution.

While not an absolute ban on historic prosecutions, the bill would make it exceptional for serving personnel and veterans to be prosecuted five years or more after an incident that took place during overseas operations, if it is signed into law.

Labour's Lord West of Spithead, who was head of the Royal Navy and also served as chief of defence intelligence, argued against bids to change the proposed legislation, fearing it would become less effective.

Speaking as peers began their scrutiny of the proposal in the House of Lords, Lord West said: "I have no doubt whatsoever that this bill is necessary.

"It's lancing a long-standing boil and fulfilling a promise to our military.

"It's an issue that has proved too difficult to tackle time and time again, and it's about time it was tackled."

The comments came in response to other peers raising concerns over the presumption of innocence if the proposal was passed into law.

Labour peer Lord Dubs called for the removal of the presumption altogether, saying there were already adequate safeguards for soldiers facing vexatious claims. 

He warned that ultimately the decision to include the presumption could lead directly to personnel ending up in front of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

"It would be hazardous in the extreme to pass a bill with measures in it which run the risk our servicemen and women could be prosecuted under the ICC," he said.

Green Party peer Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb described the Overseas Operaitons Bill as a "terrible piece of legislation", arguing that it would damage the justice system's ability to seek rightful prosecutions.

Lord Faulks, former Tory justice minister, disputed these claims, saying that raising the ICC as the reason for "wrecking" this part of the bill was "unsound", and that the legislation did not give impunity to troops.

He also said the bill did not prevent investigations and that they would still be welcomed by the Armed Forces.

Responding to peers' concerns, defence minister Baroness Goldie said: "The purpose of the measures… is quite simply to give service personnel and veterans greater tangible reassurance and demonstrable certainty that the unique pressures of overseas operations will be taken into account when decisions are made about whether to prosecute for alleged historical offences.

"This does not mean the Government considers the Armed Forces to be above the law."