header-logo header-logo

18 June 2009 / Glynis Craig
Issue: 7374 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

In the line of fire

Glynis Craig says all soldiers have human rights

For the first time a domestic court has considered whether members of the British Armed Services serving abroad are under the jurisdiction of the UK for the purposes of the Human Rights Act (HRA 1998).

On 19 May 2009, the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the case of Secretary of State for Defence v R (Catherine Smith) and HM Assistant Deputy Coroner for Oxfordshire and Equality and Human Rights Commission (Intervener) [2009] EWCA Civ 441, [2009] All ER (D) 152 (May).

The Equality and Human Rights Commission intervened in the case to argue that, as UK soldiers are serving abroad under the jurisdiction of the UK government, they should also receive the protection granted to other British citizens.

The court found that these soldiers were protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) and HRA 1998 whether they were physically on an armed forces base or elsewhere. As a result, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) will have to provide

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll