Armed Forces Bill and human rights
Defence secretary urged to uphold human rights
Defence Secretary Liam Fox was urged to uphold the human rights of forces personnel as he presented his Armed Forces Bill to the Commons this week.
Parliament is expecting a flurry of attempts to amend the Bill, as Fox’s proposals do not include a number of changes demanded by campaigners.
Plaid Cymru MP Elfyn Llwyd has already said he will try to amend the Bill to improve support for veterans facing poverty, isolation or ill health.
Forces Watch, a network launched last year to address ethical issues around the military, have called for a reduction in the minimum length of service and improved rights to conscientious objection.
In theory, members of the forces have a right to discharge if they develop a conscientious objection to continuing in the forces. But Forces Watch suggest that most are unaware of this right, which is not mentioned on the contract that new recruits sign.
‘Respect for conscience is the hallmark of a democratic society,’ argued Emma Sangster of Forces Watch. Under the current system conscientious objectors have to find their way through a ‘very opaque process’ to have their beliefs respected.
The Advisory Committee on Conscientious Objection (ACCO) last month advised the Defence Secretary to refuse to discharge Michael Lyons, a member of the navy whose conscience could no longer allow him to participate in the war in Afghanistan. Liam Fox’s ruling on his case is awaited.
It was the first time that ACCO had met to hear a case for fourteen years. Reports that many deserting soldiers mention ethical concerns have led Forces Watch to say that the current system for registering conscientious objection does not appear to be working.
In addition, a wide range of groups have backed a call to raise the minimum age of recruitment from sixteen to eighteen. They include Quaker Peace & Social Witness (QPSW), the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, War Child and the Children’s Society. Twenty-eight MPs, five of them from the government’s own benches, have signed a motion backing the proposal.
‘The armed forces don’t train teenagers to go on an adventure holiday,’ said Victoria Forbes Adam, director of the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers, ‘They train them to go to war’.
Comments
It has occurred to me that what the armed forces are doing with 16 and 17 year old is grooming them - grooming them so that they are conditioned to military life and methods whilst they are still in their formative years. Grooming of under age children is generally regarded as a crime, but, once again, it seems the military are allowed to make up their own definitions. So the only binding contract a child can make is to join the military, and grooming of children is illegal except when carried out by the military.
By RoyP on 13th January 2011 - 13:22
Please login to add a comment
