COMMANDING officers are to lose their historic powers to decide whether to charge their soldiers with serious offences, including murder, rape and human rights abuses.

The most senior officers at the top of the chain of command will also be excluded from the decision-making process under new legislation to be laid before Parliament next month.

The decision comes after an unprecedented case this year when a commanding officer of a tank regiment was overruled after he had judged that one of his soldiers had not committed a criminal offence when he shot dead a civilian Iraqi.

The commanding officer of the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment ruled that Trooper Kevin Williams, 22, should not be charged.

On the evidence available he decided that the soldier had acted within his rules of engagement.

However, the case was referred to the Army Prosecuting Authority, and Trooper Williams was duly charged with murder. But when his case came to the Old Bailey in April, the Director of Public Prosecutions dropped the charge and he was formally acquitted.

The case highlighted the complexities of prosecuting soldiers in warzones, when they have to make split-second, life-and-death decisions. The role of the commanding officer who knows his men and understands the dangers they face in a war environment was always considered to be a crucial element of the military prosecution system.

Now, however, the Armed Forces Bill that is expected to come into effect in 2008 will remove the right of the commanding officer to make decisions about charges in serious cases.

At present his superiors also have the right to give their opinions, and this tradition will also be abolished. In future, they will merely be informed of developments.

Under the Armed Forces Bill, which is to be laid before Parliament on December 1, military investigators in serious cases will have to pass their findings direct to prosecutors.

Part of the aim of the new Bill, which will cover all three Services, is to forge a closer and earlier relationship between those who are investigating alleged offences — in the Army’s case it is the Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch — and the prosecution service.

This will be more in line with the civilian police and prosecution system.

The Bill also sets up a single tri-Service prosecution agency, replacing the separate prosecutors for each Service. Courts martial are also to be merged into joint service establishments.

Yesterday as the Ministry of Defence announced its plan for a changed military prosecuting system, General Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the Army, made a bitter attack on critics who have recently accused the Army Prosecuting Authority of charging soldiers with offences in Iraq for political reasons.

General Jackson, Chief of the General Staff, said: “It’s a calumny of honest, decent people to imply that they [the Army Prosecuting Authority lawyers] are dancing to a political tune. It’s an outrageous suggestion and a slight on their character and integrity.”

General Jackson said that the authority was independent of the chain of command and independent of the Government, although Lord Goldsmith, QC, the Attorney-General, is consulted on serious cases.

INVESTIGATIONS

• 164 (out of 184) complaint cases against British soldiers in Iraq have been closed with no further action
  
  
• One is still with the Military Police
  
  
• Five cases involving fifteen soldiers are still awaiting trial
  
  
• One is being considered by the chain of command
  
  
• Five cases are still being considered by prosecutors
  
  
• Three cases have been dealt with summarily
  
  
• Five cases involving fourteen soldiers dealt with by the courts

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Milk: do we need a dairy godmother?
• DIY: the women doing it for themselves
• First double portrait of Princes unveiled