THE head of the British Army angrily denied yesterday that he was failing to defend soldiers accused of mistreating Iraqis and conducting a “witch-hunt” against senior officers.

In an interview with The Times, General Sir Mike Jackson, Chief of the General Staff, defended ordering an investigation to discover whether there was evidence of “systemic” abuse by troops in Iraq.

General Jackson, who retires next year, said that, although he believed that most of the allegations were groundless, he needed to be “absolutely certain”. He said: “I stand and fall by my soldiers, but people fail to understand that, if there are allegations of mistreatment of civilians in Iraq, it is right that they should be investigated, and prosecution decisions are made independently of the chain of command.

As head of the Army, I could be charged with perverting the course of justice if I tried to intervene.”

General Jackson has privately faced severe criticism during his time as Chief of the General Staff from some officers who believe that he has not effectively defended his troops against abuse charges.

This year several retired defence chiefs made it clear that they were worried about the prosecution of soldiers faced with life-and-death decisions. But General Jackson said that there was a clear difference between soldiers acting within their rules of engagement and those accused of abusing civilians. He has asked Brigadier Robert Aitken, director of army personnel strategy, to review the reputation and operational effectiveness of soldiers and their officers during a period after the end of the combat phase of the war in May 2003, when many accusations were levelled against Britain’s troops.

Most of the 184 allegations investigated were completed without criminal or disciplinary action, but others have led to soldiers being charged. Fourteen soldiers have faced trial and 15 more are awaiting court martial. He agreed that the allegations had “damaged the Army”, but said it would be worse if there had been a cover-up.

“Surely it’s more damaging not to face up to allegations that are made? It also means that, if serious allegations are not properly handled, the Army’s position would be eroded, and that would be very dangerous,” he said.

Parts of a letter sent out by Brigadier Aitken to commanding officers who had served in Iraq were leaked, but General Jackson said that it had been “misconstrued” and “misquoted”.

Brigadier Aitken wrote in the letter, seen by The Times, that he was seeking “anecdotal or factual evidence” to help him to judge whether the predeployment training, including prisoner-of-war handling, was adequate, whether orders in theatre were clear, and how officers had performed.

The brigadier, who will hand over his final report once all the present courts martial are completed, reassured commanding officers that he was not conducting a witch-hunt, but asked: “Can you give me any specific examples of your or other officers imposing their will on their soldiers to prevent them going ‘over the top’ in their dealings with civilians? Do you know of any officers who were ‘disciplined’ for their behaviour on operations?” General Jackson said Brigadier Aitken’s letter made it clear that he was not seeking names or units. General Jackson said: “Any sense that some sort of witch-hunt had been instigated is utterly wrong. The law doesn’t say that an officer automatically breaks the law if his men have committed a crime. But it’s his unit and he’s responsible, and that makes the whole system work.”

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Foxy Knoxy snared by her lust and her lies
• Britain is the land of the shrinking family
• Zac Goldsmith: Not such a green god