Armed Forces Act 2006

Last updated

Armed Forces Act 2006 [1]
Act of Parliament
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (variant 1, 1952-2022).svg
Long title An Act to make provision with respect to the armed forces; and for connected purposes.
Citation 2006 c. 52
Dates
Royal assent 8 November 2006
Other legislation
Repeals/revokes
Amended by
Status: Amended
History of passage through Parliament
Text of statute as originally enacted
Revised text of statute as amended

The Armed Forces Act 2006 (c. 52) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

Contents

It came into force on 31 October 2009. It replaces the three separate Service Discipline Acts (the Army Act 1955, the Air Force Act 1955 and the Naval Discipline Act 1957) as the system of military justice under which the British Armed Forces operate. The Armed Forces Act harmonizes service law across the three armed services. One motivating factor behind the changes in the legislation combining discipline acts across the armed forces is the trend towards tri-service operations and defence organizations.

The Act also granted a symbolic pardon to soldiers controversially executed for cowardice and other offences during the World War I.

Key changes

Key areas of change include:

Offences

The Act sets out offences against service law and the associated punishments. The offences fall into two main categories:

Pardon

The mass pardon of 306 British Empire soldiers executed for certain offences during the World War I was enacted in Section 359 of the Act, which came into effect on royal assent. This number included three from New Zealand, 23 from Canada, two from the West Indies, two from Ghana and one each from Sierra Leone, Egypt and Nigeria. [2]

Tom Watson, then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Defence, was instrumental in including this in the Act. [3] He was said to have acted having met the relatives of Private Harry Farr, who was executed during the Great War despite strong evidence that he was suffering from PTSD. [4]

However, Section 359(4) states that the pardon "does not affect any conviction or sentence." Since the nature of a pardon is normally to commute a sentence, Gerald Howarth MP asked during parliamentary debate: "we are entitled to ask what it does do." [5] It would appear to be a symbolic pardon only, and some members of Parliament had called for the convictions to be quashed, although the pardon has still been welcomed by relatives of executed soldiers.

Commencements

The following orders have been made under section 383(2):

See also

Related Research Articles

A court-martial or court martial is a military court or a trial conducted in such a court. A court-martial is empowered to determine the guilt of members of the armed forces subject to military law, and, if the defendant is found guilty, to decide upon punishment. In addition, courts-martial may be used to try prisoners of war for war crimes. The Geneva Conventions require that POWs who are on trial for war crimes be subject to the same procedures as would be the holding military's own forces. Finally, courts-martial can be convened for other purposes, such as dealing with violations of martial law, and can involve civilian defendants.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mutiny</span> Disobeying of superiors

Mutiny is a revolt among a group of people to oppose, change, or remove superiors or their orders. The term is commonly used for insubordination by members of the military against an officer or superior, but it can also sometimes mean any type of rebellion against any force. Mutiny does not necessarily need to refer to a military force and can describe a political, economic, or power structure in which subordinates defy superiors.

Military justice is the body of laws and procedures governing members of the armed forces. Many nation-states have separate and distinct bodies of law that govern the conduct of members of their armed forces. Some states use special judicial and other arrangements to enforce those laws, while others use civilian judicial systems. Legal issues unique to military justice include the preservation of good order and discipline, the legality of orders, and appropriate conduct for members of the military. Some states enable their military justice systems to deal with civil offenses committed by their armed forces in some circumstances.

A pardon is a government decision to allow a person to be relieved of some or all of the legal consequences resulting from a criminal conviction. A pardon may be granted before or after conviction for the crime, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is the foundation of the system of military justice of the armed forces of the United States. The UCMJ was established by the United States Congress in accordance with their constitutional authority, per Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which provides that "The Congress shall have Power. .. to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval forces" of the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treachery Act 1940</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Treachery Act 1940 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom effective during World War II to facilitate the prosecution and execution of enemy spies, suspended afterwards, and repealed in 1968 or 1973, territory depending. The law was passed on 23 May 1940, in the month after Nazi Germany invaded France and Winston Churchill became prime minister.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Courts-martial of the United States</span> Trials conducted by the U.S. military

Courts-martial of the United States are trials conducted by the U.S. military or by state militaries. Most commonly, courts-martial are convened to try members of the U.S. military for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). They can also be convened for other purposes, including military tribunals and the enforcement of martial law in an occupied territory. Federal courts-martial are governed by the rules of procedure and evidence laid out in the Manual for Courts-Martial, which contains the Rules for Courts-Martial (RCM), Military Rules of Evidence, and other guidance. State courts-martial are governed according to the laws of the state concerned. The American Bar Association has issued a Model State Code of Military Justice, which has influenced the relevant laws and procedures in some states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capital punishment by the United States military</span> Use of the death penalty by the U.S. military

The use of capital punishment by the United States military is a legal punishment in martial criminal justice. Despite its legality, capital punishment has not been imposed by the U.S. military in over sixty years.

Victor Manson Spencer was a volunteer from Invercargill, New Zealand who fought in the Otago Infantry Regiment of the New Zealand Division in World War I. Spencer was executed for desertion on 24 February 1918, despite later suggestions that he was severely traumatised by shellshock, having fought and survived several campaigns.

Private Harry T. Farr was a British soldier who was executed by firing squad during World War I for cowardice at the age of 25. Before the war, he lived in Kensington, London and joined the British Army in 1908. He served until 1912 and remained in the reserves until the outbreak of World War I. During the war, Farr served with the West Yorkshire Regiment on the Western Front. In 1915 and 1916 he was hospitalised multiple times for shell shock, the longest period being for five months. On 17 September 1916, Farr did not comply with an order to return to the front line, and was subsequently arrested and charged with cowardice. Unrepresented at his court martial, Farr was found guilty under section 4(7) of the Army Act 1881 and was sentenced to death. He was executed on 18 October 1916.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shot at Dawn Memorial</span> War memorial

The Shot at Dawn Memorial is a monument at the National Memorial Arboretum near Alrewas, in Staffordshire, UK. It commemorates the 306 British Army and Commonwealth soldiers executed after courts-martial for desertion and other capital offences during World War I.

The Articles of War are a set of regulations drawn up to govern the conduct of a country's military and naval forces. The first known usage of the phrase is in Robert Monro's 1637 work His expedition with the worthy Scot's regiment called Mac-keyes regiment etc. and can be used to refer to military law in general. In Swedish, the equivalent term Krigsartiklar, is first mentioned in 1556. However, the term is usually used more specifically and with the modern spelling and capitalisation to refer to the British regulations drawn up in the wake of the Glorious Revolution and the United States regulations later based on them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Law Act 1977</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Law Act 1977 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Most of it only applies to England and Wales. It creates the offence of conspiracy in English law. It also created offences concerned with criminal trespass in premises, made changes to sentencing, and created an offence of falsely reporting the existence of a bomb.

Lance Corporal Peter Goggins was a British soldier who was executed for desertion during the First World War. His case later became a well publicised example of the injustices of British military discipline during the war, and he was pardoned in 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military courts of the United Kingdom</span>

The military courts of the United Kingdom are governed by the Armed Forces Act 2006. The system set up under the Act applies to all three armed services: the Royal Navy (RN), the British Army, and the Royal Air Force (RAF), and replaces the three parallel systems that were previously in existence.

Conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline is an offence against military law in many countries. It has existed in military law since before the 17th century and is an important offence which functions as a catch-all to criminalise offences against military order which are not specified elsewhere.

The main Offences against military law in the United Kingdom are set out in the Armed Forces Act 2006.

Emergency Powers Order 1945 or EPO 362 was an Irish ministerial order which penalised members of the Irish Defence Forces who had deserted since the beginning of the Emergency proclaimed at the start of World War II, during which the state was neutral. The order deprived those affected of pension entitlements and unemployment benefits accrued prior to their desertion, and prohibited them from employment in the public sector for a period of seven years. Most of those affected had deserted to join the armed forces of belligerents: in almost all cases those of the Allies, and mainly the British Armed Forces.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 1988</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 1988 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Armed Forces Act 1972</span>

The Armed Forces Act 1972 [Act 77), is a Malaysian laws which enacted to amend and consolidate the law relating to the establishment, government and discipline of the armed forces of Malaysia.

References

  1. The citation of this Act by this short title is authorised by section 386 of this Act.
  2. "NZ Herald: New Zealand's Latest News, Business, Sport, Weather, Entertainment, Politics". NZ Herald.[ permanent dead link ]
  3. "War shame ended by plea of a daughter". the Guardian. 28 October 2007. Retrieved 16 August 2021.
  4. "War shame ended by plea of a daughter". the Guardian. 28 October 2007. Retrieved 21 July 2021.
  5. Hansard, House of Commons, 7 November 2006, col. 772