HC Deb 15 February 1965 vol 706 cc837-9
33. Mr. Abse

asked the Secretary of State for Defence why Corporal Duncan Irving was handed over to the Aden civil authorities to be tried for an offence alleged to have been committed as a result and during the course of his sentry duties.

50. Mr. Munro

asked the Secretary of State for Defence why Corporal Duncan Irving is to be tried in a civil court rather than by court martial for an alleged offence committed in Aden whilst on duty.

Mr. Mulley

Corporal Irving was on guard duty in Aden on 24th December last when it is alleged he shot and killed an Arab. At the inquest on 17th January, the proceedings were stayed and the case referred to the Attorney-General in Aden. As a result of his decision, on 26th January Corporal Irving was charged in the civil court with two offences: culpable homicide and causing death through a rash or negligent act. These are civil offences, and in the United Kingdom and Colonies soldiers who are alleged to have committed civil offences involving the persons of civilians are normally tried by the civil courts.

Mr. Abse

Would my right hon. Friend inform the House what would have happened to the corporal, who is alleged to have shot an Arab while the Arab was seeking out ammunition, had he not taken action to prevent the thief? Would he not have been faced with a dilemma—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This would appear to be a hypothetical question. Perhaps the hon Gentleman could frame it in some non-hypothetical form?

Mr. Abse

Was the corporal told the consequences of his action? Was he told that if he did take the action that is alleged he would be likely to come before the civil courts? Further, could the Minister comment on the fact that if a German in Wales, doing the same act, shot a Welshman, he would be tried by the German Forces? Why should this British corporal be handed over to an Adenese jury for apparently doing nothing more than his duty?

Mr. Mulley

I cannot give an opinion about the prospects of a hypothetical case in Wales, but, where there is concurrent jurisdiction in the Colonies, though naturally there is consultation, the decision in practice rests with the civil authorities, as it does here in the United Kingdom in similar circumstances.

Mr. Monro

This soldier is a constituent of mine and, whilst I should like to thank the Minister for the help he has given me over the past few weeks, may I ask him if he intends to change the law so that British soldiers are not put in this impossible position in the future?

Mr. Mulley

I am aware of the great concern that has been caused by this case, and I am considering its implications with my right hon. Friend.

Mr. Paget

Is not the position that our troops when they are serving without the jurisdiction of Her Majesty are protected, but that when it is within the jurisdiction of Her Majesty, as in a Colony, Her Majesty can intervene with clemency if anything goes wrong at the trial?

Mr. Mulley

I think that my hon. and learned Friend has stated the broad principle. The general principle is that soldiers are liable to be tried for these offences by civil courts where those courts are responsible to the Crown.

Mr. A. Henderson

Can we be assured that Corporal Irving will receive the best possible legal advice that the British Government can provide?

Mr. Mulley

I can assure my right hon. and learned Friend that, even before the inquest, one of the leading banisters-at-law in Aden, a member of the British Bar, was retained at public expense to defend the corporal.

Mr. Abse

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Mr. Monro

On a point of order—

Mr. Speaker

I think that the notice came by a fraction of a fraction of a second from my right.