HC Deb 27 April 1966 vol 727 cc673-4
4. Mr. Monro

asked the Secretary of State for Defence if, following the refusal of the appeal to the Court Martial Appeal by Privates Symington and Greig of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, he will reconsider the sentences imposed.

The Minister of Defence for the Army (Mr. G. W. Reynolds)

The sentences of imprisonment were reduced from three years to 18 months during the processes of confirmation and petition to the Army Board. They are reconsidered at intervals as provided by the Army Act. A review in March of this year resulted in no further change. Another review will be made in June.

Mr. Monro

Is the Minister aware that there are many aspects of the court martial in Singapore which have caused the gravest concern that there has been a serious miscarriage of justice? Will he say what reasons were given by the Army Council for turning down the petition?

Mr. Reynolds

The sentence and the guilt were reviewed on three and four occasions respectively during the normal procedure of reviewing court martial decisions. I cannot accept the hon. Gentleman's statements about the way in which the court was conducted.

Mr. Dalyell

if my hon. Friend is so certain that in this case, in which I have taken an interest, as he knows, the Army is right, why have there to be these frequent reviews?

Mr. Reynolds

Because we take far more care in dealing with reviews of court martial cases than is the position in actions in the civil court. This is a good thing and makes sure that trials are properly conducted and properly looked into.

Mr. Monro

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