§ 2.37 p.m.
THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERYMy Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask His Majesty's Government, the new edition of the Manual of Military Law not yet being obtainable, to what book are officers about to proceed on active service advised to refer in order that they may make themselves acquainted with the added responsibilities which they now have to bear, and the liabilities which they may incur, under the amendment to the Manual dated April, 1944, which is also unobtainable.]
THE MINISTER OF CIVIL AVIATION (LORD PAKENHAM)My Lords, the amendment to the Manual of Military Law dated April, 1944, to which the noble Earl's Question refers, provides that the fact that a war crime was committed in pursuance of superior orders docs not automatically exempt the perpetrator from punishment. This matter was discussed at some length in your Lordships' House on July 19, 1950. Although further copies of the Manual of Military Law, with amendments, are not available now, copies have been issued to all units. An officer going overseas may go direct from his unit or he may be posted into a draft before, and in either event a Manual of Military Law, with its amendments, should be available for his use.
THE EARL OF CORK AND ORRERYMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his answer to my Question, may I ask whether the Government are aware of the position so far as the Stationery Office are concerned? A short time ago, I went to the Stationery Office and asked for a copy of the Manual of Military Law for a young officer proceeding overseas. I was told that I could not have one as they were not printed yet. I asked when they would be printed, and I was told that a new edition would be out towards the end of the year. I should like to ask why Amendment No. 12 of the Manual printed in 1949 bears no reference to the Amendment of 1944. Is it satisfactory to a young officer that he 1031 cannot go to the Stationery Office and buy a book which he believes will tell him the new liabilities to which he is subject, and his new responsibilities? Is it satisfactory that he should be given this Appendix, which tells him nothing at all about it? I should like to ask, further, whether the result of the Private Fargie case does not show the absurdity of trying to make soldiers serving under Military Law in active service conditions liable to be prosecuted by the Civil Law. And may we not congratulate ourselves that we have a General there who has refused to offer up a private soldier on the altar of the Civil Law?
LORD PAKENHAMMy Lords, I cannot, of course, accept the wide-ranging implications in much of what the noble and gallant Earl has said. He is under a misapprehension, I believe, in talking about new law. As the noble and learned Viscount, the Lord Chancellor, pointed out on a previous occasion, the Manual of Military Law does not itself make law; it merely records what the law is. With regard to the noble Earl's first point, I will certainly have that matter looked into. As I have explained, any officer going overseas can obtain from his unit an up-to-date copy of the Manual with all amendments.