§ Mr. Dribergasked the Under-Secretary of State for Air if he will now make a statement on the recent case in which two airmen were held under close arrest for 57 days in Germany while awaiting courts-martial.
§ Mr. StracheyIn view of the nature of the offences with which these two airmen were originally charged, they had to be held in close arrest until they were removed from the locality where the offences were alleged to have been committed. This period of close arrest would be taken into account by the court in assessing the sentence. When, at the trial, they pleaded guilty to the charge of drunkenness, the other charges were dropped, but in accordance with the normal practice when a sentence of detention is awarded, they were, kept in close arrest pending confirmation of the sentence, which would, of course, run from the date of conviction. The cells in which the airmen were confined after they had been sentenced had not been in regular use but I have no evidence that they had ever been pronounced unfit for occupation. On the first night the airmen had complained of the cold, and were put in the guard room where there was an open fire. Minor repairs to the cells were carried out at once and the central heating was turned on. They have made no further complaints. I agree that it took a long time to bring them to trial but this was due to the shortage both of judge advocates and prosecutors and the need to obtain competent interpreters and to interview many witnesses of different nationalities. Whilst I cannot agree that the offences with which these airmen were charged were relatively trivial or that the sentences were severe, I can assure my hon. Friend that we are fully alive to the importance of speeding up action in such cases.