§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many courts martial there were in each service in(a) 1980, (b) 1990 and (c) 2000. [7403]
§ Mr. IngramI will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the costs and benefits of(a) maintaining the courts martial system and (b) maintaining services disciplinary processes while transferring criminal cases to the ordinary courts. [7405]
§ Mr. IngramThe system of military law, delivered through the Services' disciplinary processes which include courts martial, upholds the discipline structure inherent throughout the armed forces, and underpins tri-Service doctrine and the military chain of command that are both necessary for good order and operational effectiveness to be maintained. The military courts martial system has the statutory power and capability to deal with all but the most serious of criminal cases in the UK, subject to discussion over jurisdiction rights with appropriate civilian law agencies. Overseas, the military courts martial system has the power to deal with all military and civilian criminal cases, subject to agreement with the local authorities over jurisdiction rights. The benefit of transferring the most serious criminal cases to the ordinary courts allows a balance to be maintained between the military and civilian judicial systems. The costs of service courts martial accrue across the entire military system and are part of the running costs of each of the Services. It is therefore not possible to quote a figure separately for the military courts martial system.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence when there was last a review of the courts martial system. [7404]
§ Mr. IngramThe system for administering discipline in the armed forces is kept under review, with the principal vehicle for any legislative changes that may be necessary being the five-yearly Armed Forces Acts. The Armed Forces Act 1996 made substantial changes in order to reinforce the independence of courts martial, and these came into effect on 1 April 1997. Further changes on this scale were not considered necessary as a result of the most recent review, which led to the Armed Forces Act 2001, not least because the procedures introduced in 1997 have worked very well.
We have announced the intention to replace the present legislative framework for the armed forces, particularly the separate discipline Acts for each of the three services, with a single tri-service Act. The work on this will provide a further opportunity to consider whether changes 938W are required to the overall system of discipline, including courts martial, but the key consideration will be to ensure that it continues to underpin operational effectiveness.