Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Dismissed soldier takes case to European court

Christopher Bellamy Defence Correspondent
Monday 18 December 1995 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

CHRISTOPHER BELLAMY

Defence Correspondent

A British soldier dismissed by a court martial in 1991 yesterday won the right to refer his case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The military court reduced Alex Findlay in rank and dismissed him from the British Army for threatening fellow soldiers while allegedly suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder following service in the Falklands in 1982. His case threatens to overthrow the independent system of military law in Britain and has influenced changes in the Armed Forces' Bill, announced in the Queen's Speech last month.

But last night the Ministry of Defence said: "We did not think we at any time breached the European Convention on Human Rights." It said the challenge was based on the way the military justice system was closely tied in with the management and discipline of the armed forces.

Mr Findlay joined the Scots Guards in 1980. He served in the Falklands in 1982, when the battalion played a decisive role in breaking the Argentine defences on the approaches to the capital, Port Stanley. He suffered a back injury during training in 1987 and in 1990, as a lance sergeant (equivalent to corporal in most units), was alleged to have held members of his unit at pistol point after a drinking session in Northern Ireland. He allegedly held a pistol to one soldier's head.

In 1991 he was convicted by a court martial and sentenced to two years' in prison. In 1992 he applied for a judicial review but the High Court ruled that his conviction under the Army Act was legal. He then appealed to the European Commission of Human Rights which yesterday referred his case to the European Court.

His claim centred on the grounds that the "convening officer" decided the charges, where the court should be held, the appointment of prosecutors and the confirming officer. He claimed the "chain of command" exercised undue influence - in contrast to civil law when the executive is distinct from the judiciary.

The convening officer's role is to be examined in the revision of the Armed Forces' Bill next year. It will also examine the appeals process and enhance the role of the Judge Advocate General - the Army's chief legal officer. Finally, it will review the current arrangements which favour summary justice by the commanding officer - whether the accused will accept his award or elect trial by court martial. Soldiers on a charge usually elect for the former.

t A black Briton who claims his 1991 trial for robbery was tainted by racism has been given clearance to take the Government to the European Court of Human Rights. David Gregory, 29, was jailed for six years and is now in Leyland prison, Lancashire. He criticised the handling of the trial at Manchester Crown Court, during which the judge had to deal with a race problem among the jury.

His case will be that the fact of the racism, and the way it was tackled by judge and lawyers, led to an unfair trial in breach of guarantees of impartiality enshrined in the Human Rights Convention, to which Britain is a signatory.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in