Soldier who refused to serve in Afghanistan loses appeal
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.a soldier who had refused to serve in Afghanistan "for reasons of principle" has lost his appeal against a nine-month jail sentence.
Lance Corporal Joe Glenton's legal team had claimed that he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder after a deployment to Helmand four years ago and it had been "wrong in principle" to have imposed an immediate custodial sentence on him. Instead, the court was urged either to suspend it or reduce it to allow for his release.
The case had become a cause célèbre for the campaign against the Afghan war, with public rallies being held in support of L/Cpl Glenton from York. Before his court martial, L/Cpl Glenton said Taliban forces and the British Army were simply "grinding each other down".
"I don't believe our cause is just," he said. "I think it's adversely affecting the Afghan people as well as the British Army and their families. I think it has become part of the problem rather than the solution."
The trial had heard that L/Cpl Glenton, of the Royal Logistic Corps, was promoted because of the "exemplary" way he carried out his duties during his previous Afghan tour and that his stance was based on deeply held beliefs rather than an excuse to shirk his duty.
Yesterday the Court of Appeal, sitting in London, ruled that his sentence was neither excessive nor wrong in principle. Announcing the decision, Lord Judge said the "crucial matter in this sentencing decision was the impact of the absence of the individual member of service personnel on the operational effectiveness of the unit".
He went on: "The individual who goes absent without leave and so deliberately avoids his duties – when his duty is to be posted to a theatre of war – is not only letting down his comrades-in-arms and undermining their morale generally; his conduct exposes another serviceman or woman sent to replace him to the risks that he is avoiding.
"That is the essential feature of this case. This is not a case of a conscientious objector."
L/Cpl Glenton, who had so far served 75 days of his sentence, had gone absent without leave just before his scheduled second deployment to Helmand. He handed himself in after two years and six days' absence during which time he had travelled to South-east Asia and Australia.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments