Saturday - June 22, 2013

european court of uman rights and brit court devise new way to fight wars, enter lawyers

In the normal run of things we can sympathize with families and especially parents who lose a loved one in the military.  The loss is certainly made all the worse if there are fears or accusations that the dead are the result of defense dept. penny pinching and not providing the troops with adequate gear to protect themselves.

That’s what the following is all about.
For awhile now there has been talk and denial and hearings and accusations that troops were sent out in what were supposed to be reasonably safe armored vehicles that were neither safe nor well armored, resulting in the unnecessary deaths of crews and passengers. 

One mother was very much shattered and unforgiving and campaigned for investigation with regard to the type vehicle her son was killed in, by a roadside bomb.

Enter the lawyers.

Human rights victory for families of British soldiers

Justices uphold human rights of Snatch Land Rover soldiers
The families of British soldiers who died when their Snatch Land Rovers hit roadside bombs in Iraq have won the right to bring a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998).
The Supreme Court unanimously held that HRA 1998 applies to British soldiers abroad, in Smith & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41. The extent of the duty, and whether it was breached, will now be decided at trial.
The families claim the soldiers’ deaths would have been avoided if they had been given proper equipment when carrying out high-risk activities, such as medium-armoured vehicles.

READ THE REST OF IT

Not surprisingly there is another argument to be heard.

UK defence secretary warns of rights ruling repercussions

Judges decree that convention on human rights applies on battlefield

Daily Mail by way of Gulf News
London: British troops could be prevented from carrying out vital missions after an explosive human rights ruling, the Defence Secretary has warned.
Philip Hammond said the judgement means military chiefs will be “living in fear” of being sued.

He fears our forces risk being reduced to Continental-style peacekeeping roles — which see some countries refuse to let their personnel go out after dark — after judges decreed that the European Convention on Human Rights applies on the battlefield.

Hammond is understood to be so furious at the Supreme Court ruling that he is considering demanding a revocation and believes it strengthens the case for Britain quitting the ECHR.

The Defence Secretary said: “There are real concerns that British troops could be prevented from carrying out their missions for fear of falling foul of human rights legislation. We can’t have troop commanders living in fear of how lawyers back in London might interpret their battlefield decisions that are vital to protecting our national security.

“There could be serious implications for our ability to work with international partners who are not bound by the ECHR.”
Following the Supreme Court ruling that the ECHR does apply even in combat situations, Hammond has ordered a review of the implications for military commanders and troops.

The prospect of “health and safety” type laws applying to the battlefield could seriously impact on Britain’s military capability, he said.
A source added: “If the ECHR applies to personnel on operations it is feared that commanders may be reluctant to make decisions in the field that will then be second-guessed by lawyers in a London.

“We don’t want to be tied up by health and safety rules that prevent troops patrolling at night or only with certain equipment.”

READ MORE OF IT

Here’s part of an editorial from the Saturday Mail on the subject.

And as an aside I should tell the readers here, German troops in Afghanistan, some 3,500, do NOT leave their bases at night and Do Not leave their armoured carriers while on patrol. The UN has a number of restrictions on UN troops.
I suppose this is how a politically correct war is fought these days. 

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Wrong human rights verdict for our troops

By Daily Mail Reporter

As the Mail has long argued, it is a matter of great shame to Britain’s political class that, in Iraq and Afghanistan, soldiers were sent to fight and die without proper equipment.

But, while it is vital that ministers should be held to account, it’s impossible not to be alarmed by this week’s Supreme Court ruling that soldiers in warzones should, for the first time, be given protection under Labour’s Human Rights Act.

Doubtless, the judges felt that giving soldiers and their families the right to sue would focus the minds of the Government and Army on minimising risk.
But what they have failed to accord due weight to is that military commanders are regularly tasked with making instant life-or-death decisions.
If the fear of future litigation causes them to hesitate for even a moment, the consequences could be disastrous.

Meanwhile, if the Ministry of Defence budget is drained by fighting vexatious claims brought by ambulance-chasing lawyers, there will inevitably be less to spend on equipment and training.

READ MORE

Posted by peiper     on 06/22/2013 at 11:21 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK • War-Stories •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner