Select Committee on Defence Fourth Report



FOURTH REPORT

The Defence Committee has agreed to the following Report:—

THE DRAFT VISITING FORCES AND INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS (APPLICATION OF LAW) ORDER 1999 AND THE DRAFT INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS AND DEFENCE ORGANISATIONS (DESIGNATIONS AND PRIVILEGES) (AMENDMENT) ORDER 1999

1. On 2nd February last year we published a report on the draft Visiting Forces and International Headquarters (Application of Law) (Amendment) Order 1998.[1] The principal purpose of that Order was to extend to the forces of nations which were members of NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) the same immunities and privileges when visiting the UK as already applied to visiting forces from NATO member states and Commonwealth countries. The fundamental purpose of these immunities and privileges is to enable these visiting forces to engage in joint exercises with UK forces on UK territory. Certain privileges and immunities are also granted to permanently stationed visiting forces and staff of international headquarters. The only significant permanently stationed visiting forces in the UK are from the USA; there are a number of NATO Commands which are also UK based.

2. As we described in our previous report, countries listed in the Order are granted these immunities and privileges on a mutual and reciprocal basis under the provisions of the NATO 'Status of Forces Agreement' (SOFA).[2] We discussed the implications of the draft Order and recommended its approval by the House. The House approved it on 4th February 1998.

3. During our examination of the MoD witnesses, we were told that a general revision of the provisions encompassed by last year's Order was in preparation.[3] On 15th April 1999, the draft International Headquarters and Defence Organisations (Designations and Privileges) (Amendment) Order 1999 and the draft Visiting Forces and International Headquarters (Application of Law) Order 1999 were laid before the House.[4] They are both subject to the affirmative resolution procedure. The second of these embodies the wholesale revision of these provisions promised by the MoD last year.

4. We received an explanatory memorandum from the MoD, dated 6th April 1999, outlining the main provisions of these draft Orders, and this is appended to this Report.[5] In our Report last year, we were critical of the quality of the explanatory memorandum attached to the draft Order.[6] We are pleased to note that our recommendation that explanatory notes to statutory instruments should be genuinely explanatory has been acted upon by the MoD, and we are grateful for the detailed explanation we have been given of the provisions of the two draft Orders before us this year. Its quality has obviated the need for us to take further oral evidence from the Department.

5. The two draft Orders are complementary. The Application of Law Order defines the various privileges and immunities extended to visiting forces and international headquarters by the Order under the provisions of section 8 of the Visiting Forces Act 1952, and lists the countries to whose armed forces it applies.[7] The Designation Order lists those international headquarters and defence organisations to which various provisions of the International Headquarters and Defence Organisations Act 1965 apply.[8]

6. The main provisions of the Application of Law Order are explained in Annex A to the MoD's explanatory memorandum.[9] It does not appear to include any significant innovations in these immunities and privileges. It lists all countries which have made PfP agreements with NATO, but the immunities and privileges only apply to those which have become a party to the PfP SOFA.[10] The memorandum also explains the changes in the headquarters listed under the Designation Order.[11] As the memorandum explains, the only privilege applying to these headquarters listed in Part II of the Schedule is 'inviolability of archives', which in effect places the files and records of such organisations beyond the reach of the courts. Again, the Designation Order does not extend any new privileges to the Scheduled Organisations beyond those already encompassed in the 1965 Act.

7. In our recent Report on the future of NATO, we discussed the role of Partnership for Peace in meeting some of the aspirations of states seeking membership of NATO who were unlikely to receive invitations to join the Alliance at the Washington Summit. [12] The PfP has also been a great success in cementing diplomatic and military relations between the Alliance and countries which do not aspire to membership of NATO. The provisions of the draft Visiting Forces and International Headquarters (Application of Law) Order are a small but necessary step to enhance and improve the cooperation made possible by the PfP, and as such deserve our wholehearted endorsement. We recommend that both draft Orders should be approved by the House.


1  Second Report, Session 1997-98, HC 521 Back
2  ibid, para 7 Back
3  ibid, Q 61 Back
4  Votes and Proceedings, 15 April 1999, Appendix I, p 408 Back
5  Appendix, pp vii-xi Back
6  Second Report, 1997-98, op cit, para 13 Back
7  ibid, para 5 Back
8  Appendix, pp vii-viii Back
9  Appendix, pp viii-xi Back
10  Annex to Appendix, para 2 Back
11  Appendix, paras 11 and 12 Back
12  Third Report, Session 1998-99, The Future of NATO: The Washington Summit, HC 39, paras 135-171 Back

 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 1999
Prepared 23 April 1999