Memorandum from the Deepcut & Beyond
Group
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR A DEEPCUT & BEYOND
PUBLIC INQUIRY AND RELATED OBSERVATIONS
To propose that is expedient1 that a Tribunal2
be established for inquiring into a definite matter of urgent
public importance3, that is to say the incidence4 of death and
ill-treatment5 of members of HM Armed Forces6 in non-combat situations;7
— to investigate allegations and circumstances
surrounding particular deaths at barracks8 in Deepcut and elsewhere,
with specific reference to deaths at Catterick barracks9, in Northern
Ireland10, and deaths Overseas11 12;
— to provide otherwise for an appropriate
response and effective remedy13 on request for all those families14
of deceased service personnel maintaining a reasonable suspicion
that the death could have been prevented or was not subject to
an effective investigation;
— to inquire into the action and performance
of all public and private bodies, authorities and persons involved15;
— to consider the issues arising, including
the attribution or responsibility or blame where necessary;
— to consider how (a) to prevent such
incidents in future, (b) to provide for the proper exercise of
the Duty of Care; and (c) for the effective investigation of deaths
of service personnel;
— to publish its findings as soon as
practicable; to make such interim and final recommendations as
may seem appropriate; and to lay its final report before both
Houses of Parliament.
FOOTNOTES
1. Expediency
In evidence to the Select Committee on Public
Administration, Lord Justice Norton, proposed criteria for what
might satisfy this condition, to paraphrase: that the problem
to be addressed be clearly defined; that there were clear implications
for public policy; that there was a sufficient level of public
concern; that no alternative means of addressing the problem is
available; that other avenues have been exhausted; that benefits
of an Inquiry justify the cost. Deepcut & Beyond families
believe their demand for an Inquiry satisfies each of those criteria.
2. Public Inquiry
Since the formation of the Deepcut & Beyond
group, the families' demand has been for an Inquiry established
under the Tribunal of Inquiries Act (1921) and this sentence is
the standard form of wording for the establishment of this type
of Inquiry. This position has been supported by 139 Members of
Parliament who signed Early Day Motion 78[51].
We are aware that the Government intends to repeal this Act under
the Inquiries Bill presently before Parliament.
The Deepcut & Beyond families require an
Inquiry that:
(a) is wholly independent of the military
chain of command, the Ministry of Defence and the Government;
and is led by a panel appointed in consultation with the families
of the victims;
(b) has sufficient of powers to obtain documents
and all other relevant evidence, to subpoena and cross-examine
witnesses, to grant immunities and protect whistle-blowers; prosecute
to establish responsibility and attribute blame where appropriate;
to initiate legal action against those attempting to obstruct
the Inquiry;
(c) has sufficient financial and material
resources to carry out its terms of reference; to permit and fund
legal representation of interested parties, particularly the victims;
and otherwise to assist the full participation of victims and
their families;
(d) is open and transparent; its hearings
open to the public, press and media; and its report published
and promoted in the public interest; and
(e) has the authority to make recommendations
for reform and change that will be acted upon without delay by
Government and other public authorities, particularly by HM Armed
Forces.
(3) Deliberately construed broadly
In evidence to the Select Committee on Public
Administration, Lord Justice Laming, who conducted the Victoria
Climbie Inquiry, stressed the importance of permitting the Chairman
of an Inquiry to adopt a flexible approach to the Terms of Reference,
particularly where responsibility may stretch beyond one government
Department. If the breadth of terms of reference does not reflect
the full spectrum of public concerns and extent of public interest,
then confidence in the Inquiry, particularly among the victims
and potential witnesses will be undermined from the outset. It
is not in the interest of any party to establish a "stop-go"
Inquiry that has to keep going back to Ministers for a change
to the terms of reference.
4. "Incidence"
In public, the Army continues to underestimate
the extent of the problem. Despite the controversy generated around
these deaths, the Ministry of Defence has yet to provide any adequate
statistical breakdown of information it holds on deaths in army
barracks or elsewhere. An Inquiry would be remiss if it failed
to demand full disclosure of such information prior to conducting
its own "scoping" exercise. This would involve both
an appeal to those with information that may be of interest to
the Inquiry and the commissioning of independent surveys conducted
among past and serving members of HM Forces.
5. "Death and ill-treatment"
This form of words would allow the Inquiry to
examine those instances that might properly be construed as involving
a failure to protect the right of life or to protect against torture,
inhuman or degrading treatment. These cases might include breaches
in protection afforded by the Human Rights Act under Articles
2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
6. "All services"
The overwhelming majority of deaths brought
to the attention of the Deepcut & Beyond families' group concern
Army personnel. There are, however, no grounds for the Inquiry
to exclude in advance consideration of incidents that involve
Navy, RAF or other service personnel. It is possible that additional
instances of suspicious deaths may be brought to light by the
Inquiry itself. In any case, the Inquiry may properly wish to
investigate a limited number of deaths in the other Services in
order to draw upon their experiences.
7. "Non-combat situations"
Deecut & Beyond has used this form of words
to describe those fatalities where the cause of death cannot be
considered solely or principally to be the result of enemy or
hostile action. We wish the inquiry to examine all potentially
unlawful deaths and deaths where there is a suspicion that ill-treatment
or negligence may have been a significant contributory factor.
This will inevitably include deaths previously described as "accidental"
and "by natural causes".
8. "Barracks"
This taken to describe incidents where the deceased
was stationed at these barracks or where their experience during
the time they were stationed there may have contributed or be
relevant to the circumstances surrounding their death.
9. Catterick
ref Defence Select Cttee evidence
10. Northern Ireland
The Deepcut & Beyond group includes families
from both England and Northern Ireland who have experience of
controversial deaths in Northern Ireland. Here, the ongoing threat
of political violence invites comparisons with deaths in a combat
zone. While deaths in Northern Ireland may be subject to investigation
by the civilian police, the rules governing Coroners' Inquiries
remain at variance with the rest of the United Kingdom. This also
affects Northern Ireland families of service personnel that have
died outside the UK.
11. Overseas
The proper investigation of service personnel
deaths overseas poses a major problem for the MoD, especially
since the High Court has ruled[52]
that individuals may expect the protection of European Convention
rights in areas outside the UK that are under its effective control.
This will clearly include military bases. The Deepcut & Beyond
families group includes those with experiences of controversial
deaths in countries where the civilian police was inadequate,
prevented or otherwise unable to conduct an independent investigation
of a death. The Royal Military Police has neither the independence
nor the competence to conduct an Article 2 compliant investigation.
The Health & Safety Executive presently has no competence
to investigate deaths occurring outside the United Kingdom. The
provision for investigation by the Coroners' Courts in England
& Wales or Fatal Accident Inquiries in Scotland is, in our
experience, at best cursory and generally absent.
12. Time limits
Members of the Deepcut & Beyond family group
have been pressed to specify a cut off point in time before which
incidents would fall outside the scope of a public inquiry. The
overwhelming majority of incidents brought to our attention have
occurred in since 1990. We find no grounds for the Inquiry in
advance to exclude incidents that may be brought to its attention
or may raise additional elements that might assist its final recommendations.
13. Inclusivity
Deepcut & Beyond families take the position
that it is not for the victims to determine which of the deaths
brought to its attention should properly be the subject of further
investigation; to judge the strength or determine the veracity
of fresh evidence; or to consider all those matters that cast
doubt upon the verdict of a Coroner's Court. These matters are
ultimately for judicial determination.
14. "Families"
This would include immediate relatives and other
properly interested parties.
15. "All public bodies"
Deepcut & Beyond families have identified
failures that go beyond the responsibilities of the Ministry of
Defence. It is generally the case that bereaved families have
identified missed opportunities where other public authorities
or voluntary agencies could have prevented or stepped in to blow
the whistle on unlawful deaths. Examination of the work of the
army welfare and pastoral services, Coroners' and Courts Services;
the Police, Health and Social Services departments should all
come under the appropriate scrutiny by the Inquiry.
see also Appendix 1 in hard copy.
The Queen—On The Application Of—Mazin
Jumaa Gatteh Al Skeini And Others—V—The Secretary
Of State For Defence (14 December 2004).
51 Early Day Motion. http://edm.hclibrary.parliament.uk/edmdata/html/printable.html/EDMISES=03/ref=78 Back
52
http://www.courtservice.gov.uk/View.do?id=2980 Back
| 
