Numbers of Courts Martial or other disciplinary
or administrative procedures taken against instructors
ARMY
1. Court martial figures for the last five
years covering the calendar years 1999-2003 are shown below and
in more detail at Ev 309-10.
|
| Year
| 1999 | 2000
| 2001 | 2002
| 2003 | Total
|
|
| Number |
3 | 2
| 2 | 3
| 2 | 12
|
|
2. Summary Dealing figures for the period 2 October 2000-31
December 2000 and calendar years 2001-2003 (the period for which
information is available) are shown below and in more detail at
Ev 310.
|
| Year
| 2000 (part) | 2001
| 2002 | 2003
| Total |
|
| Number |
8 | 32
| 30 | 27
| 97 |
|
3. "Breach of duty of care" has been taken
to cover the following offences committed by instructors or recruits
in Phase 1 and 2 training:
(a) Ill-treatment by an instructor of a recruit either
verbal or physical charged under Army Act 1955 (AA 55) S. 65.
(b) Physical violence by an instructor on a recruit, charged
under AA 55 S. 70, Offences against the Person Act 1861.
(c) Indecent assault male on male or male on female, charged
under AA 55 S. 70 Sexual Offences.
(d) Taking financial advantage of a recruit charged under
AA 55 S. 69.
(e) Relationships between an instructor and female recruit
charged under AA 55 S. 36(1) or S. 69.
4. The following comments/caveats/explanations are also
offered:
(a) The Army views its responsibilities towards its recruits
very seriously and has a zero tolerance of all forms of harassment.
All allegations of misconduct involving those in positions of
responsibility are followed up rigorously and where culpability
is proved firm action is taken.
(b) Court martial dealings relate to the year of trial
not the date on which the offence was committed.
(c) Instructors and recruits in Phase 1 and 2 training
establishments. Note that some locations have Phase 3 training
and act in a Depot function for overseas units. Soldiers on Phase
3 training have not been knowingly included unless their action
involved recruits.
(d) The majority of cases of violence tried by court martial
involve recruits who are off duty. These usually involve drunken
violence without any element of bullying. These figures have therefore
only been included where an element of bullying was explicitly
identified.
(e) The summary dealing figures include a large number
of charges under AA 55 S. 36(1) disobedience to standing orders.
This charge covers male/female relationships between male instructors
and female recruits. It is made quite plain to all instructors
in Standing Orders and on their course at ITG Instructors School
that while recruits are in training, instructors are not allowed
to develop any personal relationships with them.
RAF
Courts Martial. The RAF are not aware of any members
of the training staff at RAF training units being court martialled
for offences which could relate to a breach of duty of care in
the period 1999-2003. However, an instructor at Initial Officer
Training at RAF College Cranwell was court martialled in 1998
for allegedly forcing a student to complete a physical training
exercise whilst carrying an injury. The instructor was found not
guilty of mistreatment of recruits.
Disciplinary and Administrative Procedures. For the
purposes of this question the above is defined as cases dealing
with Summary or Administrative action. This information is not
held centrally. Available manual records have been searched to
identify incidents involving training staff/trainees for incidents
or charges relating to "negligent performance of a duty",
inappropriate behaviour, inappropriate relationship, bullying/harassment
and assault. It has not been possible to differentiate between
Instructors and other members of training staff:
— The RAF has been unable to identify any cases
in the period 1999-2003 where Administrative Action was taken
against instructors and/or training staff for incidents relating
to breach of "duty of care".
— We have identified two cases of Summary Dealing
involving instructors. The first was an incident in 2002 that
involved a Cpl trainer found out of bounds in a female recruit
barrack block. He was fined £1,000. The second was in 2003
and involved a Cpl trainer who was charged with assault of a recruit.
He was also fined £1,000.
— There are four cases, currently under consideration
for Administrative Action, of instructors having inappropriate
relationships with recruits. The outcome of these are, as yet,
unknown.
NAVY
The information to answer this question has been taken from
a discipline database, which records the rank/rate of the offender
but not whether they were an instructor.
Details of the victim are not held on the database so we
cannot establish if they were a trainee or not.
Figures for summary dealings are for all offences committed
at each establishment. To identify each offence would involve
looking through each individual file. This cannot be done within
the timescale given.
Full records for summary dealings were only maintained from
2001 onwards. Therefore no figures are available for years 2000
and 1999.
Summary Dealings
|
| 2003
| 2002 | 2001
|
|
| HMS Raleigh | 254
| 222 | 257
|
| BRNC Dartmouth | 0
| 1 | * 0
|
| CTCRM Lympstone | 0
| 0 | 0
|
|
Note: These figures relate to initial training
CTCRM Lympstone—discipline issues are dealt with under
the Army Act 1955.
* This was a Royal Marine Corporal charged with
AWOL and therefore does not fit the criteria but has been included
for the sake of completeness.
Courts martial
|
| 2003
| 2002 | 2001
| 2000 | 1999
|
|
| HMS Raleigh | 1
| 0 | 1
| 2 | 2
|
| BRNC Dartmouth | 0
| 0 | 0
| 0 | 0
|
| CTCRM Lympstone | 0
| 0 | 0
| 0 | 0
|
|
CTCRM Lympstone—discipline issues are dealt with under
the Army Act 1955.
Court Martial statistics: 1999-2003
|
| Number of Courts-Martial | AA55 Section
| Remarks |
|
1999*
1 | s. 70 sexual
| ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s.65 (b) ill-treatment |
ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s.65 (b) ill-treatment |
ITC Catterick |
2000
2 | s.70 indecent assault
| ATR Winchester |
2001
1 | s.43 (1) & s.70 battery
| SEME Regt |
| 1 | s.70 battery | ATR Bassingbourn
|
2002
1 | s.70 violence
| RAC Trg Regt,
3x recruits assault
|
| | another
|
| 1 | s. 70 battery | AFC Harrogate
|
| 1 | s. 70 indecent assault |
ITC Catterick |
2003
1 | s. 65 (b) ill-treatment
| ITC Catterick |
| 1 | s. 70 indecent assault |
ATR Pirbright |
| Phase 3 NCO assaulted recruits
| |
| Total: 12 | |
|
|
* Year of trial, not date of offence.
Summary Dealing statistics: October 2000-03
|
| Number of Summary Dealings | AA55 Section
| Remarks |
|
2000
1 | s. 65 (b) ill-treatment
| ATFC Arborfield |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) financial |
ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Pirbright |
| 3 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Winchester |
| 1 | s. 70 battery by recruits
| ITC Catterick |
2001
1 | s. 36 (1) male/female
| 11 Sig Regt |
| 1 | s. 69 | 25 Trg Sp Regt
|
RLC
2 | s. 36 (1) male/female
| AFC Harrogate |
| 5 | s. 70 battery | AFC Harrogate
|
| 4 | s. 43a (b) bullying by recruits
| AFC Harrogate |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s. 70 common assault by recruit on recruit
| ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Lichfield |
| 3 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Pirbright |
| 3 | s. 36 (1) financial |
ATR Pirbright |
| 4 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Winchester |
| 2 | s. 36 (1) verbal abuse |
ATR Winchester |
| 2 | s. 36 (1) Male/female |
SEME Regt |
| 1 | s. 70 battery | SEAE Sp Regt
|
| 1 | s. 43A (b) bullying by Cfn
| ATFC Arborfield |
2002
1 | s. 65 (b) ill-treatment
| ITC Catterick |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
11 Sig Regt |
| 1 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
14 Regt RA |
| 2 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
25 Trg Sp Regt |
RLC
3 | s. 36 (1) male/female
| ATFC Arborfield |
| 3 | s. 43A (b) bullying by recruit
| ATFC Arborfield |
| 4 | s. 36 (1) male/female |
ATR Bassingbourn |
| 1 | s. 65 (b) ill-treatment
| ATR Pirbright |
|
| 
