sc0943003.114-117

House of Commons

Session 2005 - 06
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament

Select Committee Proceedings: 30th March 2006
114

Armed Forces Bill, continued

accommodation for a continuous period of more than 24 hours, the

order shall cease to have effect so far as it imposes the exclusion

requirement.

(7)
In this section “relevant premises” means premises occupied as a

residence by a person subject to service law or a civilian subject to

service discipline.

(8)
Who is the relevant person’s “commanding officer” for the purposes

of subsection (5)(b) shall be determined by or under regulations made

by the Defence Council.”

6    (1)
Section 21 of that Act (duration of protection orders) is amended as follows.

      (2)
In subsection (1) for the words from “being” to the end substitute “which must

be a period of not more than 28 days beginning with the date of the order.”

      (3)
In subsection (2)—

(a)
for “the officer having jurisdiction” substitute “a judge advocate”;

(b)
in paragraph (a), for the words from “applicable” to “that officer”

substitute “permitted by subsection (1) above”;

(c)
in the words after paragraph (b) for “that officer” substitute “the judge

advocate”.

      (4)
In subsection (3) for “officer”, in both places, substitute “judge advocate”.

      (5)
In subsection (5) for “an officer” substitute “a judge advocate”.

7    (1)
Section 22 of that Act (review and discharge of protection orders) is amended

as follows.

      (2)
In subsection (2) for “superior officer” substitute “judge advocate”.

      (3)
In subsection (4)—

(a)
for “superior officer” substitute “judge advocate”;

(b)
for the words from “consider whether” to the end of paragraph (b)

substitute “consider whether, if the order were discharged and—

(a)
(where the power under section 20(2)(b)(i) has been

exercised) if the child were returned by the

responsible person, or

(b)
(where the power under section 20(2)(b)(ii) has been

exercised) if the child were allowed to be removed

from the place in which he was being accommodated

immediately before the making of the order,”.

      (4)
In subsection (5) for “the officer having jurisdiction” substitute “a judge

advocate”.

      (5)
After that subsection insert—

“(5A)
On the application of the person to whom an exclusion requirement

contained in a protection order relates, a judge advocate may, in such

circumstances and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by

regulations, vary the exclusion requirement or discharge the order so

far as it imposes the exclusion requirement.”

      (6)
In subsection (7) for “officer” substitute “judge advocate”.

8
After that section insert—

“22A
Removal and accommodation of children by service police in

emergency

(1)
Where a service policeman has reasonable cause to believe that a

relevant child would otherwise be likely to suffer significant harm, he

may, if authorised—

Select Committee Proceedings: 30th March 2006
115

Armed Forces Bill, continued

(a)
remove the child to suitable accommodation and keep him

there; or

(b)
take such steps as are reasonable to ensure that the child’s

removal from any service hospital, or other place, in which he

is then being accommodated is prevented.

(2)
In this section, a child with respect to whom a service policeman has

exercised the power under subsection (1) is referred to as having been

taken into service police protection.

(3)
As soon as is reasonably practicable after taking a child into service

police protection, the service policeman concerned shall—

(a)
inform the appropriate service police officer of the steps that

have been and are proposed to be taken under this Part of this

Act with respect to the child and the reasons for taking them;

(b)
give details to the appropriate service police officer of the

place at which the child is being accommodated;

(c)
inform the child (if he appears capable of understanding)—

(i)
of the steps that have been taken with respect to him

under this section and of the reasons for taking them;

and

(ii)
of the further steps that may be taken with respect to

him under this Part of this Act;

(d)
take such steps as are reasonably practicable to discover the

wishes and feelings of the child;

(e)
secure that the case is inquired into by the appropriate service

police officer;

(f)
secure that the child is moved to accommodation approved for

the purpose by the appropriate service police officer (unless

that officer approves the child’s remaining where he is

currently being accommodated);

(g)
take such steps as are reasonably practicable to inform—

(i)
the child’s parents,

(ii)
every person who is not a parent of the child but has

parental responsibility for him, and

(iii)
any other person with whom the child was residing

immediately before being taken into service police

protection,


of the steps that he has taken under this section with respect to

the child, the reasons for taking them and the further steps that

may be taken with respect to him under this Part of this Act.

(4)
On completing any inquiry under subsection (3)(e) the officer

conducting it shall release the child from service police protection

unless he considers that there is still reasonable cause for believing

that the child would be likely to suffer significant harm if released.

(5)
No child may be kept in service police protection for more than 72

hours.

(6)
While a child is being kept in service police protection—

(a)
the appropriate service police officer shall do what is

reasonable in all the circumstances of the case for the purpose

of safeguarding or promoting the child’s welfare (having

Select Committee Proceedings: 30th March 2006
116

Armed Forces Bill, continued

regard in particular to the length of the period during which

the child will be kept in service police protection); but

(b)
neither he nor the service policeman who took the child into

service police protection has any parental responsibility for

him.

(7)
Where a child has been taken into service police protection, the

appropriate service police officer shall allow—

(a)
the child’s parents,

(b)
any person who is not a parent of the child but has parental

responsibility for him,

(c)
any person with whom the child was residing immediately

before he was taken into service police protection,

(d)
any person in whose favour a contact order is in force with

respect to the child, and

(e)
any person acting on behalf of any of those persons,


to have such contact (if any) with the child as, in the opinion of the

appropriate service police officer, is both reasonable and in the child’s

best interests.

(8)
In this section—

“authorised”, in relation to a service policeman, means authorised, by an

authorising service police officer and in accordance with regulations,

to exercise the power under subsection (1) in the case in question;

“an authorising service police officer”, and “the appropriate service

police officer” have the meanings given by regulations;

“relevant child” means a child who falls within paragraph (a) or (b) of

section 19(1) above;

“service policeman” has the same meaning as in the Armed Forces Act

1996.”

9    (1)
Section 23 of that Act (interpretation) is amended as follows.

      (2)
In subsection (1)—

(a)
in the definition of “accommodation”, for the words from “means” to

“relates,” substitute “, in relation to a child to whom a protection order

relates, means any service hospital or other suitable place the occupier

of which is willing temporarily to receive the child,”;

(b)
for the definition of “civilian in a corresponding position” substitute—

““civilian subject to service discipline” has the same meaning as in

the Armed Forces Act 2006;”;

(c)
after the definition of “contact order” insert—

““exclusion requirement” has the meaning given by section 20A

above;”;

(d)
after the definition of “extension order” insert—

““harm” and “significant harm” have the same meanings as in the

Children Act 1989;”;

(e)
for the definitions of “officer having jurisdiction” and “superior

officer” substitute—

““judge advocate” has the same meaning as in the Armed Forces

Act 2006;”;

(f)
in the definition of “regulations”, after ““regulations”” insert “(except

in section 20A(8))”;

(g)
for the definition of “service law” substitute—

Select Committee Proceedings: 30th March 2006
117

Armed Forces Bill, continued

““subject to service law” has the same meaning as in the Armed

Forces Act 2006.”

      (3)
After that subsection insert—

“(1A)
Section 163(2) and (3) of the Armed Forces Act 2006 apply in relation

to section 18(8A) and 20(9A) of this Act.”

      (4)
Omit subsection (2).’.

[Adjourned till Tuesday 25th April at 9.30 a.m.