BREAKING NEWS: British Soldiers To Be Investigated By International Criminal Court Over Claims They Committed War Crimes In Iraq
Britain is to be investigated by the International Criminal Court over claims of war crimes by troops.
Prosecutors in the Hague have launched a 'preliminary examination' into allegations UK forces tortured and mistreated Iraqi prisoners between 2003 and 2008.
It is the first time the ICC, which usually prosecutes dictators who systematically maim and kill civilians, has investigated Britain for alleged war crimes.
It took the first step towards a formal investigation after studying more than 400 allegations of beating, sexual assault, mock executions and electric shocks of Iraqi captives.
The claims are made in a 250-page dossier compiled by Phil Shiner’s Public Interest Lawyers.
It raises the prospect of soldiers, commanders and politicians, including four former Labour defence secretaries – Geoff Hoon, John Reid, Des Browne and John Hutton – who are named in the file being put on trial for war crimes.
The move provoked anger among ministers and the military.
Colonel Richard Kemp, who commanded UK forces in Afghanistan, said: ‘Public Interest Lawyers, intent on discrediting the Armed Forces, are slinging mud in every direction in the desperate hope that some will stick.
‘The ICC performs a valuable role in bringing war criminals to book from dictatorships that will not prosecute them. That does not apply to the UK, which has the oldest-established and most highly respected legal system in the world.’
Last night Attorney General Dominic Grieve said the UK would co-operate fully but that the Government ‘completely rejected’ the claim that UK forces were responsible for systematic abuse.
The ICC first looked at allegations of abuse in Iraq in 2006, but decided that an investigation was not needed because the claims were not serious or widespread enough.
Yesterday ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda said an examination was being opened after ‘new information’ that the UK was involved in alleged systematic abuse of detainees was received.
Mr Grieve said he believed the ICC would decide there was no need for it to carry out a full investigation because Britain is already investigating claims of abuse in Iraq.
One inquiry collapsed in March when lawyers admitted there was no evidence to support Iraqi claims that troops murdered prisoners and mutilated their bodies following a battle in 2004.
The Iraq Historic Allegations Team, led by former civilian detectives, is currently dealing with a further 52 allegations of unlawful killing by British forces and 93 allegations of mistreatment following the toppling of Saddam Hussein.
The ICC could take several years to decide whether to take its inquiry further but under its statute can intervene only when a nation is carrying out no effective investigation.
The Director of Service Prosecutions Andrew Cayley QC - who is responsible for prosecutions of service personnel - said the UK would co-operate fully with the preliminary examination by the prosecutor.
He said was confident that the case would not move to a formal investigation as the UK was already conducting its own inquiry through the Iraq Historical Allegations Team (IHAT) established in 2010.
Under the Statute of Rome which established the ICC, the court can only intervene in cases where there is no effective investigation by the national authorities.
'If the ICC is satisfied that the United Kingdom is genuinely investigating these crimes, they will allow us to do that.
'They may go on monitoring us for a number years in respect of investigations and prosecutions but they will not intervene,' he said.
'Of course in the end it is for the prosecutor of the ICC to determine this, but I am confident based on the work that I've seen that IHAT has been doing, that the court will find that these are genuine criminal investigations that are taking place and they won't take it any further.'
The preliminary examination was launched in response to a 250-page dossier submitted to the prosecutors office in January by the British law firm, Public Interest Lawyers, and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights - a German human rights organisation.
Former defence secretary Geoff Hoon and former armed forces minister Adam Ingram are among those named in the file.
The prosecutor's office will now study the dossier alongside submissions from the British Government and other relevant bodies - a process that could take several years before a final decision is taken on whether to move to a full investigation.
'The preliminary examination is the first step in a process,' Mr Cayley said.
'The preliminary examinations can carry on for a very lengthy period. there have been preliminary examinations going on for years.'
The IHAT, led by a former civilian police detective, is looking into 53 cases of alleged unlawful killing and a further 93 cases of alleged mistreatment.
Today's announcement follows the news in March that a legal firm took £2.5 million in taxpayers money from a public inquiry into the deaths of Iraqi men - even though the investigation's key claim has now been abandoned due to a lack of evidence.
Birmingham-based Public Interest Lawyers represented the relatives of more than 20 Iraqis who claimed the men were taken prisoner by British soldiers, and later mistreated and murdered.
Despite the relatives withdrawing their claims last week, the Al-Sweady Public Inquiry confirmed that it has spent more than £22million of public money on the investigation - including handing £2.5million over to Public Interest Lawyers run by the 'committed socialist' solicitor Phil Shiner.
A spokesperson for the Al-Sweady Public Inquiry told MailOnline: 'The £2.5 million has all gone to PIL [Public Interest Lawyers] but that’s not just legal costs. It’s also the cost for witnesses: expenses for witnesses to come over from Iraq and to hear some of them via video link from overseas.'
It is understood that the money received by Public Interest Lawyers included covering the cost of flying and accommodating 15 key witnesses in Britain, as the Al-Sweady Inquiry's chairman Sir Thayne Forbes wanted to see them face-to-face.
It also included the building of - and transport to and from - a 'small studio' close to Iraq from which an additional 40 family members of the deceased gave evidence.
As Public Interest Lawyers were the only legal firm working with the Al-Sweady Inquiry, all the expenses of gathering evidence from witnesses went through them the spokesperson said.
Public Interest Lawyers is currently acting for more than 100 clients who claim their relatives were unlawfully detained, ill-treated, or killed by UK forces in Iraq.
It has secured more than £3million in payouts, most notably, representing the family of Baha Mousa - the hotel receptionist who died in 2003 in custody in Iraq. The subsequent inquiry cost £13million.
Responding to claims that Public Interest Lawyers earned, as opposed to received £2.5million from the inquiry, Phil Shiner said: 'The amount of costs PIL has received from the MoD [not Legal Aid!] for that issue is less than £70,000.'
In the same month the primary strand of the Al-Sweady Inquiry effectively fell apart when relatives admitted there was no hard evidence to suggest the insurgents were unlawfully killed in UK custody.
In a statement released as evidence drew to a close, Public Interest Lawyers accepted the men were killed during a ferocious firefight, dubbed the Battle of Danny Boy, near Basra in 2004.
They admitted no evidence had been produced to suggest the men had been murdered unlawfully.
The extraordinary concession provoked outrage that British troops accused of the most serious crime have had their names 'dragged through the mud' by publicly-funded lawyers.
