Human Rights Act could keep UK soldiers from service in dangerous places?

Independent on Sunday:

The Ministry of Defence is bracing itself for defeat with a landmark court ruling tomorrow on whether Britain's soldiers, sailors and airmen should be protected under the Human Rights Act while they serve abroad.

If the judgment from one of the UK's most senior judges goes against the MoD, as some defence chiefs fear, it could force it to take greater care of troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The MoD has repeatedly been criticised for the loss of life caused by poor equipment in both conflicts, including the use of poorly armoured Snatch Land Rovers, and the loss of 14 men in a Nimrod aircraft, later described as unairworthy.

...

MoD officials are said to be deeply concerned that a ruling in favour of the Human Rights Act applying to soldiers serving abroad will damage their fighting effectiveness. They argue commanders making split-second decisions in the heat of battle may be paralysed by fear that their decisions will become the subject of legal actions.

Tomorrow, the Master of the Rolls, Sir Anthony Clarke will decide on an appeal by the MoD in the case of Private Jason Smith, 32, who died of heatstroke while billeted in a football stadium in Basra in 2003. An inquest heard that, with temperatures soaring to 60C in the Al Amarah stadium, there was neither air conditioning nor medical treatment, and the wrong medical advice was handed out.

Last year a court found that the Human Rights Act, which includes the right to life, should apply to soldiers serving abroad in a case brought by Pte Smith's mother, Catherine.

...

If you ever thought the Human Rights Act was descending into farce this case suggest that it is. One of the characters in the old George of the Jungle cartoon show had a weekly punchline as his associate was facing disaster. "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred." You would think that the judges would have the same reaction to a case like this.