This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/15/al-sweady-inquiry-closing-arguments

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Al-Sweady inquiry to hear closing arguments Al-Sweady inquiry to hear closing arguments
(about 17 hours later)
Lawyers for Iraqi families, British soldiers and the Ministry of Defence will make their case for the final time on Wednesday after more than a year of public hearings about a fierce battle that took place in Iraq a decade ago. Closing submissions are due to take place before Sir Thayne Forbes, a retired appeal court judge and chairman of the al-Sweady inquiry.Lawyers for Iraqi families, British soldiers and the Ministry of Defence will make their case for the final time on Wednesday after more than a year of public hearings about a fierce battle that took place in Iraq a decade ago. Closing submissions are due to take place before Sir Thayne Forbes, a retired appeal court judge and chairman of the al-Sweady inquiry.
The inquiry is named after a 19-year-old Iraqi killed by British troops on 14 May 2004 during the battle of Danny Boy, a checkpoint on the main Amara-Basra road in south-east Iraq. It was forced on the MoD after senior judges condemned the ministry's "lamentable" failure to disclose information about the battle, in particular about the handling of dead and captured Iraqi insurgents.The inquiry is named after a 19-year-old Iraqi killed by British troops on 14 May 2004 during the battle of Danny Boy, a checkpoint on the main Amara-Basra road in south-east Iraq. It was forced on the MoD after senior judges condemned the ministry's "lamentable" failure to disclose information about the battle, in particular about the handling of dead and captured Iraqi insurgents.
The Guardian first reported in June 2004 that the director of the nearby hospital in Majar al Kabir had signed death certificates describing the corpses of Iraqis handed over by British soldiers as showing signs of mutilation and torture. The claims were disputed by a senior doctor at the hospital.The Guardian first reported in June 2004 that the director of the nearby hospital in Majar al Kabir had signed death certificates describing the corpses of Iraqis handed over by British soldiers as showing signs of mutilation and torture. The claims were disputed by a senior doctor at the hospital.
Allegations that the soldiers had murdered 20 Iraqis at the UK army base, Camp Abu Naji, and abused five other detainees, were hotly denied by British military spokesmen. But the claims were pursued by Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers. He successfully argued that the Human Rights Act imposed an obligation on governments to set up an independent inquiry when serious allegations were made against agents of the state – in this case, British soldiers.Allegations that the soldiers had murdered 20 Iraqis at the UK army base, Camp Abu Naji, and abused five other detainees, were hotly denied by British military spokesmen. But the claims were pursued by Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers. He successfully argued that the Human Rights Act imposed an obligation on governments to set up an independent inquiry when serious allegations were made against agents of the state – in this case, British soldiers.
Instead of explaining what happened on the battlefield, the MoD adopted such an obstructive stance that high court judges accused it of serious breaches of its duty of candour. They castigated Bob Ainsworth, then Labour's defence secretary, for signing a gagging order even though the information he sought to suppress had already been published.Instead of explaining what happened on the battlefield, the MoD adopted such an obstructive stance that high court judges accused it of serious breaches of its duty of candour. They castigated Bob Ainsworth, then Labour's defence secretary, for signing a gagging order even though the information he sought to suppress had already been published.
Ainsworth was told that only an independent public inquiry, subsequently set up in 2009, would satisfy the courts.Ainsworth was told that only an independent public inquiry, subsequently set up in 2009, would satisfy the courts.
Public hearings began in March last year when lawyers began questioning Iraqi and British army witnesses. Some Iraqis came to Britain to give evidence, others testified via video link from a room at the British embassy in Beirut. Public hearings began in March last year when lawyers began questioning Iraqi and British army witnesses.
Much of the evidence to the inquiry – by both the Iraqis and the British soldiers – contradicted what they had originally said in their earlier written statements.Much of the evidence to the inquiry – by both the Iraqis and the British soldiers – contradicted what they had originally said in their earlier written statements.
The inquiry heard from young, inexperienced British soldiers, totally unprepared for violent clashes including close-quarter fighting with insurgents.The inquiry heard from young, inexperienced British soldiers, totally unprepared for violent clashes including close-quarter fighting with insurgents.
It was told that the day before the ambush of British soldiers which led to the battle of Danny Boy, fighting in the Iraqi city of Najaf between loyalists of the Shia militant cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and US forces had damaged the golden-domed shrine of the Imam Ali, one of the holiest Shia sites.It was told that the day before the ambush of British soldiers which led to the battle of Danny Boy, fighting in the Iraqi city of Najaf between loyalists of the Shia militant cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and US forces had damaged the golden-domed shrine of the Imam Ali, one of the holiest Shia sites.
A year earlier, six British military policemen had been massacred near Majar, a stronghold of Shia militants.A year earlier, six British military policemen had been massacred near Majar, a stronghold of Shia militants.
The most serious allegation was provoked by an attempt to see if the suspected perpetrator of that massacre, codenamed Bravo 1, was among the Iraqis killed during the battle of Danny Boy by bringing the bodies to Camp Abu Naji – rather than leaving them on the battlefield for relatives to take away and bury. This led to the allegation that British soldiers had murdered the Iraqis after the battle was over.The most serious allegation was provoked by an attempt to see if the suspected perpetrator of that massacre, codenamed Bravo 1, was among the Iraqis killed during the battle of Danny Boy by bringing the bodies to Camp Abu Naji – rather than leaving them on the battlefield for relatives to take away and bury. This led to the allegation that British soldiers had murdered the Iraqis after the battle was over.
The inquiry, which has so far cost more than £22m, heard that British military police were prevented from conducting a speedy investigation into the battle and its aftermath by senior army officers who said they wanted to protect young soldiers traumatised by the bloody gunfight.The inquiry, which has so far cost more than £22m, heard that British military police were prevented from conducting a speedy investigation into the battle and its aftermath by senior army officers who said they wanted to protect young soldiers traumatised by the bloody gunfight.
Lawyers for the Iraqis conceded last month there was insufficient evidence to show that any of them were killed while in custody at Camp Abu Naji after the battle. There is, however, evidence to show that captured Iraqis were badly mistreated, they claim.Lawyers for the Iraqis conceded last month there was insufficient evidence to show that any of them were killed while in custody at Camp Abu Naji after the battle. There is, however, evidence to show that captured Iraqis were badly mistreated, they claim.
The inquiry has also heard evidence about what happened during the battle itself, though this is excluded from its terms of reference. Witnesses said British soldiers killed wounded Iraqis on the battlefield who presented no threat, and that the bodies of some of the dead Iraqis showed signs of being handcuffed.The inquiry has also heard evidence about what happened during the battle itself, though this is excluded from its terms of reference. Witnesses said British soldiers killed wounded Iraqis on the battlefield who presented no threat, and that the bodies of some of the dead Iraqis showed signs of being handcuffed.
Patrick O'Connor QC, counsel for the Iraqis, told the inquiry last month: though there was no evidence prisoners were killed inside the British camp, "Unlawful killings may well have occurred on the battlefield or elsewhere outside the base camp."Patrick O'Connor QC, counsel for the Iraqis, told the inquiry last month: though there was no evidence prisoners were killed inside the British camp, "Unlawful killings may well have occurred on the battlefield or elsewhere outside the base camp."
He added: "That issue has not been fully investigated as part of this inquiry."He added: "That issue has not been fully investigated as part of this inquiry."