LANE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Doc ref: 27347/95 • ECHR ID: 001-3586
Document date: April 9, 1997
- 2 Inbound citations:
- •
- 0 Cited paragraphs:
- •
- 0 Outbound citations:
AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
Application No. 27347/95
by Richard Allan LANE
against the United Kingdom
The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting
in private on 9 April 1997, the following members being present:
Mrs. J. LIDDY, President
MM. M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
E. BUSUTTIL
A. WEITZEL
C.L. ROZAKIS
L. LOUCAIDES
B. MARXER
B. CONFORTI
I. BÉKÉS
G. RESS
A. PERENIC
C. BÎRSAN
K. HERNDL
M. VILA AMIGÓ
Mrs. M. HION
Mr. R. NICOLINI
Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber,
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 9 May 1995 by
Richard Allan Lane against the United Kingdom and registered on
16 May 1995 under file No. 27347/95;
Having regard to the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules
of Procedure of the Commission and the respondent Government's
indication that they have no observations on the admissibility of the
applicant's complaints;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is a British citizen born in 1948 and resident in
Portsmouth. He is represented before the Commission by
Mr. John McKenzie, a solicitor practising in London. The facts as
represented by the applicant may be summarised as follows.
A. Particular facts of the case
The applicant joined the Royal Navy in 1966 and became a
commissioned officer in 1970. In 1982 he served in the Falklands war
when the ship upon which he was serving was attacked. The applicant
unsuccessfully attempted to save a colleague who later died in the
attack.
In October 1993 the applicant was serving in the United States
and received $3,500.00 by way of a grant to which he was not entitled.
The applicant was charged (pursuant to section 42 of the Naval
Discipline Act 1957) with the civilian criminal offence of theft
contrary to the Theft Act 1968. The investigation was carried out by
the Royal Naval Police and the consequent report was sent to the Flag
Officer Surface Flotilla ("FOSF").
By two letters dated 17 June 1994 to the applicant's commanding
Officer, the FOSF stated that it had now been decided to try the
applicant by court-martial. It was also suggested that a barrister,
Lieutenant Commander, Command Legal Adviser to Flag Officer Naval
Aviation, would act as the accused's friend. The applicant claims that
he had some doubts about being represented by a naval barrister and
that, having taken that barrister's advice, he did not pursue the issue
of a civilian defence lawyer.
By notice dated 2 November 1994 the Convening Authority noted
receipt of the letter alleging the misconduct of the applicant ("the
circumstantial letter"), ordered the convening of a court-martial for
7 November 1994 and nominated by name the President, the remaining four
members of the court-martial, the court-martial Judge Advocate (who was
the Chief Naval Judge Advocate) and the Clerk of the Court. The
applicant submits that the Prosecutor and the accused's friend were two
of thirteen Lieutenant Commanders in the Royal Navy Legal branch, that
the Judge Advocate was the second most senior captain in that Branch
and that the Prosecutor was senior to the accused's friend. The
applicant also submits that two of the members of the court-martial
were from ships in the command of the FOSF.
The trial took place on 7 November 1994. The applicant claims
that the cause of his actions, for which he was on trial, was a
"professional suicide impulse" caused by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
and that, though he had strong psychiatric evidence to that effect, he
was persuaded by the accused's friend to plead guilty. Having heard
evidence in mitigation, the court-martial retired to consider sentence.
The applicant was given a three month suspended sentenced and was
ordered to be discharged from the navy.
On 16 December 1994 the applicant petitioned the Defence Council
citing the numerous and uncontradicted witnesses who offered
psychiatric and other evidence in mitigation as a basis for a more
lenient sentence. By letter dated 31 January 1995 from the FOSF, the
applicant was informed that his petition, which had been reviewed by
the Naval Secretary and the Director General Naval Manning on behalf
of the Admiralty Board, demonstrated no grounds for interfering with
the finding or sentence of the court-martial. The Petition was to be
passed to the Admiralty Board.
On 23 March 1995 two members of the Admiralty Board (Controller
of the Navy and Chief of Fleet Support) dismissed the petition having
taken advice from, inter alia, the Judge Advocate of the Fleet. A
letter dated 5 April 1995 to the FOSF (and copied to the accused's
friend and to the applicant's new legal representative) noted the
decision of the Admiralty Board and the FOSF was requested to notify
the applicant accordingly. That letter was accompanied by a note
outlining the points considered by the Admiralty Board and the reasons
for their decision.
B. Relevant domestic law and practice
1. General
The law and procedures in respect of naval courts-martial are
contained in the Naval Discipline Act 1957 ("the 1957 Act") and in
certain Statutory Instruments made under the 1957 Act including the
Naval Courts-Martial General Orders (Royal Navy) 1991. Under section
42 of the 1957 Act "civilian" offences are also offences under the 1957
Act. Therefore, even if the charge relates to a civilian offence, in
most cases naval personnel can be tried on that charge by the naval
authorities under the 1957 Act.
2. Composition of a naval court-martial
A naval court-martial consists of between five and nine naval
officers not below the rank of lieutenant, though the rank of the
members may be higher depending on the rank of the accused. All members
cannot belong to the same ship or naval establishment and the captain
and executive officer of the accused's ship cannot sit on the court-
martial.
A President of the court-martial will be appointed from the
members. A Judge Advocate must also take part in every naval court-
martial. A Clerk of the Court is also appointed and is responsible for
certain administrative and routine duties in connection with the court-
martial. A Provost Marshal may be appointed to take the accused into
custody and to keep the accused until he is delivered in due course of
law. A Prosecutor must be appointed and he may be a legally qualified
naval officer or any other competent person. In exceptional cases
civilian counsel will be appointed as Prosecutor.
An accused may engage, inter alia, an officer or civilian counsel
who may be reasonably available to assist him with the defence ("the
accused's friend"). The accused's friend advises the accused, may
examine the accused if he desires to give evidence, cross-examine
witnesses for the prosecution and examine witnesses for the defence.
The accused's friend may make any submissions that the accused might
make and may, on the accused's behalf, open and close the defence case
and, if necessary, make a statement in mitigation of punishment. If the
accused wishes to be represented by a civilian lawyer he may apply to
the Convening Authority for approval of legal aid.
3. Convening Authority
A court-martial may be ordered by the Defence Council and any
officer authorised by the Defence Council. Any officer so authorised
may in turn authorise an officer under his command (including a flag
officer) to so convene a court-martial. The officer who convenes the
court-martial is referred to as the Convening Authority.
The Convening Authority receives the circumstantial letter,
orders the convening of a court-martial and must appoint the date, time
and place for the trial. Notice of the court-martial must be posted in
a place accessible to the public and press at least twenty-four hours
before the court-martial. The Convening Authority appoints the
President and other members of the court-martial. He also appoints, or
directs an officer to appoint, a Judge Advocate, a Clerk, a Prosecutor
and a Provost Marshal. He must also ensure that the accused is properly
assisted. In this latter respect, unless the accused desires to
represent himself or to instruct civilian counsel, the Convening
Authority must nominate a competent naval officer to act as the
accused's friend.
The Convening Authority must inform the accused that any
witnesses he may desire to call and whose attendance may be reasonably
procured, will be summoned on his behalf. The Convening Authority
directs the charges upon which the accused is to be brought to trial.
However, if he is satisfied with the charge sheet accompanying the
circumstantial letter (see 5. below), he can simply countersign the
charge sheet.
The Convening Authority can, in exceptional circumstances,
countermand the ordering of a court-martial before its commencement and
dissolve a court-martial during the trial if circumstances arise which,
in his opinion, render such action necessary. On receipt of the report
on the finding and sentence of a court-martial, the Convening Authority
either takes the necessary steps to give effect to the sentence or, if
he doubts the correctness of the findings or the sentence, he shall not
put the sentence into effect pending reference to the Defence Council.
4. Judge Advocates
(a) The Judge Advocate of the Fleet is appointed by the Queen on the
recommendation of the Lord Chancellor and is removable on the same
authority for inability or misbehaviour. He must be a barrister or
advocate of not less than ten years standing. He acts as a legal
advisor to the Admiralty Board on matters regarding the administration
of justice under the 1957 Act. In particular, he advises that Board
whether a court-martial was properly conducted according to law and
whether the conviction can stand, gives a view on the sentence and
draws attention to any gross errors or irregularities. He also gives
the Chief Naval Judge Advocate his view as to the manner in which the
naval barristers have conducted themselves as Judge Advocate,
Prosecutor and as the accused's friend.
(b) The Chief Naval Judge Advocate is a serving officer of the rank
of captain of the Royal Navy and is also a barrister. The Chief Naval
Judge Advocate is assisted by a staff of serving naval officers who are
barristers. His duties include assisting and consulting with the Judge
Advocate of the Fleet and sitting as Judge Advocate at naval courts-
martial where the seriousness of the charges, the complexity of the
trial, the rank of the accused or the interest of the Service may so
require.
(c) In all other cases a Judge Advocate is appointed to a court-
martial from the staff of the Chief Naval Judge Advocate. The
appointment is made by the Convening Authority, by an officer nominated
by the Convening Authority or by the President of the court-martial.
Before the trial the Judge Advocate appointed must inform the
Convening Authority of any defect in the constitution of the court-
martial. He advises the court-martial, whether his opinion is requested
or not, upon all questions of law and procedure which may arise and the
court-martial must accept his advice unless there are weighty reasons
for rejecting it, in which case those reasons must be recorded.
The Judge Advocate must ensure that the accused does not suffer
any disadvantage during the hearing in consequence of, inter alia, the
accused's position, ignorance or incapacity to examine witnesses.
Before the closing of the trial the Judge Advocate sums up the relevant
law and evidence. The Judge Advocate is not present when the court
considers its finding and, if during the court-martial's deliberations
on the charges further advice is required, the court-martial must
receive that advice in open court. The Judge Advocate also advises the
court-martial on sentence but not in open court.
5. Pre-hearing matters
The Commanding Officer of the accused applies to the Convening
Authority for a court-martial by way of a "circumstantial letter".
The circumstantial letter must report the circumstances upon
which a charge is founded in sufficient detail to show the real nature
and extent of the offence. Any statement made by the accused in the
course of inquiries, during investigation or after he has been charged
must be forwarded in a separate document attached to the letter. A
charge sheet in the prescribed form, a list of witnesses for the
prosecution, summaries of evidence of those witnesses and a list of
exhibits which the Prosecutor proposes to put in evidence must
accompany the circumstantial letter.
As soon as practicable after the accused has been remanded for
trial by court-martial, and in any case not less than twenty-four hours
before his trial, the accused must receive a copy of the circumstantial
letter together with its annexes.
6. Preliminary matters during the court-martial
The accused is given an opportunity to object to any particular
member of the court-martial and to its general constitution. If the
objection to the President is upheld the court must adjourn until
another is appointed. If an objection to a member is upheld a member
may be appointed from the "spare members list" and, if an objection as
to the constitution of the court-martial is upheld, the court-martial
must adjourn and report the matter to the Convening Authority. All
members of the court, the Judge Advocate, the Clerk and any other
officers of the court-martial must take a prescribed oath or
affirmation.
The accused may also challenge the court-martial's jurisdiction.
If the court-martial allows the challenge the court-martial must
adjourn and report to the Convening Authority who can, if he considers
that the challenge is not well founded, order that the court-martial
continues as constituted.
7. Procedure in the event of a plea of guilty
Before the court accepts a plea of guilty, the Judge Advocate
must ensure that the accused understands the charge to which he has
pleaded and the different procedure which will result from the plea.
The Prosecutor then reads the circumstantial letter. Before the court
proceeds to deliberation on sentence, the Prosecutor must whenever
possible call relevant witness evidence as regards information in the
possession of the naval authorities as to the accused's background and
history which may have rendered the accused more likely to commit the
offence, as to his service history and as to his previous convictions.
The accused may also give evidence and call witnesses in mitigation.
The court-martial must also take note of the accused's naval record
(for example, awards for gallantry).
The members of the court-martial retire (with the Judge Advocate
and the Clerk) to consider the sentence. The court-martial does not
give reasons for its decision on sentence.
8. Post-hearing matters
(a) A convicted person may petition the Defence Council against the
findings or sentence or both. Having reviewed the petition, the Defence
Council may, inter alia, quash or alter findings, authorise a re-trial
and annul, remit or alter sentences. However, those powers may be, and
are normally, carried out by the Admiralty Board or by any officer
empowered in this respect by the Admiralty Board. Should an appeal be
lodged to the Courts-Martial Appeal Court, the functions of the Defence
Council cease.
(b) The Courts-Martial Appeal Court was established by the Courts-
Martial (Appeals) Act 1951 and was confirmed by the Courts-Martial
(Appeals) Act 1968. The Courts-Martial Appeal Court has the same status
and, in essence, the same procedure as the Court of Appeal, Criminal
Division and considers appeals from courts-martial. The judges of this
court include ordinary and ex officio judges of the Court of Appeal and
such judges of the High Court as are nominated by the Lord Chief
Justice.
There is, however, no provision for an appeal against sentence
only, although certain powers of revising such sentences, pursuant to
an appeal against conviction, are available to the Courts-Martial
Appeal Court.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention that
he did not receive a fair and public hearing by an independent and
impartial tribunal established by law. The applicant also complains
under Article 13 of the Convention that he had no effective remedy as
regards these violations of Article 6 of the Convention.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 9 May 1995 and was registered
on 16 May 1995.
On 4 September 1996 the Commission decided to communicate the
application, requesting the parties observations as to the complaints
under Article 6 of the Convention.
In their letter received on 21 November 1996 the Government
stated that they have no observations on the admissibility of the
application.
THE LAW
The applicant complains under Article 6 (Art. 6) of the
Convention that he was denied a fair and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal established by law and, under
Article 13 (Art. 13) of the Convention, that he has no effective
domestic remedy in these respects. The Government have no observations
on the admissibility of the applicant's complaints.
The Commission considers that the application raises complex and
serious issues under Articles 6 and 13 (Art. 6, 13) of the Convention
which require determination on the merits. It follows that these
complaints of the applicant cannot be dismissed as manifestly ill-
founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the
Convention. No other ground for declaring them inadmissible has been
established.
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,
DECLARES THE APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE, without prejudging the
merits.
M.F. BUQUICCHIO J. LIDDY
Secretary President
to the First Chamber of the First Chamber