Starmer called for ECHR to be used against UK veterans | UK | News

Sir Keir Starmer has pushed for European human rights laws to be applied to the investigation of British soldiers in Iraq through a chapter he wrote for a book by disgraced lawyer Phil Shiner.

The Prime Minister claimed the Government had made a “deliberate effort” to rewrite international law in its contribution. This, he argued, gave effective immunity to British troops operating in Iraq.

Sir Keir’s article appeared in a 2008 publication, The Iraq War and International Law, put together by Shiner, who would be convicted of fraud and banned from practicing law after false allegations of abuse against British soldiers.

The Telegraph has also uncovered a photo showing Sir Keir and Shiner addressing an audience at an event celebrating a landmark ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in 2014.

Former Army chief questions Prime Minister’s suitability

Gen. Sir Peter Wall, the former chief of staff who commanded British forces in Iraq, said on Wednesday it was “shocking” that Sir Keir associated himself with Shiner, whom he described as “the bane of our lives”.

Sir Peter has raised doubts about Sir Keir’s suitability to be Prime Minister, including his authority over the military, given his involvement in a legal case that resulted in hundreds of soldiers facing investigation on trumped-up war crime charges.

Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch demanded on Wednesday that Sir Keir apologize for his involvement in the case, claiming both the Prime Minister and Attorney-General Lord Hermer had aided people who “acted against our country’s national interests”.

Legal documents reviewed by The Telegraph and reported by the Express on Wednesday revealed that Sir Keir donated his services to human rights groups in a landmark legal case that determined British law applied in war-torn Iraq.

The Prime Minister was invited to comment via No 10’s website.

Downing Street insists Prime Minister should only be helped with legal matters

Sir Keir’s spokesman claimed on Thursday that the Prime Minister was assisting the court “on legal matters and not to defend either side”.

But at a hearing before the Law Lords in 2007, Sir Keir, acting on behalf of several human rights organisations, claimed investigations into the deaths of Iraqi civilians were “sloppy” and “wholly inadequate”.

In his academic paper included in Shiner’s book, Sir Keir said ECHR laws were “much more effective” than United Nations international laws, which he argued had been interpreted and developed by the US and UK to suit them.

“Reading major speeches by US and British politicians and lawyers, you cannot help but think that such a development involves a deliberate effort by the US and UK to change international law for their own purposes,” he wrote.

“These are important,” he said, noting that methods for implementing ECHR law are “much better developed and much more effective” in holding governments to account.

PM argues UN forces are generally immune from investigation

Sir Keir argued that the UN Security Council “gives multinational forces the authority to use force if necessary to achieve specific objectives… the created force is generally immune from legal process in the country in which it operates”.

The Prime Minister has faced repeated calls for Britain to withdraw from the ECHR, while critics have argued that continued membership prevents the UK from effectively tackling illegal immigration. Sir Keir rejected these demands, insisting that the UK should remain a signatory.

Shiner’s successful legal challenge at the ECHR in 2012 forced the Government to expand criminal investigations against soldiers through a new organization called the Iraq Historical Allegations Team (Ihat).

Sir Keir ceased dealing with the case at this point, having been appointed Director of Public Prosecutions in 2008.

But in 2007, after joining Shiner’s legal challenge, Sir Keir acted without making accusations on behalf of numerous human rights organisations, amplifying claims made by the families of six Iraqi civilians killed during British operations.

Soldier under investigation says Prime Minister should share responsibility

Among the allegations was one against Sergeant Richie Catterall, which led to new investigations being launched. Catterall told The Telegraph that Sir Keir “must share some of the responsibility” for repeated investigations into the fatal shooting of an Iraqi armed with an assault rifle.

Rachel Webster, who was also investigated by Ihat and later received money for her wrongful arrest, said: “It is extremely saddening to learn that a man who is Prime Minister willingly gives up his time freely to conduct investigations against veterans like me.”

Tom Tugendhat, a former Conservative Cabinet minister who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Sir Keir’s work had turned British soldiers into “whipping boys for the courts” and left senior officers “paralyzed by potential litigation”.

His comments echoed those of the Army’s former commander, Sir Peter: “Phil Shiner… was the bane of our lives.” He said Shiner’s marketing of “false” claims had caused “enormous harm” to British troops.

Chief of General Staff questions the moral stance of the Prime Minister

He continued: “The fact that Starmer was linked to Shiner is quite shocking, to be honest, by linking up with this guy to eventually become Prime Minister.”

“If that is the Prime Minister’s moral stance, then one must ask questions about how compatible that is with the job of making decisions to put soldiers at risk in the national interest for the defense of the country.”

A Downing Street spokesman said: “This is a desperate and deliberate misrepresentation.”

But Matthew Jury, a leading human rights lawyer, said: “When a lawyer is instructed by an intervening organisation, they are acting as an advocate for that organisation. Although their statements are framed to assist the court, they describe this role as neutral or independent risks giving a misleading impression of how the intervention works in practice.”

A human rights lawyer, who asked not to be named, said: “To claim that he is is complete nonsense. [Sir Keir] He only helped with legal matters. “Amnesty International cannot ask him to intervene unless it is to support his views on the matter.”