The Ministry of Defence does not have effective oversight of civilian casualties in UK military campaigns overseas, which puts lives at risk and undermines British foreign policy objectives, a tribunal heard on Thursday.
The UK has admitted causing only one civilian death in its nearly decade-long campaign against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, a position widely criticised as implausible by defence establishment insiders and the civil service.
Investigative charity, Airwars, took the government to court after it rejected a freedom of information request seeking more information about the single incident, on 26 March 2018.
Part of the hearing was closed to journalists, to allow the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to present classified information to back its argument that releasing information about the strike could undermine national security.
However, testimony in open court from a senior ministry official raised profound questions about Britain’s capacity, and its political will, to monitor and investigate civilian deaths caused by its armed forces.
Alexander Oliver admitted that the British public had very little understanding of how attacks carried out by the armed forces are monitored or allegations of harm to civilians assessed.
He told the tribunal the public should have confidence that military operations were carried out in a way that protects civilians because of the many experienced people in the sector.
Oliver said he did not know what standard of proof the UK used when investigating allegations of civilian harm, whether written procedure governed investigations, and whether the UK tracks allegations at a systemic level, Will Perry, barrister for Airwars, told the tribunal in his summing up.
Oliver explained his inability to answer some questions, saying he was distant from a process that was carried out initially at a tactical and operational level, and suggested some military units had discretion to carry out their own investigations.
Perry said that raised questions about oversight: “On the one hand Mr Oliver was saying that the Ministry of Defence, through civil servants and ministers, were exercising effective oversight, on the other hand he was saying they were so distant he wasn’t able to answer a number of basic questions.”
Ahead of the hearing, the MoD admitted that the March 2018 airstrike was missing from its publicly released records of attacks in Syria and Iraq, and the death had not been registered with coalition officials tracking civilian casualties in the campaign.
That resolved one mystery about the death, which had apparently come in a strike that did not officially harm anyone, on a victim who did not appear to officially exist. The MoD had not previously responded to questions from the Guardian about the discrepancy.
Oliver said the error was due in part to communications issues, which raised further concerns about the ministry’s capacity to track and oversee investigations into possible civilian harm.
“[Oliver] explained how command structure and operational details affected the misreporting between UK and the coalition and how it contributed to the late disclosure of the additional material,” Perry said.
“That suggests there are issues with communication both within the armed forces, and between the armed forces and the Ministry of Defence.”
The MoD said it did not deny a “broad and general interest in favour of disclosure”, but argued there was an even stronger argument to withhold the information. It cited grounds including national security, and relationships with key allies.
Airwars argued that precedent from multiple allies, including the US, show it is possible to reveal details of how reports that civilians may have been harmed are assessed, without causing risks to national security.
“In the United States we have a very clear understanding of how that process goes through, we have known that for five or six years. In the UK we still have no understanding of what that looks like. That is why we are here,” Joe Dyke, Airwars head of investigations, told the hearing.
Those who questioned the British military’s claim to have killed only a single civilian in nearly a decade of often intense aerial bombardment, include former MoD permanent secretary, David Omand, and veterans minister, Johnny Mercer, who raised the issue in a parliamentary committee hearing in April 2019. “The reality is people think ‘well, you’ve dropped 4,500 pieces of ordnance. Of course the idea that you haven’t killed any civilians is nonsense,” he said.
The US-led coalition has said its strikes killed at least 1,437 civilians during the campaign.
Perry cited the Chilcot report into the Iraq war, which recommended the UK do everything possible to identify risks to civilians during armed conflict, and reduce them. He also noted the successful impact of efforts to reduce civilian harm during the Nato-led mission in Afghanistan, and said without transparency about procedures it would be impossible for the public to hold the government to account.
