Baha Mousa Inquiry

The MoD should retain its current absolute prohibition on the use of hoods on Captured Personnel (CPERS).

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to maintain its ban on hooding captured personnel. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House of Commons that he was accepting the recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Joint Doctrine Publication (JDP) 1-10 should include the requirement for standard orders to be issued for each operation prohibiting the use of the five techniques.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed the initial response in September 2011, when Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he accepted in principle all recommendations from the inquiry with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The definition of stress positions in JDP 1-10 and elsewhere should be broadened so that it is not dependent upon the intention of the person enforcing the position.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed a statement in September 2011 by Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, who informed the House that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The essence of guidance on hooding should be that it is prohibited at any time for whatever purpose to place a sandbag or other cover over a CPERS’ head.

The Inquiry called for guidance prohibiting placing sandbags or covers over captured persons' heads. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, had stated to the House of Commons that the department accepted all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The definition of the prohibition on subjecting CPERS to noise should be broadened. It should prohibit subjecting CPERS to any unnecessary excessive noise. Guidance in JDP 1-10 should explain that: (1) holding facilities may be inherently noisy places, but steps should be taken to mitigate such conditions; (2) it is not legitimate deliberately to increase the noise in the vicinity of CPERS even for security purposes; (3) facility design should, where practicable, avoid the risks of CPERS hearing sensitive information including questioning of others; (4) where strictly necessary, ear defenders may be used to prevent CPERS overhearing sensitive information; and (5) generators or other loud equipment should not be used as noise shields.

The Inquiry recommended expanding restrictions on subjecting captured persons to excessive noise. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" in the report, though specific updates to detention noise guidance were not mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, recorded that this proposal was among those the department initially decided to implement and which might have formed part of his own report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

In the interests of clarity for all, the five techniques should be referred to as being banned or prohibited rather than proscribed.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed a September 2011 statement by Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, who informed the House that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD should give careful consideration as to whether referring to the five techniques as being prohibited “as an aid to interrogation” remains the most effective means of communicating the prohibited techniques.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to review how it communicates prohibited interrogation techniques. Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated in March 2014 that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation, in part regarding deprivation of food and drink, might have formed part of the recommendations at the conclusion of his inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The prohibition on the five techniques should not appear only within the Tactical Questioning and Interrogation section of JDP 1-10 since it has a wider application and importance.

The Inquiry recommended placing the prohibition on the five techniques more broadly in doctrine. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed Parliament that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The prohibition on the five techniques should appear in the Joint Tactics, Techniques and Procedures guidance as well as in the main body of JDP 1-10.

In March 2014, Minister for the Armed Forces Mark Francois announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). That announcement followed an initial response in September 2011, when Secretary of State Liam Fox informed Parliament that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Five principles on permitted sight deprivation should be consistently emphasised in JDP 1-10 and subordinate doctrine and instructions: (1) where practicable the need to deprive CPERS of their sight should be avoided in the first place by common sense steps such as appropriate design and layout of facilities, the planning of operations, choice of routes, and covering up equipment; (2) even if it is impracticable to avoid CPERS seeing facilities or equipment in the first place, there must be a genuine sensitivity about the facilities or equipment before sight deprivation can be justified; (3) when sight deprivation does take place it must only be for as long as is strictly necessary; (4) sight deprivation should not become routine; it must always be capable of being justified by the operational circumstances on the ground; and (5) when sight deprivation is used, the fact that it has been used should as soon as practicable be noted in a simple brief record giving the date/time/duration/circumstances/justification for its use.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to embed five sight deprivation principles into doctrine. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had taken action to "consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting all inquiry recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

JDP 1-10 should make clear that it is prohibited deliberately to keep prisoners awake, even for short periods, merely because they may shortly face tactical questioning or interrogation. CPERS may nevertheless be woken up in order to be tactically questioned or interrogated if the questioning is ready to take place, provided that the policy on minimum periods of rest is respected.

The Inquiry recommended prohibiting deliberately keeping captured personnel awake before tactical questioning or interrogation. Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in March 2014 that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation might well have formed part of his own inquiry's recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

JDP 1-10 should give some guidance in relation to the number of daily meals for CPERS and the timing of them.

The Inquiry recommended doctrine guidance on daily meal numbers and timing for captured persons. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations, though meal guidance was not specifically mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the recommendation was among several that might well have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

In dealing with segregation, JDP 1-10 should make clear that sight deprivation should not be used as a means of segregating CPERS to prevent them communicating with each other.

The Inquiry recommended that joint doctrine prohibit using sight deprivation to segregate captured personnel. In a March 2014 written statement to the House of Commons, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that recommendation 13 might well have formed part of the recommendations at the conclusion of his inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

JDP 1-10 should include guidance that where practicable CPERS should be told the reason why sight deprivation is being applied. Suitable simple phrases in relation to sight deprivation should be included in mission specific language training.

The Inquiry recommended explaining sight deprivation reasons to captured personnel and providing relevant language training. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the department had initially decided to implement the recommendation, observing that it might have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

JDP 1-10 should include a simple checklist covering both the principles and practicalities of accommodation for unit holding areas.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations from the inquiry (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation was among those the department had decided to implement and which might otherwise have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

JDP 1-10 should include a simple checklist for actions on a death in custody. Where there is a death in custody, particularly one that is sudden or unexplained, prompt checks must be made on the welfare of other CPERS.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to include a death-in-custody checklist in operational guidance. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). The Minister's statement did not detail the checklist or prompt welfare checks for captured personnel (CPERS) (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was "accepting in principle all of his recommendations with one reservation" (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

JDP 1-10 should incorporate the requirement that on entry to and exit from a theatre level detention facility, CPERS are proactively asked whether or not they have any complaints concerning their treatment. This should not be done in the presence of the capturing soldiers/unit. JDP 1-10 should require the Force Provost Marshal (FPM) for an operation to consider what arrangements for complaints would be most practicable and effective in respect of detention before theatre level facilities. Consideration should be given to the value of asking more neutral questions about CPERS’ treatment during detention which may help to elicit more information about areas of CPERS’ concern about their treatment.

The Inquiry recommended proactively asking captured personnel about their treatment during military detention. Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement in March 2014 that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this proposal might well have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

JDP 1-10 should address the protection that will be afforded to service personnel who make complaints or allegations in good faith of the mistreatment of CPERS. It should give guidance as to those who can be approached when service personnel have concerns about the treatment of CPERS.

The Inquiry recommended guidance and whistleblower protections for service personnel reporting mistreatment of detainees. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation was among those the department initially decided to implement and which might have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

In the current redrafting of JDP 1-10 and in future subordinate doctrine and instructions regarding CPERS: (1) plain English, simplicity of structure and brevity should be given greater priority while allowing for the target audience and complexity of the subject matter; (2) the wording should be thoroughly assessed to ensure (a) that material is not unnecessarily duplicated and (b) that the wording and diagrams are clear and readily understandable to the commander who may need to consider and apply the guidance on the ground; and (3) timescales must be stated clearly both in the text and in flow diagrams. Timescales in relation to CPERS handling should be demanding as this encourages the rapid move of CPERS away from forward detention areas where risks of abuse are greatest. The next redraft of JDP 1-10 needs to make clear that the stated timescales should be adhered to whenever possible, but may need to be amended in some theatres.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to simplify doctrine on handling captured persons. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed a statement to the House of Commons in September 2011 by Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, who confirmed that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD should ensure that Development Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC) reviews whether its protocols for layout and pagination of joint doctrine really serve the end user.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Permanent Joint Headquarters (PJHQ) should complete work on a generic theatre-level Standard Operating Instruction (SOI) for CPERS handling. This should stand as the starting template for CPERS handling on future operations.

The Inquiry recommended completing generic standard operating instructions for handling captured persons. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report, though the generic instruction template was not mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he was accepting all inquiry recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Urgent consideration must be given to amending the tactical questioning policy to make clear what approaches are and are not authorised for use in tactical questioning. In future all tactical questioning and interrogational policies should descend to greater detail on approaches, as a minimum making clear which approaches are authorised for use in which discipline, tactical questioning or interrogation.

The Inquiry called for tactical questioning policy to specify which approaches are authorised. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation was among those the department had initially decided to implement and which might otherwise have formed part of his inquiry's recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

To the extent that the MoD considers that the harsh approach can still lawfully be used in interrogation: (1) there is a need for very clear guidance to be given within the interrogation policy and in training as to the proper limits of the harsh approach; (2) the approach should be given a label which is less apt to be misinterpreted as permitting unlawful, threatening or intimidatory conduct; (3) the approach should not include an analogy with a military drill sergeant; and (4) in light of the legal and other risks in the use of the harsh approach, specific Ministerial approval should be sought before the harsh approach is approved for use in any operational theatre.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to strictly regulate harsh interrogation techniques. Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated in March 2014 that the department had "now taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report", though guidance, labelling, drill sergeant analogies, and ministerial approval were not mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the recommendation was among those the department had decided to implement and which might otherwise have formed part of the recommendations in his report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

In line with Recommendation 11 above, the tactical questioning and interrogation policies need to make clear that it is not permissible to deliberately keep prisoners awake, even for short periods, merely because they may shortly face tactical questioning or interrogation. CPERS may nevertheless be woken up in order to be tactically questioned or interrogated if the questioning is ready to take place provided that the policy on minimum periods of rest is respected. Both policies should make clear that the discretion to wake a CPERS for immediate questioning is not to be abused by way of repeated or random waking of the CPERS with a view to disorientation.

The Inquiry recommended restricting when captured personnel may be woken for questioning. Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated in March 2014 that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this measure was among those the department initially decided to implement and which might well have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The tactical questioning and interrogation policies should give more detailed guidance on the extent to which tactical questioners and interrogators may seek to exploit self and system induced pressures.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this proposal was among those that might well have formed part of the recommendations at the conclusion of his inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The interrogation policy should require, as part of the auditing process, a review of a selection of video recordings of interrogations of the inspector’s choosing. Interrogators should know that the recordings of their interrogations may be inspected in this way.

The Inquiry recommended auditing selected interrogation video recordings and notifying interrogators of inspections. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation was among those the department initially decided to implement that might have formed part of his own inquiry's recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The tactical questioning policy should be amended to include a clear and simple auditing procedure.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, announced that the department was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Armed Forces medical personnel can and should be involved in providing advice that a CPERS is not fit for detention or questioning. Alternatively, the medic may validly advise that no specific intervention different from the normal process is required in respect of that CPERS. Medics should not advise that a CPERS is fit for detention or fit for questioning.

The Inquiry recommended military medics advise when detainees are unfit for detention or questioning. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, reported that the department advised that policy required decisions on whether a detainee was unfit for questioning to be recorded on their file and on medical form F Med 1026 (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014). He found that the form lacked a specific place to record this information, did not list unfitness as an examination purpose, and contained no requirement to record reasons for a decision (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The medical policy for CPERS should include the following: (1) CPERS must undergo a medical examination within four hours of capture, unless there are compelling circumstances making such examination impossible. This examination should be conducted by the most medically qualified individual available; (2) CPERS should be examined by a qualified doctor as soon as reasonably practicable (i.e. usually upon transfer to a facility where a doctor is based); (3) the non-medical chain of command should be prohibited from allowing interrogation (as distinguished from tactical questioning) of a CPERS to take place until the CPERS has been medically examined. Medical staff should not be directed that their examination of the CPERS should take place before interrogation; they should be directed merely to examine as early as reasonably practicable; and (4) an electronic or written record of the examination of all CPERS should be made at the time of the examination and preserved.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to set medical examination rules for captured persons. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that this recommendation might well have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations, observing that the department had initially decided to implement it (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The definitions of the prohibited techniques contained in SOI J3-9 should be updated to reflect the recommendations I have made above in respect of JDP 1-10.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to update definitions of prohibited techniques. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced to the House of Commons that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations", without mentioning the specific operating instructions (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated in September 2011 that he was accepting all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

SOI J3-9 should reflect the greater emphasis that is given in the latest draft of JDP 1-10 to avoiding in the first place, where practicable, circumstances in which sight deprivation may be necessary. More generally, it should reflect the five principles in Recommendation 10. Within reason, these key messages should also feature in the aides memoire.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to revise its instructions on sight deprivation. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced to the House of Commons that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Where practicable CPERS who are subjected to sight deprivation or hearing deprivation should be told the reason for it. If being deprived of their sight for some or part of a journey by road or air, as well as ensuring that the sensory deprivation is kept to the minimum time strictly necessary, CPERS should be told in general terms where they are being taken.

The Inquiry recommended informing captured persons of reasons for sensory deprivation and transit destinations. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). The statement did not describe specific measures regarding explanations for sensory deprivation or journey destinations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the department had initially decided to implement the recommendation and observed that it might have formed part of his inquiry's recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

Theatre level detention instructions and guidance should be reviewed to ensure that references to the means of permissible sight deprivation are consistent.

The Inquiry recommended reviewing detention guidance to ensure consistent references to permissible sight deprivation. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Theatre level detention instructions and guidance should be reviewed to ensure that references to timescales for detention are clear and consistent.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to review detention guidance for consistent timescales. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

CPERS documents should be as few in number as possible but they require amendment to ensure that those involved in detention are guided more accurately on what to record.

The Inquiry asked that detention documents be reduced and amended to clarify recording guidance. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report, though detention documents were not specifically mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted this measure among the recommendations that might have formed part of the conclusions of his inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

A suitable occurrence book must be maintained at all times whenever CPERS are being held at a unit or sub-unit holding facility.

The Inquiry recommended maintaining an occurrence book whenever holding captured personnel. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, informed the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed a September 2011 statement to the House by Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, accepting all inquiry recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD should continue its recent practice of ensuring that theatre level instructions and procedures for CPERS are contained within a single comprehensive order that is kept up to date and which can be easily handed over to incoming formations in enduring operations. It is inappropriate to permit CPERS handling to be governed by a series of fragmentary orders that may be lost or confused in the roulement of formations and units.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to keep captured persons procedures in one order. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The Provost Marshal (Army) (PM(A)) should formally review whether the current practice of using blacked out goggles for all movement of CPERS within Temporary Holding Facilities (THF) in Afghanistan is strictly necessary and ensure that it is not being used in circumstances that are not clearly justified by operational security and/or CPERS own protection.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to review using blacked out goggles. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report", though the review of goggles was not mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting in principle all recommendations from the inquiry with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Each Battlegroup should have a “Detention Officer” being a commissioned officer within Battlegroup Headquarters. The role should encompass coordination and management of CPERS; acting as a focus on CPERS matters during mission specific training; ensuring that Military Annual Training Test (MATT 7) and other training relevant to CPERS inculcates the vital messages about the correct handling of CPERS; assisting the Commanding Officer during operations by monitoring compliance with timescales, record keeping and other CPERS handling standards; acting as a clear point of contact with Brigade on CPERS matters and liaising as necessary with the Military Provost Staff (MPS); ensuring that the responsibility for CPERS does not ‘fall between the cracks’ of other Battlegroup level officers.

The Inquiry recommended that each battlegroup appoint a commissioned detention officer for captured personnel. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted in the inquiry's report that this recommendation might well have formed part of its own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

On operations where CPERS may be taken there should be a Senior Non-Commisioned Officer (NCO) who acts as the “Detention Sergeant” who has responsibility for the administrative aspects of CPERS handling. In most cases, it would be appropriate for the Regimental Provost Sergeant to fulfil this role.

The Inquiry recommended appointing a Senior Non-Commissioned Officer as detention sergeant for captured personnel administration. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all recommendations in the report with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Before any deployed operation, the Commanding Officer must ensure that there is a clear written explanation of unit level responsibilities for CPERS. If responsibilities are changed during an enduring operation this should be recorded.

The Inquiry asked commanding officers to document unit-level responsibilities for captured persons before operations. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes noted in the Report of the Al-Sweady Inquiry that this measure was among those the department initially decided to implement (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The PM(A) and those who in his name carry out inspections of the main operational detention facilities should be expressly recognised as having the right and duty to inspect CPERS handling throughout the detention process including during interrogation.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to authorise detention inspections throughout interrogation. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted in his inquiry's report that this proposal might have formed part of his own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The PM(A) and the in theatre FPM should take account of the in theatre situation in assessing whether any unannounced MPS inspections of forward detention facilities would be feasible and beneficial. The unit detention officer, as part of his advisory and oversight responsibilities, should be able to carry out less formal checks at unit and sub-unit level on CPERS handling including how unit holding areas are being run and whether proper custody records are being kept.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to consider unannounced inspections and informal detention checks. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated to the House of Commons that the department had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD should consider whether the lessons learned procedures need to be adjusted or supplemented so that the clearer and more urgent lessons and changes to previous practice are fed back far more quickly both to the operational theatre and into the pre-deployment training cycle.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all the inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

CPERS training should include both theoretical and practical training in what Forces personnel can and should do when handling CPERS.

The Inquiry recommended theoretical and practical training for personnel handling captured persons (CPERS). In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that the department accepted in principle all inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

CPERS training should be woven into the full range of military exercises and training. Such training should be “end to end”, not just focused on planning and the actual combat/public order side of the operation, but including what happens after a CPERS is captured. Practical exercises should not routinely end with the enemy or insurgent being captured, as often appears to have been the case before 2003. Exercises for commanders need to test and train them in CPERS handling issues and problems, including in the command and control of tactical questioning. This should be a particular priority for mission specific training.

The Inquiry called for captured persons (CPERS) training to be integrated across military exercises. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Training materials across the Services need to be reviewed to ensure that the messages about all aspects of CPERS handling are clear and consistent.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to review service training materials on captured personnel. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the department had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, had previously stated to the House in September 2011 that he accepted all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MATT 7 PowerPoint presentation on the five techniques should be amended to ensure that the definitions of the techniques are consistent with amendments to JDP 1-10; that it is clear that the techniques are not only prohibited as aids to interrogation (in particular hooding is prohibited in all circumstances) and so that the background information section is fully accurate.

The Inquiry called for updates to the armed forces training presentation on the five prohibited techniques. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report, though the presentation is not mentioned in the sources (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House of Commons that he was accepting in principle all inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The 2005 prisoner handling DVD should be amended to avoid misleading messages about sight deprivation in the context of interrogation, and the inappropriate presentation of the interrogation facility. Where such training materials touch on specialist areas such as tactical questioning and interrogation, the relevant subject matter experts should be consulted. “Bagged and tagged” is an ambiguous phrase which should not be used. In reviewing the DVD, consideration should also be given to: (1) whether the prohibition on the five techniques might be incorporated into the film; and (2) whether all of the CPERS handling within the DVD is commensurate with best practice, allowing for the need for realism and that CPERS treatment in military operations may in circumstances need to be firm as well as fair.

The Inquiry recommended revising the 2005 prisoner handling training video. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report, without specifically mentioning the video (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House that he was accepting in principle all of the report's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Greater clarity and guidance should be given in training in relation to the concept of “restraint positions”. More must be done to give practical guidance to help service personnel distinguish between unlawful stress positions, on the one hand, and the legitimate use of force to effect a search, or an arrest or prevent assault or escape, on the other. They need guidance on common sense precautions for preventing assault or escape at the point of capture where arresting UK Forces might be outnumbered.

The Inquiry called for improved training and guidance for service personnel on restraint positions. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that the department accepted all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

MATT 7 and mission specific training for CPERS handling should incorporate suitably pitched training on the risks of positional asphyxia/death by struggle against restraint.

The Inquiry recommended adding training on positional asphyxia risks to military detention courses. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

There needs to be better recording of the take-up of MATT 7 (and equivalent training) to avoid the need to rely upon Reception Staging and Onward Interrogation (RSOI) training in CPERS handling.

The Inquiry recommended improved recording of MATT 7 training take-up. In a written statement in March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, had previously informed the House of Commons in September 2011 that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Those responsible for designing the mandatory operational law and values and standards training must keep the training relevant and up-to-date both in its content and in the style and means of delivery.

Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in March 2014 that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" in the inquiry report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House of Commons in September 2011 that the department was accepting all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Unit commanders should ensure that the annual operational law training is delivered to the highest standards, so as to avoid it becoming stale or routine. Different media should be used to keep the materials fresh and up-to-date.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). This followed the department's initial response in September 2011, when Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Training soldiers to maintain or prolong the shock of capture is apt to be misunderstood and should not feature in general training. Phrases such as “calm, neutral and professional” and “firm, fair and efficient” can properly be used as shorthand for those involved in CPERS handling.

The Inquiry recommended removing shock of capture language from general military training. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced in a written statement that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted in his inquiry's report that this recommendation might well have formed part of his own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

MATT 6 training should include discussion and role play scenarios relevant to moral courage. Training materials should include reference to occasions when UK troops have breached the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) to avoid any risk of complacency about the conduct of UK Forces.

The Inquiry recommended including moral courage scenarios and armed conflict breaches in military training. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations", though neither MATT 6 nor the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) was mentioned (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, had stated to the House of Commons that the department accepted all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Enhanced auditing of tactical questioning and interrogation training should be introduced to ensure that the interrogation branch at Chicksands adequately trains students including in the proper limits of approaches, what constitutes a threat to a CPERS, and how self induced and system induced pressures are approached.

The Inquiry recommended enhanced auditing of tactical questioning and interrogation training at Chicksands. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the recommendation was among those the department decided to implement and might have formed part of his own report's recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The annual legal review of training materials planned by Defence Intelligence and Security Centre (DISC) is a necessary step which I commend. It must, however, include a rigorous scrutiny of the detail of the presentations and speaking notes used on the tactical questioning and interrogation courses.

The Inquiry recommended rigorous annual legal scrutiny of tactical questioning and interrogation training materials. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations from the report, without specifically mentioning the scrutiny of course presentations or speaking notes (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House of Commons that the department accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

A more senior and more independent legal review of the kind now being conducted as a one off ad hoc review is also required. Such a review should not be necessary on an annual basis but should provide a suitable measure of further assurance if conducted every three years.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House that he was accepting in principle all inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

DISC should take immediate remedial action to ensure that: (1) old versions of interrogation branch teaching materials are retained but archived separately from current, in-use teaching materials; (2) interrogation branch teaching materials are always dated; and (3) when legal advice, policy changes, or internal reviews require changes to interrogation branch materials, the changes are checked for accuracy and made consistently across the body of training materials.

The Inquiry recommended that interrogation training materials be properly archived, dated, and accurately updated. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report", though the specific training material procedures named in the recommendation are not mentioned in the sources (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the department had initially decided to implement this recommendation (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

The tactical questioning and interrogation courses must train students adequately in all approaches that they may be required to use operationally. The current compromise whereby tactical questioning students are given an idea of the harsh approach but not trained fully in it should cease. To the extent that MoD may choose to retain the harsh approach (whether for interrogation or tactical questioning) the courses must take particular care to teach the limits of the approach including the new parameters following the MoD’s legal review.

The Inquiry recommended that tactical questioning courses adequately train students in all required approaches. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House that he was accepting in principle all the Inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD should give further careful consideration to the examples used in training for bridging between questioning sessions to ensure that they comply with the Geneva Conventions.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

“Conditioning” should cease to be used as an approved Chicksands or HUMINT term.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to cease using conditioning as an approved term. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced to the House of Commons that the department had taken "action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report", without specifically mentioning Chicksands or human intelligence (HUMINT) terminology (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House that he was accepting in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

DISC should give consideration to avoiding the terminology “maintain the shock of capture” and “prolong the shock of capture” even in their own courses. As a minimum, students on the tactical questioning and interrogation courses should be expressly warned of the dangers of unqualified personnel misunderstanding these phrases. Tactical questioners and interrogators, in dealing with capturing or guarding personnel, must emphasise swift handling up the CPERS chain and firm, fair and efficient handling not prolonging or maintaining the shock of capture.

The Inquiry recommended avoiding shock of capture terminology in military questioning and interrogation training. In March 2014, the Minister for the Armed Forces, Mark Francois, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, the Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, Sir Thayne Forbes, noted that this recommendation might well have formed part of the recommendations at the conclusion of his inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

All theoretical and practical resistance training must include a warning which explains in terms that the training is to show conduct that can be expected of a non-Geneva Conventions compliant enemy and does not reflect the standards required of British and NATO forces. Any of this training which uses, illustrates or refers to the use of any of the prohibited techniques should include a specific reminder of the prohibition on the five techniques and a reminder to personnel to abide by their MATT 7 training (or equivalent) in how they treat CPERS.

The Inquiry called for warnings and reminders about prohibited techniques in all resistance training. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, noted that the department had decided to implement the recommendation, which might otherwise have formed part of his inquiry's own recommendations (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

When reviewing the current Survive, Evade, Resist and Extract (SERE) DVD, Defence Survival Training Organisation (DSTO) should take into account the latest developments in tactical questioning and interrogation policy. DSTO should seek to ensure that, without affecting the realism of the training material, more care is taken to avoid using language in the SERE DVD which is also used (with a different meaning) in tactical questioning and interrogation training. Such ambiguity of terms may be confusing for those receiving the training and should be avoided as far as possible.

The Inquiry recommended revising survival training materials to avoid confusing interrogation terminology. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to address all accepted recommendations in the report, though the Survive, Evade, Resist and Extract (SERE) training material was not mentioned in the sources (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that the department was accepting in principle all of the recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The MoD must make all units aware that, not only is DSTO the only body trained to provide resistance training, but that if any escape and evasion training is carried out it must under no circumstances involve, whether at the point of “capture” or otherwise, the use of any of the prohibited five techniques nor any element of conduct after capture or resistance to interrogation training.

The Inquiry asked the Ministry of Defence to restrict resistance training to one provider. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the department had taken action to address all accepted inquiry recommendations (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). The Minister did not mention resistance training or escape and evasion exercises (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he accepted the inquiry recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

The Military Correction Training Centre (MCTC) should continue to monitor that breakaway, personal protection and control and restraint techniques taught on the All Arms Unit Custody Staff Course (AAUCSC) are appropriate having regard to a realistic assessment of the number of unit custody staff who are likely to be on duty (whether in a firm base or on operations).

The Inquiry recommended monitoring military custody staff restraint training against realistic unit staffing levels. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, had stated to the House of Commons in September 2011 that he accepted all recommendations in principle with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Refresher training for unit custody staff in whichever breakaway, personal protection and control and restraint techniques they are taught on the AAUCSC should now be rolled out ensuring that there is proper take up and recording of those who attend it.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated to the House of Commons that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, informed the House that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry's recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

Unit Detention Sergeants (see recommendation 41) should be properly trained in CPERS handling practices.

The Inquiry asked that unit detention sergeants receive proper training in captured persons (CPERS) handling. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Previously, in September 2011, Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, stated to the House of Commons that he accepted in principle all recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).

In reducing the number of firm base unit custody facilities, the MoD should be careful not to erode the unit level operational detention expertise which is provided to a Battlegroup by the attendance of unit provost staff on the AAUCSC, unless the equivalent expertise can be provided to each Battlegroup by the MPS.

In March 2014, Mark Francois, the Minister for the Armed Forces, announced that the Ministry of Defence had "taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report" (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). Earlier, in September 2011, Liam Fox, the Secretary of State for Defence, stated that he was accepting in principle all of the inquiry recommendations with one reservation (Dr Liam Fox response, Sep 2011).