Medical Personnel Role

I can inform this House that I am accepting in principle all of his recommendations with one reservation.

I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Defence has now taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report.

5.187 Sir William Gage then went on to say this: “I therefore conclude that 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. They should not advise that a CPERS is fit for detention or fit for questioning.” 5.188 For my part, my principal concern was that, as the position existed in May 2004, there was nowhere to record the outcome of any such medical examinations, whether expressed in the terms indicated as acceptable by Sir William Gage or otherwise. For this reason, the Ministry of Defence (“MoD”) were advised in a letter dated 15 October 2014, that: “Consideration should be given to ensuring that appropriate forms are made available to allow a medical examiner to declare a detainee unfit for detention and tactical questioning and stating the reasons for that decision.” 5.189 The MoD advised me that both their current policy on Tactical Questioning and Interrogation stated that a decision as to whether a detainee was unfit for questioning should be recorded on the captured person’s file and on medical form F Med 1026. 5.190 That being so, I note that the F Med 1026 form does not have a specific place for this information to be recorded, nor does it explain, under the list entitled “Purpose of the Examination”, that one of the purposes is to consider whether the detainee is unfit to be detained or questioned. Furthermore, there is currently no requirement for the reasons for such a decision to be recorded.