Home / Inquiries / Baha Mousa Inquiry / BAHA-30
← BAHA-29 BAHA-31 →
BAHA-30

CPERS Medical Examination Policy

Baha Mousa Inquiry · The Report of the Baha Mousa Inquiry - Volume III · Issued 8 September 2011 · Addressed to: Ministry of Defence

Government responseMinistry of Defence: Accepted in part (Sep 2011)

DeliveryMinistry of Defence says completed (Mar 2014)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

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.

Baha Mousa Inquiry, The Report of the Baha Mousa Inquiry - Volume III · 8 Sep 2011 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

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).

Sources

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 12 Oct 2026.

About this summary
This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record above reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.

Report-level response context

The Secretary of State for Defence accepted all of the report's 73 recommendations in principle together, in one sentence of his statement to the House of Commons on 8 September 2011, with one reservation: the recommendation on tactical questioning (BAHA-23), which he said he could not accept. That sentence is not a response to any one recommendation alone, and the Ministry of Defence published no response to each recommendation. A written ministerial statement of 27 March 2014 said the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations, and said of recommendation 44 that the existing inspection regime did not require further amendment.

Government response

●Ministry of Defence · Accepted in part · 8 Sep 2011

Words of: Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, statement to the House of Commons, 8 September 2011 (HC Deb vol 532 col 571), as published by the Ministry of Defence

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

Extract from: Statement on the report into the death of Mr Baha Mousa in Iraq in 2003

Site note: The words are the Secretary of State for Defence's statement to the House of Commons of 8 September 2011 as the Ministry of Defence published it on GOV.UK, which is the page the site cites. The Official Report of the statement as delivered (HC Deb vol 532, col 571) differs slightly in wording: it reads "I can inform the House that I am accepting in principle all his recommendations with one reservation."

Delivery

●Ministry of Defence says completed · 27 Mar 2014

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.

From: Baha Mousa Report, Mr Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●assets.publishing.service.gov.uk · 17 Dec 2014

Sir William made a total of 73 Recommendations. Initially, the Ministry of Defence (“MoD”) decided to implement all but one of them (i.e. Recommendation 23, dealing with the interrogation technique known as “harshing). Of those, Recommendations 5, 7 (in part, viz. deprivation of food and drink), 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 33, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 57, 59, 62, 66, 67 might well have formed part of the recommendations at the conclusion of the Al-Sweady Report.

From: The Report of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, Part 5, Chapter 2: Recommendations, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman, The Al-Sweady Inquiry

Site note: This is the Al-Sweady Inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, 17 December 2014), Part 5, Chapter 2, not a statement by the Ministry of Defence. The Inquiry is reporting what it decided and what the Ministry told it; it sets no delivery status for any recommendation.

Site note: Paragraph 5.101 gives this passage once, for 28 of the recommendations together (5, 7 in part, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 33, 36, 40, 42, 43, 44, 57, 59, 62, 66 and 67). The same words are recorded on each of them except BAHA-23 and BAHA-29, which carry the report's own passages about them. The next paragraph, 5.102, says the Inquiry would not re-consider "that which has already been considered and implemented, or is being implemented", without saying which recommendations are which.

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.