BAHA-67 Accepted

Resistance Training Warning

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

Source — verbatim from the inquiry

Inquiry recommendation

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.

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

Published evidence summary

Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:

- The Defence Secretary stated on 8 September 2011 that the government accepted this recommendation and stated that all resistance training now includes clear warnings that the training demonstrates conduct expected from non-Geneva Conventions compliant adversaries and does not reflect standards required of British forces (Government Response to the Baha Mousa Inquiry, Ministry of Defence, September 2011).
- Resistance training materials are internal military documents not publicly available for independent verification.

Response — verbatim from government

Ministry of Defence

Accepted. All resistance training now includes clear warnings about different standards.

Ministry of Defence · 8 Sep 2011 Written response →

Evidence trail — what's actually happened since

No published activity has been recorded against this recommendation yet.

Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.

How this page is built

Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.

This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.