Stop Labour's betrayal of our SAS heroes: Ex-Special Forces chiefs and MPs demand veterans who battled IRA are protected from prosecution
SAS veterans are being hounded with the threat of prosecution decades after their service thanks to a shameful betrayal by Labour.
The Mail today launches a major campaign with ex-Special Forces commanders and senior MPs to protect the soldiers who bravely defended this country.
We are demanding that ministers U-turn on their bid to repeal the Tories ' Legacy Act, which shielded Northern Ireland veterans from historical 'witch hunts', or else produce a proper alternative.
It comes as former SAS soldiers face possible murder charges after a judge in Northern Ireland ruled that the shooting of four IRA terrorists in 1992 was not justified. Those behind the campaign have warned of a dire threat to national security if this process is permitted to continue.
One ex-SAS commanding officer said ministers had to wake up to the need to protect serving and retired personnel from 'this creeping lawfare' or it would prove 'calamitous' by hobbling operations and hitting recruitment.
The campaign has already generated £250,000 in fighting funds in a single donation from ex-SAS soldier-turned-entrepreneur Sir Mike Gooley, founder of travel company Trailfinders.
A petition on the Parliament website demanding protection for Northern Ireland veterans has, meanwhile, reached 136,290 signatures, meaning a parliamentary debate will be held on July 14. The campaign team includes two former SAS commanding officers and a Regimental Sergeant Major.
Other senior soldiers involved in the call for action served in undercover roles and faced being murdered by IRA terrorists every time they deployed.
The political dimension of the campaign is being led by Conservative MP Sir David Davis, a former SAS reservist. He said last night: 'What we have seen so far has been a travesty of justice. This is not just about those who served in Northern Ireland.
'It is about giving protection and certainty to the entire Armed Forces family. Our veterans deserve our respect, not relentless legal pursuit decades after the events in question.'
At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, the Mail yesterday asked Keir Starmer why he was opening veterans up to a possible legal witch hunt by repealing the legislation.
The PM replied: 'I worked in Northern Ireland for five years so I know just how important and significant these issues are. We are in talks and discussions about how we resolve this issue.'
SAS veterans have suffered emotional trauma from their hounding by lawyers. This included a suicide attempt by a former Special Forces soldier last year.
Former SAS Regimental Sergeant Major George Simm said: 'As a result of these evidence-free accusations, soldiers are realising they have no legal rights. This has to change, out of necessity, for national security reasons. They have never been so exposed.
'On operations, to be compliant with the Human Rights Act, soldiers need their own lawyer on speed dial to advise them if there's a chance they might have to kill someone. The situation is beyond absurd. Soldiers didn't sign up to defend activist judges or a European legal system.'
The case at the centre of the campaign involves the 1992 shooting of four IRA terrorists by SAS soldiers in Clonoe, County Tyrone. Following a police investigation and inquiries by the coroner, the RUC concluded at the time that there should be no prosecutions. The soldiers stated their use of lethal force was reasonable due to the threat posed by the IRA.
However, last year they were ordered to appear before a new 'legacy inquest'. Coroner Mr Justice Humphreys ruled in February the soldiers' use of force was excessive, despite the terrorists having a heavy machine-gun and other guns.
He claimed there was no attempt to arrest the four IRA men and determined, more than 30 years after the incident, that the soldiers should have waited for the IRA gang to disassemble the machine gun.
The Ministry of Defence has vowed to challenge his verdict. But in the meantime, files have been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland. This could trigger a criminal investigation.
Last night, former SAS CO Aldwin Wight said it was absurd that the soldiers who confronted the IRA at Clonoe 'should have to face the possibility of criminal action based on a subsequent flawed inquest three decades later, under a law that didn't exist in 1992.'
He said it 'will prove calamitous for national security. Nobody is going to volunteer to expose themselves to this sort of legal nonsense.
'When are ministers going to wake up to the need to protect serving and retired personnel from this creeping lawfare?'
Relatives of the IRA terrorists brought the 'legacy inquest' citing Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1998 Human Rights Act.
The previous Tory government brought in the Legacy Act to protect Northern Ireland veterans from prosecution and endless investigations. But Labour's manifesto included a pledge to repeal the 'unlawful' Act.
The Northern Ireland Office has pledged to replace it 'in a way that is lawful, fair and that enables families, including military families, to find answers'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
Three men escape from prison at same time as cops launch manhunt and warn ‘do not approach them'
THREE lags have escaped from jail with police launching an urgent manhunt to capture them. Jason MacDonagh, 34, Daniel Harty, 34 and Barney Casey, 24, all escaped from HMP Springhill on Monday, June 23. Police have warned that the three escaped lags could be dangerous and warned the public not to approach them. MacDonagh is described as a white man, at around 5ft 9ins tall, of medium build and has ginger hair. He has facial hair and was last seen wearing grey tracksuit trousers and a white vest. Casey is a white man, at around 5ft 9ins tall, of small build and has black hair. He has slight facial hair and a moustache and goatee beard. He was last seen wearing a grey tracksuit. Harty is a white man, at around 5ft 9ins tall, of slim build with black hair and a black beard. He was last seen wearing a blue jacket and grey joggers. Police staff investigator, Claire Busby said: 'We are appealing to the public for any information around MacDonagh, Casey and Harty's whereabouts, or anyone who may see them to get in touch. 'We would advise members of the public not to approach them if, but call 999 instead. 'If you have any information as to where they may be, you can call 101 or make a report online, quoting 43250312586. 'Alternatively, if you wish to remain anonymous, you can contact the independent charity, Crimestoppers, on 0800 555 111.' 3
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
If Labour cuts my PIP, I lose everything I have worked for
It's been a horrific few weeks – few months – for disabled people, with the never-ending uncertainty around the Labour government's disability benefit cuts making our community scared for our lives. The government claims their welfare reforms are to help support disabled people into work, but they're ignoring the fact that many disabled people can only work because of the benefits they receive – and I'm one of them. I live with a wide range of conditions including lupus, endometriosis, arthritis, migraines and dyspraxia, the toll these have on my body means that my disability mostly manifests through lack of energy and cognitive function. I would never be able to work a full time job or one with a strict schedule, as I can only work for a few hours at a time before I can't look at a screen anymore. I mostly work from bed as that's where I'm most comfortable. However, I've still managed to build a pretty successful career as a writer. With my limited energy and time, I've also helped shape the Taking the PIP campaign, which has brought together more than 130 well-known disabled people to urge the prime minister to stop the cruel cuts to benefits. But the harsh reality is that if these cuts are approved next week, with a second reading vote on the welfare reform bill, I will lose everything I have. I receive £558 a month in PIP. I also receive Universal Credit, the amount of which changes every month because I have to input my earnings, but is roughly around £400 a month. At a time when I only have the energy to work one or two hours a week, it means that I'm not working myself to the bone in order to be able to afford to live and can still afford my bills. Currently, you have to score 8 points to qualify for the daily living component of PIP. But if the eligibility changes come in, you will also have to score at least 4 points in one activity – these involving your ability to cook and clean, socialise and maintain good hygiene. On my last assessment, the highest I scored on all activities was 2. Due to my depression and neurodivergent conditions, I've made myself ill in the past with bad hygiene. I have to be reminded or pushed to keep myself clean. When I'm in deep depressive episodes, I will go days, or sometimes even weeks, without changing my clothes or washing myself. It's unsafe for me to do certain things in the kitchen as I sometimes lack control of my hands. I enjoy cooking, but often cut or burn myself and struggle to use many kitchen utensils. My cognitive and mental health conditions also mean I put housework at the bottom of the list, and prioritise just keeping myself alive. Only this week, I had to deep-clean my house – with the support of friends – after I discovered a fly infestation. But I make allowances so that I can live a good, independent life. I have apps that remind me to clean and eat, I buy pre-sliced food or mostly rely on ready meals. I live in social housing, in an accessible bungalow, so I can move around it safely without fear that I will put myself in danger. I live five minutes from my parents, who are on hand to help with housework. But if Labour's cuts to PIP go through, I won't be able to afford to continue living my lovely little life. I will be forced to find a job that will push me mentally and physically to breaking point. If I lose my PIP, I genuinely can't guarantee I'll still be here in five years time. And I'm far from the only one. Under Labour plans, more than 3.2 million people will see their benefits cut, pushing around 8,000 people into poverty or even absolute poverty, which is defined by the UN as 'a condition characterised by severe deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends not only on income but also on access to services.' More than 280,000 PIP claimants who are already in work would lose their support – and, as a result, could lose their jobs. In return, just 1-3 per cent of those affected will be able to move into work. While many working people will be affected, those who can't work will also be hard hit. Where I agree with the government is that the welfare system does need reform, but only to make it more compassionate and less inhumane. Starmer says the welfare system 'doesn't work for anyone', and that it's 'counterproductive' and 'works against them getting into work'. It is all well and good the government saying they want to support people into work – but when they're also quietly cutting Access to Work entitlement, their actions don't show it. I hear every single day from scared disabled people who have no idea how they'll survive if these cuts go through. The government can claim this is a cost-cutting measure all they want, but the reality is that the very real cost will be that of disabled people's lives. Is that really a debt politicians want on their hands? * Rachel Charlton-Dailey is a journalist and disability rights campaigner who is part of the 'Taking the PIP' campaign
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Here comes Sir U-turn… Starmer braces to make concessions as MORE Labour MPs join massive benefits revolt ahead of crunch vote with demands for 'regime change'
Keir Starmer is poised to make humiliating concessions on benefits reforms today after failing to quell a massive Labour revolt. Ministers have been hinting at a climbdown as they face a disastrous defeat in a crunch Commons vote on the flagship legislation. Despite frantic direct pleas from the PM and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, more MPs have added their names to a fatal amendment overnight. Around 130 have now publicly declared they will oppose the Second Reading of the Bill, easily enough to overturn even Labour's massive majority. There is speculation that Sir Keir could offer to widen eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (Pip) or weaken curbs on Universal Credit - blowing a hole in hopes the proposals will save the government £5billion. He has dismissed what has been described as the nuclear option of delaying or abandoning the package altogether. Ms Reeves has been among the strongest backers of the reforms, as she desperately struggles to balance the books without resorting to more tax hikes. Even with the changes the benefits bill was still due to keep spiralling, just at a slightly slower rate. In a grim sign for the premier, bitter infighting has been surfacing with MPs and aides swiping at No10 chief of staff Morgan McSweeney. Some have been demanding 'regime change' complaining that Downing Street is dominated by 'over-excitable boys'. A No10 source said: 'The broken welfare system is failing the most vulnerable and holding too many people back. 'It's fair and responsible to fix it. There is broad consensus across the party on this.' The source insisted the reforms were 'underpinned by… Labour values'. They said: 'Delivering fundamental change is not easy, and we all want to get it right, so of course we're talking to colleagues about the Bill and the changes it will bring, we want to start delivering this together on Tuesday.' Lord Blunkett last night suggested the PM had failed to focus on the peril the Government is in because he has spent so much time abroad. And he warned that Sir Keir will be forced to hold a formal confidence vote if he loses. No government Bill has failed to pass second reading - typically a verdict on the broad principles of plans rather than details - since 1986. The Labour grandee told LBC: 'If they lost it, they'd have to go for a vote of confidence, I think. 'But the embarrassment of that one year in leaves you with two problems. One is you've been humiliated, and the second is you've still got the problem. The welfare issue has not gone away. So, solving the problem, not taking the hit, is the sensible solution.' Urging a delay in the vote, he added: 'Keir Starmer, for very understandable reasons, has been diverted on to the international agenda. I think he now needs to come back from Holland and be absolutely focused on this.' Facing questions at the Nato summit yesterday, Sir Keir bridled at suggestions he had failed to read the mood of Labour MPs. He risked inflaming the mood by shrugging off the insurrection as 'noises off', insisting benefits reform must happen and the vote will go ahead on Tuesday. Angela Rayner delivered the same message as she stood in at PMQs. But by the evening the tone had changed, with ministers stressing they are listening to complaints from MPs. Sir Keir is finally due to take his feet in the Commons today, giving a statement expected to cover the G7 in Canada, Nato summit and Middle East crisis. It has been over two weeks since he spoke in the chamber. Touring broadcast studios this morning, trade minister Douglas Alexander admitted that the government was thinking about how to 'implement' the intention of curbing benefits. He told Sky News: 'Everyone agrees welfare needs reform and that the system was broken. Everyone recognises you're trying to take people off benefit and into work, because that's better for them and also better for our fiscal position. 'And everyone recognises that we need to protect the most vulnerable. 'Where there is honestly some disagreement at the moment, is on the issue of 'how do you give implementation to those principles?'' Toby Perkins is among the new MPs to add their names to the fatal amendment He suggested that normally the second reading of a bill, its first Commons test, was a vote on the principle behind a piece of legislation rather than the way it will be implemented. 'The effect of what's happened with this reasoned amendment being tabled is that that's brought forward the discussion of how to give implementation to those principles,' he said. 'So given the high level of agreement on the principles, the discussions over the coming days will really be about the implementation of those principles.'
