Skip to main content
Normal View

Special Committee Defence Bill, 1951 debate -
Tuesday, 8 Apr 1952

SECTION 126.

I move amendment No. 167.

To delete paragraph (a), lines 2 and 3.

It is very difficult to find circumstances in which you could say that a man, by want of due precaution, is taken prisoner. You are going to have an awful lot of trouble in proving that, by want of due precaution or through disobedience of orders or wilful neglect of duty, he is taken prisoner.

Again, I quote the 1923 Act. Under Section 33 (1), the penalty for being taken prisoner through disobedience of orders, wilful neglect of duty or want of due precaution is death or penal servitude.

The trouble is the danger of leaving an easy way out for a fellow to put up his hands.

Or to run out of a trench in front of the enemy.

I gather that the Minister thinks it is desirable to maintain it and, if so, I will not press it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments 168 and 169 not moved.
Section 126 agreed to.
SECTION 127.

I move amendment No. 170.

In line 16. to delete " death " and substitute " penal servitude."

I can visualise a mutiny accompanied by violence but death seems to be a pretty severe punishment, although I know it would never be operated.

If it were in emergency conditions and in wartime, death would certainly be well merited, but in peacetime it would never be inflicted.

Mutiny is such a serious offence that it would have to be dealt with stringently.

It is like everything else—it sounds worse than it is. Mutiny in military law is a combination of two or more persons to resist lawful military authority. It is a sort of collective insubordination. In one person, it is insubordination, but, in concert, it is mutiny and that to a person who comes up against military offences does not look so serious. Mutiny in the other form, however, is a very serious thing and I agree that there must be pretty severe punishment for it, but I do not think it should carry the punishment of death. The general tendency in all our law is to abolish the death penalty—I do not say that it will be realised in our time—and it is very unlikely to be enforced. For that reason, I withdraw the amendment.

I think the Deputy is met by the phrase " or any less punishment ".

You will never abolish the death penalty in a war until you stop killing in war and then you do not need any army.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 127 agreed to.
Top
Share