All posts tagged: UK

The Bill of Rights threatens access to justice for civilians and service personnel – Ceasefire and RSI joint briefing


The UK government’s plans to abolish the Human Rights Act (HRA) and replace it with the Bill of Rights poses a serious threat to the human rights of both civilians and service personnel.

Ceasefire and Rights & Security International have published a joint briefing on the impact of the Bill of Rights on overseas military operations.

This Bill, if enacted would end access to justice for human rights violations occurring in UK overseas military operations. This would significantly impact the ability of members of the Armed Forces and civilians to gain redress and closure in the UK courts for allegations of wrongdoing – essential to military discipline, individual rights and long-term peacebuilding.

Despite being described as “a complete mess” by Whitehall sources, “neither necessary nor sufficient” by Sir Peter Gross who chaired the Independent Human Rights Act review last year, and being widely condemned by human rights organisations, the Justice Secretary, Dominic Raab MP, has persevered with this Bill.

When combined with the Overseas Operations Act passed last year, this legislation would mean that the armed forces could act with greater impunity during overseas operations.

Ceasefire and RSI call on the government to stop its plans to introduce the Bill of Rights.

Read the full briefing here

For any media enquiries or further questions, please contact Ceasefire’s Advocacy Officer, Lydia Day, at


ceasefireThe Bill of Rights threatens access to justice for civilians and service personnel – Ceasefire and RSI joint briefing
read more

The protection of civilians and siege warfare: CEASEFIRE and the Embassy of Switzerland in the UK host event

From Mariupol and other cities in Ukraine, to Mosul, Aleppo and other cities in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Ethiopia and the Philippines, the global resurgence of siege warfare and its devastating impact on civilian populations have raised serious questions about the implementation of international humanitarian law (IHL) and military strategy and operational practice.

Such questions were considered at an event at the Swiss Ambassador’s residence in London on 31st March to launch CEASEFIRE’s latest report, Protecting civilians in siege warfare: Constraints on military action. Academics, lawyers, civil servants, parliamentarians, military officials and civil society members gathered to engage with a panel discussion on the protection of civilians and siege warfare.

The Swiss Ambassador Markus Leitner introduced the panel discussion, referring to Switzerland’s long-standing tradition of protecting civilians in armed conflict and emphasising the importance of the conversation. He underlined the priority of the protection of civilians in Swiss foreign policy and the value of cooperation with like-minded countries such as the UK. Opening remarks were also given by Ambassador Corinne Cicéron Bühler, Director of the Directorate of International Law at the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, on the role of IHL in regulating siege warfare, and how Switzerland is working in multilateral forums to strengthen IHL and compliance with it.

The panel discussion, which was conducted under the Chatham House Rule, was chaired by CEASEFIRE’s Executive Director, Mark Lattimer, and the speakers included:

  • Radhya Al-Mutawakel, Chairperson of Mwatana Organisation for Human Rights
  • Helen Alderson, ICRC Representative to the UK & Ireland
  • Brigadier Keith Eble, Head of Operational Law at the British Army
  • Professor Noam Lubell, Director of the Armed Conflict and Crisis Hub, University of Essex.

Participants agreed that while siege warfare is often referred to as ‘medieval’, this description was deeply inaccurate given how widespread such tactics are in contemporary urban warfare, and the extent to which modern technologies and equipment have changed the nature of siege warfare.

Several panellists and audience members spoke about the devastating consequences of siege warfare for civilian populations, including casualties from bombardment, food and water scarcity, and psychological consequences. It was crucial that discussions were grounded in the realities of civilians’ lives under siege.

A significant point of discussion was about whether existing IHL was sufficient for mitigating civilian harm from siege warfare, and if so, whether the focus should be on increasing compliance with IHL. Some commented that it was better to improve compliance with IHL in siege warfare through increased training, funding, and accountability for potential violations. Others noted that these approaches were not mutually exclusive, and that we should seek to expand IHL where necessary while also strengthening compliance to existing IHL.

There was also an ongoing conversation about what accountability means in the context of siege tactics and urban warfare. Participants examined criminal and state accountability for violations of IHL during sieges, and what avenue may be most appropriate for this kind of warfare.

Read CEASEFIRE’s latest report on siege warfare here.

ceasefireThe protection of civilians and siege warfare: CEASEFIRE and the Embassy of Switzerland in the UK host event
read more

CEASEFIRE submits evidence to the UK government consultation on reform of the Human Rights Act

Read our submission to the consultation on reforming the Human Rights Act here.

CEASEFIRE has submitted a response to the Ministry of Justice consultation to abolish the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and instead replace it with a new Bill of Rights. CEASEFIRE’s submission, drafted by legal expert Dr Stuart Wallace, responds specifically to the section on the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the HRA.

CEASEFIRE’s view is that any attempt to remove overseas military operations from the application of human rights law, whether by means of an international protocol, domestic legislation, or derogation, poses a severe threat to the rights of civilians. The government also faces formidable obstacles in its proposals for this and is unlikely to achieve its aims.

Rather than trying to change the application of the law to military operations, the government should take alternative approaches to address underlying problems which lead applicants to use the ECHR/HRA system in the first place.

CEASEFIRE makes the following recommendations to the government:

  1. Improve enforcement of IHL in military operations
  2. Offer alternative, independent and effective forums for complaints to be addressed
  3. Conduct prompt, independent, impartial and effective investigations where alleged violations occur in theatre and improve investigation methods
  4. The UK should seek complementary application of IHL and IHRL during military operations, as this is consistent with the UK’s other legal obligations and international legal practice.

Our report Reparations for Civilian Harm in Military Operations: Towards a UK Policy examines compensation claims for civilians harmed by UK military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of these claims are made under the Human Rights Act 1998.

Read our full submission here. Our thanks goes to Dr Stuart Wallace for drafting this submission.

We have also published a short article explaining the HRA, extraterritorial jurisdiction of the HRA, and what the consultation proposes.

ceasefireCEASEFIRE submits evidence to the UK government consultation on reform of the Human Rights Act
read more