Secrecy around UK military civilian harm risks undermining public confidence'

"The British government's secrecy around how it tracks civilian deaths in UK military campaigns risks undermining public confidence in the process, a tribunal has found. The UK has no published guidelines for how it reviews and assesses allegations that civilians have been killed or injured in an attack, unlike its closest ally, the US. The ruling was made in response to a freedom of information case brought by the conflict monitor Airwars."

"The British government said in May 2018 that one civilian was killed by a strike that targeted three fighters in eastern Syria earlier that year, but the strike was not logged in the records of civilian casualties kept by the US-led coalition and did not appear in a UK list of attacks that killed militants. Syrian human rights groups had no record of a civilian killed in that area on that day."

"The judge ruled against Airwars, based on national security considerations that were presented in closed court and therefore excluded from the ruling. However, he also found British voters had a legitimate interest in the nature, comprehensiveness and robustness of procedures to assess harm. The absence of any published procedure at all has the potential to undermine public confidence as to its integrity and comprehensiveness, the ruling said."

A tribunal found that secrecy over how the UK tracks civilian deaths in military campaigns risks undermining public confidence in the review process. The UK has no published guidelines for reviewing or assessing allegations of civilian deaths or injuries, unlike the US. The ruling arose from a freedom of information case by Airwars into the UK's bombing campaign against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The UK acknowledged one civilian killed in May 2018, but that strike did not appear in coalition records, UK lists of militant-killing attacks, or Syrian human rights group records. The judge ruled against Airwars on national security grounds but said lack of published procedures weakens public confidence and scrutiny.

Read at www.theguardian.com