RIGHTS OF SOLDIERS
Sir,—l challenge the reported statement of Lieutenant-Coloriel C. B. Barrowclough that ‘‘the rights of the soldier on active service were preserved.” My experience showed that there were no really effective safeguards of such rights. The reason is (and I quote Lieutenant-Colonel Barrowclough) * that “the whole basis of the Army Act is that the prerogative °c P un ishment goes with command, so that the executive officer is also the judiciary officer.” In practice, this meant that a private had little chance of clearing himself of an unjust charge on a point either of law or simple jusjice. so long as his commanding officer was determined on his punishment. Soldiers, subservient in military life, were seldom foolish enough , to risk other and certain punishment by invoking points of law in order to clear themselves. This, in fact, was the wise advice given by an Army lawyer to me.—Yours, etc., VICTIM. June 27, 1946.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19460629.2.46.3
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24914, 29 June 1946, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
155RIGHTS OF SOLDIERS Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24914, 29 June 1946, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
Ngā mihi
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.
Log in