Government response Ministry of Defence: Accepted in part (Sep 2011)
Delivery Ministry of Defence says completed (Mar 2014)

Recommendation BAHA-29: Medical Personnel Role

From The Report of the Baha Mousa Inquiry - Volume III, published 8 September 2011.

Recommendation

Armed Forces medical personnel can and should be involved in providing advice that a CPERS is not fit for detention or questioning. Alternatively, the medic may validly advise that no specific intervention different from the normal process is required in respect of that CPERS. Medics should not advise that a CPERS is fit for detention or fit for questioning.

Jurisdiction: UK-wide

In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended military medics advise when detainees are unfit for detention or questioning. In March 2014, Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces, stated that the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all accepted recommendations in the report (Mr Mark Francois, Mar 2014). In December 2014, Sir Thayne Forbes, Chairman of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, reported that the department advised that policy required decisions on whether a detainee was unfit for questioning to be recorded on their file and on medical form F Med 1026 (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014). He found that the form lacked a specific place to record this information, did not list unfitness as an examination purpose, and contained no requirement to record reasons for a decision (Sir Thayne Forbes, Dec 2014).

Sources

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 12 Oct 2026. The record below is the sources' own words.

About this summary

This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.

Government response

Accepted in part Ministry of Defence
8 Sep 2011
Words of: Liam Fox, Secretary of State for Defence, statement to the House of Commons, 8 September 2011 (HC Deb vol 532 col 571), as published by the Ministry of Defence

I can inform this House that I am accepting in principle all of his recommendations with one reservation.

How this response relates to the recommendation

Site note: The words are the Secretary of State for Defence's statement to the House of Commons of 8 September 2011 as the Ministry of Defence published it on GOV.UK, which is the page the site cites. The Official Report of the statement as delivered (HC Deb vol 532, col 571) differs slightly in wording: it reads "I can inform the House that I am accepting in principle all his recommendations with one reservation."

Blanket government agreement does not establish acceptance or delivery by each addressee. Some response passages cover groups of recommendations.

Scope of the government response

The Secretary of State for Defence accepted all of the report's 73 recommendations in principle together, in one sentence of his statement to the House of Commons on 8 September 2011, with one reservation: the recommendation on tactical questioning (BAHA-23), which he said he could not accept. That sentence is not a response to any one recommendation alone, and the Ministry of Defence published no response to each recommendation. A written ministerial statement of 27 March 2014 said the Ministry of Defence had taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations, and said of recommendation 44 that the existing inspection regime did not require further amendment.

Delivery

Ministry of Defence says completed (27 March 2014)

I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Defence has now taken action to consider and address all the accepted recommendations in the report.

From: Baha Mousa Report, Mr Mark Francois, Minister for the Armed Forces

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (17 December 2014)

5.187 Sir William Gage then went on to say this: “I therefore conclude that Armed Forces medical personnel can and should be involved in providing advice that a CPERS is not fit for detention or questioning; alternatively, the medic may validly advise that no specific intervention different from the normal process is required in respect of that CPERS. They should not advise that a CPERS is fit for detention or fit for questioning.” 5.188 For my part, my principal concern was that, as the position existed in May 2004, there was nowhere to record the outcome of any such medical examinations, whether expressed in the terms indicated as acceptable by Sir William Gage or otherwise. For this reason, the Ministry of Defence (“MoD”) were advised in a letter dated 15 October 2014, that: “Consideration should be given to ensuring that appropriate forms are made available to allow a medical examiner to declare a detainee unfit for detention and tactical questioning and stating the reasons for that decision.” 5.189 The MoD advised me that both their current policy on Tactical Questioning and Interrogation stated that a decision as to whether a detainee was unfit for questioning should be recorded on the captured person’s file and on medical form F Med 1026. 5.190 That being so, I note that the F Med 1026 form does not have a specific place for this information to be recorded, nor does it explain, under the list entitled “Purpose of the Examination”, that one of the purposes is to consider whether the detainee is unfit to be detained or questioned. Furthermore, there is currently no requirement for the reasons for such a decision to be recorded.

From: The Report of the Al-Sweady Inquiry, Part 5, Chapter 2: Recommendations, Sir Thayne Forbes

Site note: This is the Al-Sweady Inquiry's report (Sir Thayne Forbes, 17 December 2014), Part 5, Chapter 2, not a statement by the Ministry of Defence. The Inquiry is reporting what it decided and what the Ministry told it; it sets no delivery status for any recommendation.

Site note: Paragraphs 5.187 to 5.190. The words the report quotes from the Baha Mousa report at 5.187 are this recommendation. The Ministry of Defence's account of its policy is reported at 5.189 in the Inquiry's words.

Source

Report The Report of the Baha Mousa Inquiry - Volume III 08 Sep 2011

Responsible bodies

Ministry of Defence Primary

Who has spoken

  • Ministry of Defence
    Response, delivery statement
  • assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
    Finding
Recommendation made 15.1 years ago