A tribunal has warned that the British government's secrecy surrounding how it tracks civilian deaths in military operations risks eroding public confidence in the process.
Lack of Public Procedure Exposed
The ruling came in response to a Freedom of Information case brought by the conflict monitoring group Airwars. It highlighted a stark contrast with the UK's closest ally, the United States. Unlike the US, the UK has no published guidelines for reviewing and assessing allegations of civilian casualties from its military actions.
The case was part of an Airwars investigation into Britain's conduct during the bombing campaign against Islamic State (IS) in Syria and Iraq. While the US-led coalition has admitted to over 1,400 civilian deaths from its strikes, the UK has acknowledged only a single civilian fatality.
Questions Over a Single Acknowledged Death
That one death, from a strike in eastern Syria in early 2018, has itself been shrouded in mystery. The British government stated in May 2018 that the strike, which targeted three fighters, killed one civilian. However, this incident was not logged in the official US-led coalition records of civilian casualties and did not appear on a UK list of attacks that killed militants. Syrian human rights groups also had no record of a civilian death in that area on that day.
The judge ultimately ruled against Airwars' request for more information on this specific strike, citing national security considerations presented in a closed court session. Despite this, the ruling delivered a significant critique of the Ministry of Defence's (MoD) overall approach.
A Landmark Call for Greater Transparency
The judge found that British voters have a legitimate interest in understanding the procedures used to assess civilian harm. The ruling stated: "The absence of any published procedure at all has the potential to undermine public confidence as to its integrity and comprehensiveness." It added that while there was no reason to doubt the good faith of officials, high-level assurances were no substitute for a published, scrutinizable process.
An MoD official told the tribunal that UK politicians have the final say on whether to accept an assessment that British forces killed civilians. This differs from the US system, where a dedicated civilian harm assessment cell makes that judgment.
Emily Tripp, Director of Airwars, hailed the verdict as a landmark. "The judge has ruled that the British public have a right to know when civilians are killed in our names," she said. She emphasised that the ruling officially recognises the damaging effect of the UK's lack of public policy on civilian harm, both for the public, the military, and for affected civilians themselves.
