Sexual offences committed by members of the armed forces: Is the service justice system fit for purpose?

Abstract: Recent policy reviews, academic research and high-profile media critiques have repeatedly emphasised the UK military as a hypermasculine culture, seemingly permissive of sexual violence, marked by high prevalence of sexual offences and inadequate justice response. The service justice system has been characterised by low conviction rates and poor treatment of victim-survivors of sexual offences, prompting recommendations that rape should be tried in the civilian criminal justice system rather than the service justice system. Despite notable debate on this matter, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) ultimately rejected this recommendation in December 2021 and instead committed to implementing clear and meaningful change within the service justice system response to sexual offences. In light of this decision, this article interrogates available data about the current service justice system response to sexual offending, and lessons that may be learnt from the civilian criminal justice system, to highlight current obstacles to justice and outline areas in which further research and scrutiny is necessary.

Read the full article
Report a problem with this article

Related articles

  • More for Policy & Practice

    The ask, care, escort suite of trainings: Initial evaluation of the Army’s primary suicide prevention strategy

    Abstract: The U.S. Army’s Ask, Care, Escort (ACE) suicide gatekeeper training has been the annual requirement for all personnel since 2009; however, this training has never been formally evaluated. The present study evaluated three updated versions of ACE: a training for Army leaders (ACE-Suicide Intervention), a training for basic combat trainees (ACE for Basic Combat Training and One Station Unit Training), and a standard training for all personnel (ACE for the Force). Self-report surveys measured pre- to posttraining changes in objective and subjective knowledge and stigma, as well as preparedness, self-efficacy, and likelihood to engage in gatekeeper behaviors. Implementation outcomes, such as training acceptability, suitability, and usability were also assessed. Across these evaluations, participants reported that knowledge and gatekeeper behaviors significantly improved from pre- to posttraining. Implementation metrics revealed a high degree of acceptability and relevance for all three ACE trainings. Overall, the findings of these evaluations suggest important changes in key suicide prevention outcomes following the ACE suite of trainings. Further longitudinal assessment is needed to establish the full effectiveness of gatekeeper interventions in the Army.