UK Offence Report

The Courts-Martial (Royal Air Force) Rules 1997

UK Statutory Instrument 1997 No. 171 — creates 1 criminal offence.

1offences created
0recorded in force
0revoked
Made
12 February 1997
In force from
1 April 1997
Extent
Not stated
Subject
Miscellaneous
Made under
Air Force Act 1955

Explanatory note

(This note is not part of the Rules) — published with the instrument by the department that made it. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

These Rules prescribe the procedure governing the prosecution and trial of offences at courts-martial under the Air Force Act 1955 (c. 19). The Rules generally accord with procedures in the Crown Court. They replace and revoke the Rules of Procedure (Air Force) 1972 (S.I. 1972/419) and take account of changes in the law and procedure since then, giving effect in particular to the provisions of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (c. 46). The Rules regulate the functions of the prosecuting authority and the court administration officer. The Rules provide for the form and preferring of charges, the discontinuance of proceedings before trial and the procedure to be followed by the court administration officer when convening the court-martial. The Rules provide for the first time for preliminary proceedings in the form of a hearing for directions, at which the judge advocate may make any necessary directions to secure the efficient trial of the case, and preparatory and pre-trial hearings at which the judge advocate may make rulings before the trial commences. Specific provision is made for the court-martial to resolve disputed issues of fact other than the accused’s guilt, where it is necessary to do so before deciding what sentence is to be passed. Rules relating to the admission of evidence via closed circuit television link and of video recording of testimony from child witnesses are included. A period of 28 days from the day sentence is announced is prescribed within which an accused may present a petition against finding or sentence or both to the reviewing authority, who is required to give reasons for his decision if such a petition is presented.

Offences created by this instrument

What Parliament said about it

Hansard was searched for this instrument by name and returned nothing. That is the ordinary outcome: an instrument laid under the negative procedure is usually never debated, and becomes law without a word said about it in either House.

How Parliament handled it

Parliament's Statutory Instruments service records procedure from May 2017 onwards, and this instrument predates it. That is a limit of the source, not a statement that nothing happened.

Check the source