A tribunal has ruled that the British government's secrecy over how it tracks civilian deaths in military campaigns risks undermining public confidence. The ruling came in a freedom of information case brought by the conflict monitor Airwars, which is investigating the UK's record in its bombing campaign against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.
Unlike the United States, the UK has no published guidelines for reviewing and assessing allegations that civilians have been killed or injured in an attack. The US, which led the coalition against IS, has acknowledged killing more than 1,400 civilians with its strikes. The UK has admitted only one civilian death, from a strike in Syria in 2018, but Airwars found inconsistencies in how that incident was recorded.
The judge ruled against Airwars based on national security considerations presented in closed court. However, he found that British voters had a legitimate interest in the 'nature, comprehensiveness and robustness' of procedures to assess harm. 'The absence of any published procedure at all has the potential to undermine public confidence as to its integrity and comprehensiveness,' the ruling said.
A Ministry of Defence official told the tribunal that UK politicians have the final say on whether to accept an assessment that British forces killed civilians. In the US, a dedicated 'civilian harm assessment cell' makes that judgment. Airwars said the ruling was a landmark validation of the need for greater transparency. The Airwars director Emily Tripp stated: 'The judge has ruled that the British public have a right to know when civilians are killed in our names.'
