Lord Hermer pursued 'witch hunt' against innocent British troops | Unpacked

Key Concepts

• The Battle of Danny Boy: A 2004 engagement in Iraq where British troops defeated the Mahdi Army, later becoming the focal point of false allegations.
• Al-Sweady Inquiry: A public inquiry launched by the UK government to investigate claims of murder, torture, and mutilation by British soldiers.
• Mahdi Army: An Iranian-backed Shia militia involved in the ambush of British troops.
• Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) & Leigh Day: Law firms that represented Iraqi claimants against the British Ministry of Defence (MOD).
• Human Rights Act (HRA): The legal framework used to pursue civil damage claims for detention, even when underlying allegations of murder were proven false.

1. The Battle of Danny Boy and Subsequent Allegations

In May 2004, British soldiers were ambushed by approximately 100 members of the Mahdi Army. Despite being heavily outnumbered, the British forces secured a victory. Following the battle, Iraqi families and survivors alleged that prisoners were captured alive, then subjected to torture, murder, and mutilation at a British base. These claims were championed by lawyers Phil Shiner (Public Interest Lawyers) and firms like Leigh Day, leading to a high-profile press conference where soldiers were accused of war crimes.

2. Lord Hermer’s Involvement and Legal Strategy

The investigation, based on over 25,000 documents, reveals that Lord Hermer (the current Attorney General) played a central role in pursuing these claims.

• Strategic Manipulation: Documents show Hermer advised solicitors on how to frame press releases to "generate sufficient interest," specifically questioning if they should be more explicit about "serious concerns of execution" to attract media attention.
• Awareness of Credibility Issues: Evidence indicates Hermer was aware of the dubious nature of the claims. He advised solicitors to maintain "wiggle room" in case the killings did not actually occur.
• Pursuing Settlements: Despite mounting evidence that the claimants were members of the Mahdi Army—not innocent civilians—and that their testimonies were inconsistent, Hermer advised claimants to reject MOD settlement offers in favor of higher counter-offers.

3. The Al-Sweady Inquiry Findings

The public inquiry, established in 2009, ultimately exonerated the British troops. The findings concluded that the allegations made by the Al-Sweady claimants were the result of "deliberate and calculated lies."

4. Post-Inquiry Persistence

A critical revelation from the investigation is that even after the inquiry proved the allegations were false, Lord Hermer continued to pursue legal action. In 2015, he argued that the detention claims remained "viable as a matter of law" under the Human Rights Act, regardless of the fact that the claimants' accounts lacked credibility. This highlights a legal strategy that prioritized technical claims for damages over the veracity of the underlying accusations against military personnel.

5. Notable Statements

• Phil Shiner (at the 2004 press conference): Alleged that British soldiers were responsible for the "executions of up to 20 Iraqi civilians, the torture of many of these 20 before death, the torture of nine other survivors, and horrific bodily mutilations."
• Lord Hermer (in internal correspondence): Advised solicitors: "Do you need to be slightly more explicit in the press release about evidence raising serious concerns of execution of prisoners in order to generate sufficient interest?"

6. Logical Connections and Synthesis

The narrative establishes a clear trajectory: from a military engagement to a coordinated legal campaign against British veterans. The investigation demonstrates that the legal pursuit was not merely a search for justice but a calculated effort to extract compensation, even when the legal team possessed internal notes questioning the logic of the claimants' stories (e.g., questioning why a farmer would not recognize his own fields).

Conclusion: The evidence suggests that Lord Hermer, while acting as a legal representative, prioritized the pursuit of civil damages against the British state despite being privy to information that undermined the credibility of his clients. The case serves as a significant example of the "witch hunt" phenomenon against military veterans, where legal frameworks were utilized to sustain claims long after they were exposed as fraudulent, causing significant distress to the accused soldiers. Calls have been made for an investigation into Lord Hermer’s conduct regarding his role in these proceedings.