Generals condemn lawfare's effect on warfare

Nine former 4-star chiefs warn Troubles Bill “risks everything” as General Sir Peter Wall publicly attacks “moral equivalence”.

General Sir Peter Wall says policy had “not been very thoroughly thought through”.

London, 11 November 2025 — Nine retired four-star commanders have warned that the Government’s new Northern Ireland Troubles Bill will undermine the Armed Forces and erode the moral compact between the state and those who serve. In a letter published on Armistice Day, the officers say the Bill “achieves nothing” and that “ongoing lawfare risks everything,” accusing ministers of blurring the line between “legitimate authority and illegitimate violence.”

The signatories¹ argue the Bill wrongly extends equivalent protections to terrorists and to those who enforced the law on the state’s behalf. They say that erases the distinction on which military legitimacy rests.

The generals contend that service personnel who acted lawfully “relied upon … the belief that if they acted within the law, under proper orders and in good faith, the nation would stand by them,” and that the current legislative direction tears up that understanding. They link this to recruitment, retention and morale problems, warning that “highly trained members of special forces are already leaving the service” due to mounting legal uncertainty.

ECHR creep incompatible with combat realities

Speaking to Times Radio this morning, General Sir Peter Wall said protections introduced by the 2023 Northern Ireland Legacy Act are being stripped out and replaced by renewed exposure of retired soldiers to litigation and investigation “with no new evidence,” often decades after incidents that were previously examined by inquests. He said this amounted to judging veterans “by a set of laws that didn’t exist” at the time.

Wall questioned whether rules of engagement can be “driven by and underpinned by human rights legislation” as the Ministry of Defence has suggested, arguing he “can’t envisage” how such an approach would work in operations or peacekeeping scenarios and still afford soldiers the necessary legal protections. He also criticised what he called a growing “moral equivalence” in the Bill, in which “everyone is seen as a victim … whether you were protecting civilians … or whether you’re a terrorist,” calling that position unacceptable.

Following questioning by Times Radio presenters, who noted that the Government had clarified that ex-IRA members cannot serve on the new legacy commission, Wall said the need for such clarification showed the policy had “not been very thoroughly thought through.” He described six alternative “protections” the Government has touted as “wafer-thin,” adding they are not in the Bill and only apply after a case is reopened.

Call for a new legal framework

The officers urge the Prime Minister and Attorney General to “restore legal clarity,” reaffirm the law of armed conflict, and ensure those acting under lawful authority are protected. They argue that an expansive interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights is being used against personnel who operated under Crown authority, and say allies are watching “uneasily” as adversaries exploit legal ambiguity.

¹ Signatories: Gen Sir Peter Wall; Gen Sir Mark Carleton-Smith; Gen Sir Patrick Sanders; Gen Sir Richard Barrons; Gen Sir Chris Deverell; Gen Sir Richard Shirreff; Gen Sir Tim Radford; Gen Sir Nick Parker; ACM Sir Andrew Pulford.