BBK Manifesto 2026: Let civilian police investigate Armed Forces sexual offences
Serious sexual offences committed by members of the Armed Forces can still be prosecuted through the military justice system rather than the civilian courts, despite successive reviews urging change.
Bolt Burdon Kemp has long supported calls to remove sexual offences from military jurisdiction and we continue to lobby for change in this year’s Manifesto for Injured People to give survivors a clear and independent route to justice.
How the current system falls short
Concerns about the Service Justice System are not new. Independent reviews, including the Lyons Review, the Wigston Review and the Atherton Report, have all questioned whether the military justice system is the right forum for investigating and prosecuting serious sexual offences. Survivors have consistently reported low confidence in both the Service complaints process and the Service Justice System itself.
In 2020, the independent Lyons Review recommended that murder, manslaughter and rape cases committed in the UK by members of the Armed Forces should ordinarily be dealt with by the civilian courts rather than the Court Martial. When Parliament considered the Armed Forces Act 2021, the Government decided not to implement that recommendation.
The Lyons Review also found that conviction rates for rape at Court Martial appeared significantly lower than those in the civilian criminal justice system. While the Ministry of Defence has since argued that direct comparisons between the two systems should be treated with caution, the wider concerns identified by Lyons, Wigston and Atherton remain. Their recommendations were not based solely on conviction rates, but also on issues of confidence, independence and whether the military justice system is the most appropriate forum for dealing with these offences.
Since then, the Government has introduced some reforms intended to improve the experience of survivors within the Service Justice System. These include an Independent Legal Advocacy (ILA) scheme providing free legal advice to survivors of sexual offences, reforms through the Armed Forces Act introducing new protective orders and strengthened powers for Service Police, and additional investment in specialist victim support services across defence.
The Government has also emphasised that, when deciding whether a case should proceed through the civilian or Service Justice System, independent prosecutors take account of the survivor’s preference alongside the statutory jurisdiction protocols. However, a survivor’s views are only one factor in that decision and do not determine the outcome. Serious sexual offences can therefore still be investigated and prosecuted within the Service Justice System even where a survivor would prefer their case to be dealt with by the civilian criminal justice system.
These reforms acknowledge the current system requires improvement and may help strengthen support for survivors. However, they do not tackle the fundamental issues identified by successive independent reviews. The system of concurrent jurisdiction remains in place, meaning serious sexual offences can still be dealt with through the Service Justice System rather than automatically being investigated by civilian police and prosecuted through the civilian criminal justice system.
The human impact
Behind every statistic is a person whose life has been changed by sexual abuse.
Service personnel already face unique pressures. When they experience sexual assault, rape or other forms of sexual abuse, they should have complete confidence that their case will be investigated independently and fairly. Instead, many survivors describe feeling unable to report offences because they fear the impact on their careers, worry about reprisals within the chain of command or simply lack confidence in the system responsible for investigating their case.
Research published by the Centre for Military Justice has also highlighted concerns that allegations of sexual violence may, in some circumstances, be downgraded to less serious disciplinary matters so they can be dealt with through the chain of command rather than investigated as criminal offences. Whether or not this occurs in every case, the existence of these concerns further undermines confidence among those considering whether to come forward.
When confidence in the justice system is lost, the consequences extend beyond the individual survivor. It discourages others from coming forward, reinforces a culture of silence and risks allowing perpetrators to remain in positions of authority.
For offences as serious as rape and sexual assault, there should be one clear and consistent approach. Survivors should not face uncertainty over which justice system will deal with their case, nor should access to the civilian criminal justice system depend on a case-by-case jurisdictional decision. Serious sexual offences committed in the UK by members of the Armed Forces should be investigated by civilian police and prosecuted through the civilian criminal justice system.
Why further reform is needed
The Government’s recent reforms focus on improving how the Service Justice System operates. They do not address whether the military justice system should continue to investigate and prosecute serious sexual offences in the first place.
A recent leaked Ministry of Defence review has only reinforced these concerns. The review warned the Defence Serious Crime Command was at “significant risk” of being graded inadequate if assessed against civilian policing standards, with concerns raised about delays and inconsistencies in investigations into serious offences including rape and sexual assault.
These findings add further weight to the case for serious sexual offences to be investigated by civilian police, who have the specialist expertise, resources and independence required.
Civilian police investigate sexual offences every day. The Crown Prosecution Service has specialist prosecutors with extensive experience of these complex cases, while crown court judges regularly oversee trials involving serious sexual offences. The civilian criminal justice system is also institutionally independent of the Armed Forces, helping to strengthen confidence that allegations will be investigated and prosecuted impartially.
Removing serious sexual offences from military jurisdiction would provide greater consistency, strengthen confidence in the justice system and implement the principal recommendation of the independent Lyons Review.
Learning from elsewhere
The UK would not be acting alone by making this change. Canada has already legislated to transfer jurisdiction for many Criminal Code sexual offences committed in Canada from the military justice system to the civilian courts.
This reflects growing recognition that serious sexual offences are better dealt with by civilian investigators, prosecutors and courts. The UK should be willing to learn from comparable reforms.
Our call for change
The Government has recognised some of the shortcomings within the Service Justice System and has introduced reforms to improve support for survivors. These are welcome steps, but they leave the existing system of concurrent jurisdiction intact.
BBK’s Manifesto for Injured People is clear: serious sexual offences committed in the UK by members of the Armed Forces should be investigated by civilian police and prosecuted through the civilian criminal justice system.
Those who serve our country deserve the same independent justice system as every other survivor.
This blog is part of our 2026/27 Manifesto for Injured People. At Bolt Burdon Kemp, we support injured people not only by winning their cases but by driving positive change. Guided by our clients’ experiences and partnerships with charities across the UK, we are raising awareness of the changes needed to better support injured people. We will continue working with politicians from all parties to ensure injured people’s needs are not overlooked in Westminster or beyond. You can read our full manifesto here.
