Will Sir Christopher object?

The Armed Forces (Derogation from European Convention on Human Rights) comes up for second reading tomorrow. Sir Christopher Chope has been in the habit of blocking private members' bills on the grounds that they do not receive sufficient scrutiny at second reading stage, scheduled as they are for Fridays when most MPs have started an early weekend. To be sure, some loosely-worded legislation - like the  Postal Voting Bill, which has been scheduled and deferred already since its introduction last year - has been punted into the long grass, but Sir Christopher and his little group have it seems singled out much worthy legislation, especially in the field of civil and  women's rights.

It will be interesting to see if he shouts "object!" tomorrow. Leo Doherty's Bill would appear to fall within the category of "well-meaning but flabby legislation" which Sir Christopher and his cohorts decry. It would, without any proviso, "require Her Majesty’s Government to derogate from the European Convention on Human Rights in its application to the conduct of members of the armed forces participating in combat operations overseas". If passed into law, it would send out the message to the world that our servicemen and women could commit acts of barbarism as bad as those of the terror groups such as al-Qa'ida with impunity.

Now I accept the arguments that at least one disreputable law firm, with the flawed testimony of supposed victims, has abused the system, and that cases have been pursued decades late when alleged perpetrators are well into old age. But there are more nuanced remedies without going to the extreme of placing all our military above the law.