Will Veterans Take Legal Action Against MoD Over LGBT Compensation?

A pair of veterans, Mark Shephard and Steven Stewart, are seeking legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) after being denied access to reparations for their unfair dismissal from the armed forces due to their sexual orientation. The veterans argue that the compensation scheme discriminates against lower-ranking individuals, excluding them from financial reparations despite having suffered similar injustices as their commissioned officer counterparts.

Last updated: 19 October 2023 (BST)

What’s happening now

Mark Shephard, 49, and Steven Stewart, 55, have issued a pre-action letter to the MoD, urging a judicial review of the LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme. They contend that the scheme's criteria unjustly favour commissioned officers while neglecting lower-ranking veterans who were equally pressured to leave the armed forces. This legal challenge comes shortly after King Charles III's dedication of the UK's first memorial for those affected by the "gay ban," highlighting the ongoing struggles of LGBT+ veterans in their quest for recognition and reparations.

Key takeaways

Veterans Mark Shephard and Steven Stewart challenge the MoD for denying them reparations.
The LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme reportedly discriminates against non-commissioned personnel.
The MoD previously expressed regret for past treatment of LGBT+ service members.

Timeline: how we got here

The ban on LGBT+ personnel serving in the UK armed forces was officially lifted in 2000, but its legacy continues to affect veterans today. Here are some key dates:

1967: The Sexual Offences Act decriminalises homosexual acts in private in England and Wales, yet the military maintained a ban on LGBT+ personnel.
2000: The ban is lifted, allowing LGBT+ individuals to serve openly in the armed forces.
2022: The MoD launches the LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme, offering payments to affected veterans.
October 2023: Shephard and Stewart threaten legal action against the MoD over claims of discrimination in the reparations scheme.

What’s new vs what’s known

New today/this week

The veterans' legal action has brought renewed attention to the reparations scheme's criteria, which they claim unfairly excludes non-commissioned veterans despite similar experiences of discrimination and harassment. The MoD's potential embarrassment is compounded by its efforts to publicly acknowledge past injustices.

What was already established

Prior to this legal challenge, the MoD had expressed regret for the treatment of LGBT+ service members and initiated a reparations scheme aimed at compensating those affected by the ban. However, the scheme has faced criticism for its limited criteria, which has left many veterans, particularly those of lower ranks, without access to funds.

Impact for the UK

Consumers and households

The ongoing legal battle may not directly affect consumers and households; however, it underscores the broader issue of how the government addresses historical injustices. Financial reparations could significantly improve the lives of veterans who have suffered due to discriminatory practices.

Businesses and jobs

For businesses, particularly those in the defence and veteran support sectors, the outcome of this legal challenge may influence future hiring practices and policies regarding inclusivity. Companies may need to reassess their commitments to equality within the workforce, particularly for veterans.

Policy and regulation

The legal action could prompt a review of the financial recognition scheme and influence future government policy regarding reparations for historically marginalised groups. It may lead to wider consultations about the treatment of LGBT+ veterans and the adequacy of existing support measures.

Numbers that matter

£70,000: The maximum compensation available under the reparations scheme for those dismissed due to the ban.
£50,000: The standard payment for veterans who were dismissed or felt forced to resign under the ban.
40: Estimated number of veterans who have been rejected for payments under the current scheme.

Definitions and jargon buster

LGBT+: An acronym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and other sexual orientations and gender identities.
Constructive dismissal: A legal term referring to situations where an employee resigns due to their employer creating a hostile work environment.
Commissioned officer: A member of the armed forces who has a position of authority, usually following a formal commissioning process.

How to think about the next steps

Near term (0–4 weeks)

As the legal challenge unfolds, stakeholders will be closely monitoring the MoD's response and any potential changes to the reparations scheme. The outcome could influence public perception of the government's commitment to addressing historical injustices.

Medium term (1–6 months)

Further developments in the legal proceedings may lead to a reevaluation of the criteria for the reparations scheme. This could result in expanded eligibility for financial compensation for non-commissioned veterans.

Signals to watch

Updates from the MoD regarding changes to the reparations scheme.
Legal rulings related to the veterans' case.
Public statements from LGBT+ advocacy groups and veteran support organisations.

Practical guidance

Do

Stay informed about the developments regarding the legal actions taken by veterans.
Support advocacy groups working towards equality and justice for LGBT+ veterans.

Don’t

Dismiss the importance of reparations for those affected by discriminatory policies.
Assume that the current criteria of the reparations scheme are set in stone; changes may be forthcoming.

Checklist

Understand the eligibility criteria for the LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme.
Follow updates from the MoD regarding the legal challenge.
Engage with community discussions on the impact of past military policies on LGBT+ veterans.

Risks, caveats, and uncertainties

There is no guarantee that the legal challenge will result in changes to the reparations scheme. Additionally, the outcomes could vary based on the interpretation of the law and the specifics of each veteran's case. The MoD has previously expressed its commitment to addressing historical injustices, but the effectiveness of these measures remains to be seen.

Bottom line

The ongoing legal action taken by veterans against the MoD highlights the complexities surrounding reparations for historical injustices faced by LGBT+ personnel. As the situation develops, it raises critical questions about fairness, equality, and the commitment of the government to acknowledge and rectify past wrongs.

FAQs

What is the LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme?

The LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme is a compensation initiative aimed at providing reparations to veterans who lost their careers due to the military's ban on LGBT+ personnel, which lasted until 2000.

Who is eligible for compensation under this scheme?

Eligibility primarily includes commissioned officers dismissed or pressured to resign due to their sexual orientation, while non-commissioned veterans face exclusion despite similar experiences.

What are the potential outcomes of the legal action?

The legal action could prompt a judicial review of the compensation criteria, potentially leading to expanded access for non-commissioned veterans who were similarly impacted by the ban.