As an ex soldier I cannot understand how any government can allow a soldier to be prosecuted fifty years after the alleged event took place.
Any government that sends a military unit into any area whether in a conflict situation or for any other reason, must be aware that sending armed men or women that have been trained to kill into that area, must bring a risk that people will get either killed or injured. If their orders are to load their weapons with live ammunition the risk becomes even greater. Therefore my contention is that the primary cause of anyone getting killed or injured in these circumstances, rests with the government that sends the troops and not the individual soldiers who are only doing what they are ordered to do by their superior officers. Obviously if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that any personnel have opened fire without explicit orders to do so then there may be a case to answer, however if that should prove to be the case, I believe that the previous selection and training for duty should be thoroughly examined, to ascertain whether the individual in question was even suitable to be in the armed forces in the first place, and it must be the responsibility of government to provide proper screening and training in order to eliminate the possibility of crimes such as the one in question being committed.
The above refers to the case of a paratrooper who is alleged to have caused the death of a civilian in Northern Ireland 50 years ago.