Defence Minister Marles’ updates on Brereton Report

Statements by Minister for Defence Richard Marles…

FILE PHOTO: Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence Richard Marles. Photo by Jay Cronan, digitally altered by CONTACT.

The Albanese Government has finalised its commitment to close out the recommendations of the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Afghanistan Inquiry report.

In 2016, the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force commissioned Major General the Honourable Paul Brereton AM RFD to undertake an inquiry into events in Afghanistan, following claims of serious misconduct by members of the Special Operations Task Group in Afghanistan over the period 2005 to 2016.

The Brereton Report, as it is known, concluded there was credible information of unlawful conduct during this period; including the identification of 23 incidents involving Australian Special Forces personnel. These incidents related to the alleged unlawful killing of 39 people by, or involving Australian Defence Force (ADF) members as well as the alleged mistreatment of two individuals.

It also concluded there was credible information of a sub-culture of elitism and deviation from acceptable standards which was normalised over time and into which more junior personnel were inculcated.

The Brereton Report made a broad range of findings and 143 recommendations. The Albanese Government has taken the final action emanating from that Report, resulting in the closure of 139 of these recommendations. The four remaining recommendations remain on hold, pending ongoing investigations by the Office of the Special Investigator.

Compensation

The Brereton Report contained 15 recommendations to pay compensation to alleged victims and their families where there is credible information involving allegations of property damage, assault and unlawful killing, without awaiting the establishment of criminal liability.

In response, the Government directed Defence to design a compensation scheme under regulation. This regulation came into effect on 19 July 2024.

Command accountability

Two recommendations of the Brereton Report related to command accountability and the treatment of honours and awards given to commanders during the relevant period. The recommendations relate to a small number of individuals who held command positions during the period in which the inquiry found evidence of unlawful conduct.

I have written to those whose awards were referred for consideration by the then Chief of Defence Force to advise I have concluded my consideration of their individual awards.

My decisions on this matter are consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Brereton Report. In accordance with obligations owed to individuals involved, including under the Privacy Act, I am prohibited from disclosing the details and outcomes.

More than 26,000 people served in Afghanistan during this period. Whilst this decision may be difficult for a small number, it does not diminish the service and legacy of the majority of those who served or supported operations there.

The pathway forward

The Government acknowledges the service of all those who served in Afghanistan with professionalism and integrity, the 41 Australians who died on operations, those wounded in service and their families.

The stain on the reputation and the legacy of the Australian Defence Force and on the nation, at the hands a few, is not easily removed. Yet it is our response that tells the true story of us as a people. It is testament to us as a people that we hold ourselves to account for these appalling set of circumstances.

In announcing the substantive closure of the Report’s recommendations, the Government and Defence remain committed to continuing to reform the culture within the ADF. This task is ongoing and enduring.

The Government thanks Major General Brereton and the Afghanistan Inquiry Report team, independent Afghanistan Inquiry Implementation Oversight Panel, participants in the Afghanistan Inquiry Reform Program and all of those who gave evidence or support to the reforms.

 

 

To Parliament, 12 September 2024

Mr Speaker,

In 2016 the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force commissioned a judicial officer, Major General the Honourable Paul Brereton AM RFD, to undertake an inquiry into events in Afghanistan. This followed rumours of serious misconduct by members of the Special Operations Task Group in Afghanistan over the period 2005 to 2016.

Between 12 May 2016 and 29 October 2020 Major General Brereton and his team conducted 510 interviews in Australia and Afghanistan, encompassing approximately 2500 hours of testimony which in turn are recorded in over 60,000 pages of evidence. These interviews were undertaken on the basis that what was said could not be used in a court of law, which Major General Brereton believed was crucial in encouraging those involved to share what they knew.

The inquiry’s work was thorough, forensic and remarkable. What resulted was a 3255 page report which has come to be known as the Brereton Report.

At the outset, I want to place on record the Government’s thanks for the extraordinary work of Major General Brereton and his team. He has provided the nation with the opportunity to do all that we can to make right a terrible wrong. Australia owes him and his team a debt of gratitude.

The Brereton Report concluded there was credible information of unlawful conduct; the most disturbing of which was the identification of 23 incidents involving 25 Australian Special Forces personnel.

These incidents related to the alleged unlawful killing of 39 people by, or involving Australian Defence Force members as well as the alleged mistreatment of two individuals.

The Report also concluded there was credible information of a sub-culture of elitism and deviation from acceptable standards which was normalised over time and into which more junior personnel were inculcated.

These were findings of the most serious, disturbing and consequential nature. They warranted the most serious, considered and thorough response.

On the 6th of November 2020, the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) received the Brereton Report from the Inspector General Australian Defence Force, announcing the findings two weeks later.

The CDF acknowledged the allegations of grave misconduct by some members of the Special Operations Task Group on operations in Afghanistan and apologised to the people of Afghanistan and the people of Australia.

The Brereton Report made a broad range of findings and 143 recommendations.

Defence accepted all of the Brereton Report’s findings.

Since 2020 Defence has addressed the recommendations, and implemented a comprehensive plan at a systemic, organisational and cultural level. This has occurred across the tenure of both Labor and Coalition Governments. The implementation of the Brereton Report has essentially been bi-partisan. And I acknowledge the efforts of the former Coalition Government for its part in giving effect to the Brereton Report.

In July 2021, a dedicated team was established within Defence with a mandate to implement the recommendations of the Brereton Report, to examine the root causes of the conduct identified, and to develop and embed within Defence measures to ensure that reform was both effective and enduring. This team and its work were called the Afghanistan Inquiry Reform Program (AIRP).

The AIRP sought to address the past by taking appropriate action to deal with organisational, collective and individual responsibility for failure and wrongdoing.

It also sought to prevent recurrence by building the best possible Defence organisation for the future through comprehensively understanding and addressing the heart of these failures and wrongdoing. It sought to develop the systems, culture and accountability that will ideally prevent departures from required standards in the future, but – if departures do occur – to ensure that these are promptly detected and dealt with.

The work of the AIRP was reported publicly on the Defence Afghanistan Inquiry website on a quarterly basis.

Reforms delivered by the AIRP addressed the critical issues identified in the Brereton Report’s recommendations. These encompassed leadership development and command arrangements; ethics, character, and culture; the Law of Armed Conflict and the protection of civilians; health and wellbeing; reporting and investigations; and information, data and records management.

The work of the AIRP and all other aspects of Defence’s response to the Brereton Report were overseen by the members of the independent Afghanistan Inquiry Implementation Oversight Panel, which reported to me and my predecessors on a quarterly basis.

I take this opportunity to thank the members of the Oversight Panel for their diligence in ensuring the proper implementation of these vital reforms.

Following our election in 2022, the Albanese Labor Government committed to the full implementation of the recommendations of the Brereton Report. At that time, there were 42 recommendations yet to be completed.

In implementing the recommendations, we determined to undertake a thorough and robust process. We were unapologetic in taking the necessary time to ensure that each of the recommendations and each of the processes were fully completed.

When the Oversight Panel needed an additional 12 months to complete its work, the Government granted it. Without reservation, we adopted the work of the AIRP as our own and committed to seeing it through.

Two of the outstanding recommendations of the Brereton Report related to command accountability of commanders during the relevant period. The last step on closing out these two recommendations was me writing to relevant commanders about my decision in relation to medals awarded to them as part of their service during periods proximate to the incidents which are at the heart of the Brereton Report. I have now written these letters. My decisions on this matter are consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Brereton Report. In accordance with obligations owed to individuals involved, including under the Privacy Act, I am prohibited from disclosing the details and outcomes.

This is the final step in Government action emanating from the Brereton Report.

Accordingly, of the 143 recommendations in the Brereton Report, 139 of these recommendations are now closed.

To address the issues raised in the Brereton Report, an Office of the Special Investigator was established to prepare any prosecutions that arise as a result of the findings. The Office of the Special Investigator is independent and sits within the portfolio of the Attorney-General. Its work happens at arms-length from the Government.

The four remaining recommendations remain on hold, pending investigations by the Office of the Special Investigator.

Our Government recognised the utmost importance of the work of the AIRP and the Oversight Panel to the past, present and future of the Australian Defence Force. Delivering the recommendations to the fullest possible extent has been essential to restoring the full faith and confidence of the nation in the ADF.

The Oversight Panel has expressed confidence that Defence has now delivered the wide-ranging and complex reform plan to the level and standard required by the Government.

Accordingly, today I advise the House that the work of the Afghanistan Inquiry Reform Program has formally concluded and with this the Government formally closes its response to the Brereton Report.

I wish to thank everyone who gave evidence to Major General Brereton’s inquiry. In many cases this involved great moral courage. Bravery comes in different forms. In speaking out, there were acts of bravery which rank in the highest echelon. All that we know and all that has since been done to address the wrongs of the past so that we can truly honour the sacred service of our defence force personnel is built upon the evidence which was given: the brave individual decisions to speak the truth. These people, whose names are not heralded, have changed our country for the better. Today we honour them.

I also thank all those who contributed their time and expertise to the development and implementation of the AIRP.

To be clear, the work of the Office of the Special Investigator is ongoing. Any prosecutions which are pursued by the Office of the Special Investigator will take years to complete. Consistent with the approach of past governments, and with our Government’s commitment to respecting the Office of the Special Investigator and its work, I will not make further comment on these investigations.

Other work will also continue. In response to recommendations of the Brereton Report, Defence has developed a whole-of‑government response to compensation. The Government will establish the Afghanistan Inquiry Compensation Scheme in regulation, under which compensation claims may be managed by the Afghanistan Inquiry Compensation Advocate.

Most significantly, while the formal work of the reform program has concluded, the work of the taskforce continues and the work of transforming the culture of Defence is ongoing and enduring. It remains essential.

The allegations which are the subject of the Brereton Report are arguably the most serious allegations of Australian war crimes in our history. As the then CDF General Angus Campbell said:

“Such alleged behaviour: 

profoundly disrespected the trust placed in us by the Afghan people who had asked us to their country to help them;

it would have devastated the lives of Afghan families and communities, causing immeasurable pain and suffering; and

it would have put in jeopardy our mission and the safety of our Afghan and coalition partners.

…

These findings allege the most serious breaches of military conduct and professional values.

The unlawful killing of civilians and prisoners is never acceptable.”

This will always be a matter of national shame.

At the same time the Brereton Report, its recommendations, and the actions of successive governments in implementing these recommendations, are a demonstration to the Australian people and to the world, that Australia is a country which holds itself accountable. Any prosecutions of Australian War Crimes will happen inside Australia by Australian courts.

In the history of human conflict, it is worth noting that this accountability is very unusual. Major General Brereton has lead a process which has global significance.

And this accountability is profoundly important.

Service in our Defence Force has always been and always will be a deeply honourable calling. The nation owes a debt of gratitude to those who have worn and will wear our nation’s uniform. For the 103,000 Australians who have made the ultimate sacrifice in that service their names are rightly inscribed on the roll which is accorded our country’s greatest honour.

That we have held ourselves accountable in this moment allows Australia to continue to cherish this service: past and future.

More than 26,000 Australians served in the war in Afghanistan.

Bar the actions of a few, they undertook their service with professionalism, honour and integrity.

They should be proud of their contribution and we are proud of them.

We acknowledge the 41 Australians who died on operations in Afghanistan, and today, and every day, we hold their families in our hearts.

We acknowledge those wounded by their service over the course of Australia’s longest war.

And those who have felt it’s aftermath.

The Government also recognises the heavy impact of the Brereton Report on our service personnel, veterans and their families.

Today’s statement may raise issues for former serving ADF personnel and their families affected by the Brereton Report.

The Government has ensured they have access to support from the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defence and this help remains available.

Anyone who requires assistance should contact Open Arms on 1800 011 046.

The Brereton Report and its recommendations offered a defining opportunity for Defence and the nation to do right in the face of wrong.

While the journey continues, we have met this challenge.

Defence is a different organisation to the one that existed at the end of the War in Afghanistan: better positioned to prevent, detect and respond to unlawful, unethical and unacceptable behaviours in the future.

While today marks a significant milestone, the work of reforming the culture of Defence continues. And I want to assure the Australian people that it does so with the absolute commitment of Defence’s leadership and this Government.

 

 

 

Doorstop interview:

MARLES: Well, today we have announced in the House of Representatives that the Government has concluded its formal response to the Brereton Report. I want to start by thanking Major General Paul Brereton and his team for what has been a thorough, extensive, remarkable inquiry, which has resulted in an utterly essential report for our nation, and is the basis upon which the Government has been able to engage in fundamental reforms. I want to thank those working on the Afghanistan Inquiry Reform Program within Defence who have been charged with the responsibility of carrying out the recommendations of the report, and I want to thank the Independent Oversight Panel who has provided guidance to me and my predecessors during the period in which this program has been implemented. Most particularly, I really want to acknowledge those who have given evidence to Major General Brereton. Bravery comes in a range of forms, but those who have provided evidence have engaged in a moral courage of the highest decimal. They have in their act of courage in speaking the truth, helped make our country better and they have made a difference. In closing out the Brereton Report, I really want to emphasise that this is a moment in which our country has been able to hold ourselves accountable for our actions. From here as the Office of the Special Investigator does its work, any prosecution of war crimes will happen inside Australia by an Australian court. And in the history of human conflict, that level of accountability is unusual. Major General Brereton has led a process of global significance and in doing this he has allowed us to take accountability for the past, but to do so in a way which enables the whole country to have full confidence in the Australian Defence Force and for us all to cherish the sacred service of those who have worn our nation’s uniform in the past and will wear it in the future. 

 

JOURNALIST: Deputy Prime Minister, Jacqui Lambie has already responded. She says it’s deeply insensitive to do this in the same week as the Royal Commission, and she doesn’t think there are enough mental health beds to deal with the fallout of making this decision and how it will be treated in the Defence community. What do you say to her?

 

MARLES: We acknowledge that the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide was a really significant report. It’s a report which is deeply thoughtful. The recommendations will make a huge difference. But we do understand the impact on those who have provided evidence to that. It really is a separate issue to what has occurred in terms of the inquiry that was undertaken by Major General Brereton, and we do acknowledge that for a number of those people who have been involved, specifically in the periods of time that the Brereton Report covers, there will be issues there as well, and we, again, are providing all the appropriate supports. But it matters that both of these are done. Like, it really does matter that both of these are done and we’re committed to following them through.

 

JOURNALIST: Minister, we’re told that there’s a difference between the number of people who might have been advised to you by the CDF that should be stripped of metals, and the number who actually were – a difference of maybe four to five individuals. What were the circumstances or arguments that you accepted to allow these people to keep their medals?

 

MARLES: Well, look, on the question of command accountability, I’m not going to go into numbers other than to say it’s a small number of people that we are talking about. And because of that, to go into the specifics runs the risk of walking down a path of identifying those. 

 

JOURNALIST: Generally speaking?

 

MARLES: And, sure, and there are privacy issues in relation to this. And ultimately, at the end of the day, the decisions that I make are really, and the letters that I’ve written, are a matter between me and those people. But in answer to the question as to what’s guided me in general terms in the making of the decisions that I’ve made, the answer to that is the Brereton Report. I mean, Major General Brereton and his team undertook hundreds of interviews involving thousands of pages of testimony. It is a thoughtful, detailed, thorough report. It is Major General Brereton and his team who did these interviews, not any of us. And it’s on the basis of those interviews that he concluded the judgments that he did. And so I have followed those to the letter in terms of the decisions that I have made, and that is the basis on the decisions that I’ve made and the letters that I’ve subsequently written.

 

JOURNALIST: Quoting Brereton, he said that commanders might not have known of the commission of war crimes did not fully absolve them, and that they were accountable for what happens on their watch. So I again ask you, why did some people keep their medals, and some didn’t?

 

MARLES: Well, you’ve quoted one line from a very extensive report, and you really need to look at all of what Major General Brereton has said. It doesn’t do justice to the report to simply take one line out of context. Major General Brereton is detailed and thorough in terms of how he sees accountability across the entire chain of command. He makes the comment that you quoted in respect of some. But I really encourage those who are interested in this to read what’s out there in the public domain in full. But the point I make is simply this. I have done that and I’ve made sure that in the decisions I have made, I have followed Major General Brereton’s report to the letter. 

 

JOURNALIST: Do you want them to hand the medals back if you’ve written a letter to them?

 

MARLES: Well, I mean, the precise mechanics of this will be managed by Government House in terms of the physical medals. I doubt that’s an issue. I mean, what matters here is that the decision has been made. And I think really the point I’m seeking to make in relation to command accountability is that this really was the final step in terms of government action around the recommendations that have been made by the Brereton Report, and that step has now been concluded. 

 

JOURNALIST: Minister, how does stripping medals and setting up a compensation fund that will pay out to alleged victims, not infer guilt?

 

MARLES: Again, I encourage people to read the Brereton Report. I mean, the answer to your question really, really lies in that. And there are a couple of dimensions to what you’ve said, because really, medals and compensation schemes are two very different things. In relation to command accountability, this is not an allegation of wrongdoing on behalf of those who receive medals. Medals are awarded for conspicuous conduct. No one, no one, and Major General Brereton makes this really clear in his report, no one is asserting that those who are being spoken of in relation to command accountability are suggesting they knew what happened, were aware of it, or didn’t act. That’s not the issue. But the issue is that when you command a unit, you will receive often the benefits and the accolades of what that unit does, irrespective of whether you’ve personally been right there at the front line and commensurately you accept the responsibility of that unit in terms of what failings occur. And the judgement that Major General Brereton goes through is, had we known what had occurred, would the medals have been granted? Now, again, I give you an excerpt there, but I encourage you to read it because it’s detailed and it is thorough. And the fundamental point here is I have followed that to the letter. In terms of compensation, allegations have been made. And at this point, in terms of Major General Brereton’s report, the language is that there is credible evidence in respect of those allegations. And it is off the back of that, that the government and successive governments have acted and acted upon one of the recommendations, which was in respect of compensation, and we are fulfilling that recommendation. 

 

JOURNALIST: Veterans groups are outraged that former Defence Chief Angus Campbell hasn’t been caught up in this. Can you explain why he hasn’t had his medals removed?

 

MARLES: Again, I refer you to Major General Brereton’s report. He is the one who did the hundreds of interviews. He is the one, more than any of those who are out there commenting, who understands best exactly what happened, the proximity of various commanders to what happened. And on the basis of that, he has made very clear judgments about what should and should not happen. And I have followed those to the letter. Now, in respect of commanding officers of Joint Task Force 633, he is crystal clear on that issue. And again, I have followed Brereton’s report to the letter because he is the one, none of us, and not veterans groups, he is the one who did the hundreds – and his team – the hundreds of interviews here, has heard the thousands of pages of testimony and has reached a conclusion as a result. And I have no reason to doubt those conclusions.

 

JOURNALIST: But the buck stops with him – putting the Brereton Report aside, the buck stops with Angus Campbell. Why does he keep his DSC?

 

MARLES: Well, again, we’ve got to be really clear and forensic and careful. Details matter. The argument is in respect of General Campbell’s service at the time as a commanding officer of Joint Task Force 633. And in respect of that, Major General Brereton is utterly and completely clear. 

 

JOURNALIST: Can we go to a broader question about Afghanistan? Obviously, we have had the report, the veterans report today and, you know, diggers who have been with, you know, PTSD from that. The war crimes inquiry, which were the actions of a few that tainted the ADF. We’re seeing Afghanistan, the Taliban’s hold there becoming further and further entrenched, and now women with new morality laws silencing women in public. A lot of people will probably ask, was Afghanistan worth it? What’s the broader legacy of that war?

 

MARLES: That’s a huge question and forgive me for not answering the full breadth of it. There’s probably not the time in order to do that, but I want to answer a dimension of it. I think the legacy is this. 26,000 Australians fought in that war. It’s a large number. It’s the longest conflict in which Australians have participated. And what we learn throughout our history is that judgements are made by governments of the day about engaging in conflicts. But those judgements are not questioned by those who wear our uniform. In fact, part of the service that is offered by those who wear our uniform, part of the remarkable thing they do in putting that uniform on each and every day, is to, without question, go out and provide service to our nation in a way where they put their lives on the line. 

And indeed, we saw a number of Australians lose their lives in exactly that fashion. I think the legacy that I would want to acknowledge on this day is that service, the sacredness of that service, and that in holding to account all the actions that we have through the Brereton Report, we give the country an opportunity to understand that it was just a few who were engaged in these acts, that the vast bulk of those 26,000 who served in Afghanistan did so with professionalism, with honour, with bravery and with integrity. And for them, we thank them for their service, as we do those who have worn our uniform in the past and will wear it in the future. Thank you.

 

 

Radio interview, ABC Melbourne Drive

ALI MOORE, HOST: Well, we’ve been talking about whether the cost of the Land Forces expo down at South Wharf has been worth it and also what it’s done to the reputation of Melbourne. It was lauded as bringing tens of millions of dollars into the Victorian economy, the largest land defence conference in the Asia Pacific. It has, though, cost millions in extra police and also shutdowns of local businesses, as you were hearing earlier. At the same time today, Defence Minister Richard Marles has stripped distinguished service awards from a number of current and former defence personnel over alleged war crimes. This has been described as the final step of government action coming from the Brereton report, which concluded that there was credible information of unlawful conduct involving Australian Defence Force members. Richard Marles is the Minister for Defence and the Deputy Prime Minister. Richard Marles, welcome back to Drive.

 

RICHARD MARLES, DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER: How are you, Ali?

 

MOORE: I’m good, thank you. Can we start with the Land Forces expo, your reaction to what happened in particular yesterday? 

 

MARLES: Well, I feel that the conduct of those who are protesting is absolutely disgraceful and that obviously has cost a lot of money in terms of the police that have needed to be put on duty in order to deal with this. But, I mean, I think everyone in Australia understands that we’ve got a right to express our view peacefully, but police and those going about their lawful business also have a right to do so safely and that safety has absolutely not been respected by those who have been protesting. I mean, at the end of the day, I think what people need to understand is the Land Forces conference – this is the 6th iteration of it, its first time in Melbourne, but it’s been in Australia since 2014 – it’s a really important event in terms of the land capabilities and industrial capabilities that exist within Australia. It is supported by the Australian Defence Force, and what goes along with it is a Chief of Army Symposium where the Chief of Army has had 11 of his counterparts from different armies around the region. That conference itself is actually really important in terms of building understandings between defence forces in the region and makes its own contribution to the maintenance of peace. That’s actually what’s happening here inside the convention centre in Melbourne. And these demonstrations pay no respect to that. They pay no respect to the people who wear our nation’s uniform. They’ve effectively been undertaken in a way which has verged on disorder and violence and has cost an awful lot of public money. And I think it’s a disgrace.

 

MOORE: As you said, it’s not the first time it’s been held in Australia. And in fact, last time it was held, which was prior to the Gaza war, there were protests. So, we know what this sort of conference attracts. Was it the right place to hold it, though, given the sensitivities of the time? And albeit those sensitivities maybe did not exist when this was first organised at the beginning of last year. But do you hold something like this, at a time like this, in a place like this, where we’ve got businesses who are worried about losing tens of millions of dollars simply because they’re caught in the wrong place, and we’ve got a massive bill for extra police at a time when this state really can’t afford it?

 

MARLES: Well, we’re at a moment in Australia’s journey where we face as complex and in some ways as threatening a set of strategic circumstances as have existed since the end of the Second World War. It is absolutely essential that we are engaging with countries within our region, and that is what is going on at this symposium. It is utterly essential that we are making sure that our soldiers, sailors and aviators have the equipment that they need to do their job and to keep them safe. That is more needed now than ever. And again, that is what Land Forces is about. And Melbourne is at the centre of Australian industry. So, I think that’s why the Victorian Government would have felt this was exactly the right place to hold it. And I think defence industry plays a huge contribution, makes a huge contribution, not only to our economy, but to our national security. It fundamentally is about keeping Australians safe, and that includes Victorians and Melbournians. And I think Victorians and Melbournians understand that. That’s not what’s going on with these protestors–

 

MOORE: Will it bring $65 million into the economy as it was touted as being able to do?

 

MARLES: Well, I mean, defence industry is a very significant contribution to the economy. And you only need to look at the defence budget to understand the sums of money that are being spent in order to acquire cutting edge capabilities, which is what defence capabilities are, which are about keeping us safe. But none of this can be the fault of those who are going about their lawful business. None of this can be the fault of those who are about wearing our nation’s uniform to defend the country, or indeed working in companies which supply our defence forces with the equipment they need to do this. The blame lies in people who are not exercising their right to engage in peaceful protests, but are doing this in a way which engages in violence. And that’s what needs to be condemned. I mean, if where we get to in our logic is that we somehow take our eye off that and then blame people for doing the work which is about keeping Australians safe, the work that we actually acknowledge whenever we acknowledge the service of those who wear our nation’s uniform, we’re getting this all wrong. The protestors who have done what they have done have shown absolutely no regard for the people who make the incredible decision to engage in the service which comes with wearing our nation’s uniform. It’s obviously disrespectful to them, but it’s disrespectful to every Australian. It is not engaging in a peaceful right of protest. It is the opposite. And that’s where the condemnation lies.

 

MOORE: You’re listening to the Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles on 774 ABC Radio Melbourne Drive this afternoon. Richard Marles, today you have announced an historic decision, I think, for Defence. You’ve stripped distinguished service awards from a number of current and former Defence personnel over alleged war crimes. Why has that happened now and how many current and former personnel have been affected?

 

MARLES: Well, I’m not– we haven’t made public the precise number.

 

MOORE: Can I ask why not? I understand why you may not name them, but why not the quantum?

 

MARLES: Because it’s a small number. I’ll say that. And for those who are in the space, as soon as we start talking about the precise small number, it really does walk us down a path of identifying the individuals, which is just not appropriate to do. But perhaps it is relevant then to say to you that we are talking about a small number. And I want to emphasise that what we’re talking about here is people who were in the chain of command. This was an issue which was dealt with by Major General Brereton in his report, but who are not– there’s no sense that they were responsible for this or knew about it, but they were in the chain of command under which these events or these incidents occurred. And in the report there is a detailed discussion of the responsibilities that come with command and there was, amongst 143 recommendations, two recommendations which went to the command accountability for people in these circumstances and whether or not medals that were awarded at the time can rightfully stand in the context of what we now know occurred. It’s been a process which has taken some time, but we’re unapologetic for that because we wanted to do this in a way which was completely thorough. But in now writing these letters and making these decisions, it does close off the last of the recommendations that is really within the purview of government, of executive government. And so the significance as well today was to really say that by virtue of this step, we are now at a point of closing off successive governments’ responses to the Brereton Report. And that is a very significant milestone in this journey.

 

MOORE: So, those who have been stripped of their distinguished service awards, you just said then that they’re not responsible, but they are in the chain of command. Can I just play you a quick little bit of the Shadow Defence Minister, Andrew Hastie, who served in Afghanistan. This is him speaking today.

 

EXCERPT OF ANDREW HASTIE, SHADOW DEFENCE MINISTER: I believe that our troops were let down by a lack of moral courage that went up the chain of command all the way to Canberra, including in this House. I want to be clear: those who are alleged to have shed innocent blood are alone responsible for that. I do not say this to absolve or condemn anyone, but those in the chain of command who saw the post-mission slide decks with the kill counts and pictures of dead individuals had an obligation to ask questions.

 

MOORE: That’s Andrew Hastie speaking today. Minister, are we essentially here talking about the same thing? The point that he is saying that the chain of command had an obligation to ask more questions than they asked. They are the people who have been affected by today’s decision?

 

MARLES: We are talking about people who are in the chain of command. I mean, firstly, on this issue, I very much respect the role that has been played by the Shadow Minister in his time as having formerly served in the Australian Defence Force and indeed the SAS. I very much acknowledge that service and his first-hand experience in relation to this. He makes it clear in those comments that he has a different view to that of Major General Brereton. But where there is common ground is that we’re talking about people who are in the chain of command. There’s no sense that there’s no question about whether or not they knew of what had occurred. There is no suggestion of that or a suggestion that they have any culpability in that regard. But there is a long discussion, as there should be, about the nature of command, about the collective responsibility that comes with command, about the way in which commanders, in some instances, receive the accolades of events that occur within the command, which may not be them directly, but commensurately. They take responsibility for what happens under their command as well. Now, this is– I hasten to make this point, Major General Paul Barton, who in his civilian life has been a judge and is now the head of the National Anti-Corruption Commission has approached this in a deeply judicial way. He and his team undertook hundreds of interviews in Australia and Afghanistan, have taken thousands of pages of testimony, and on the back of that have formed judgments which are very detailed and very considered and I think are deeply thoughtful. In making the decision that I’ve made, I’ve really followed the work of Major General Brereton to the letter. I haven’t seen any reason to depart from the fine judgments that he’s making about where accountability, as he would describe it, moral accountability, lies within the chain of command. And so that is why I’ve ultimately made the decisions that I’ve made. And it is a reflection of the esteem in which we hold the work of Major General Brereton.

 

MOORE: Just a final question. Will we get, I’m reading a text here, will we get charges? Will we get trials?

 

MARLES: Yeah, look, that’s a very good question, and we pointed this out in today’s statement as well. So, what happens from here is an office which has been created called the Office of the Special Investigator – which is a bit like, in this context, say, a department of public prosecutions or director of public prosecutions, an office of that kind which is at arm’s length from government, which sits within the portfolio of the Attorney-General – now has in front of it a whole lot of information that comes from the Brereton Report. They will now do their work. And it is completely possible that prosecutions emanate from them. The OSI has the responsibility of taking any prosecutions forward, and if they do, obviously they will then end up in the courts. And so in that sense, the Office of the Special Investigator’s work will continue going forward and we may well see cases play out in our courts over the course of the next few years. So, all of that will continue, but that will very much continue now at arm’s length from government, as would happen in any criminal justice case in Australia. The work though of executive government, of the government of the day, the Department of Defence, the ADF, really, that is what has now been closed off by the final steps that I’ve taken and the statement that I made at the Parliament today.

 

MOORE: Richard Marles, we appreciate your time. Thank you very much for joining us.

 

MARLES: Thanks, Ali.

 

 

All serving and ex-serving ADF personnel and their families should know that if they need support they can contact Open Arms for free, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on 1800 011 046 or visit www.openarms.gov.au

.

.


.


.