 |
|
CA
Lt-Gen Peter Leahy appeared before the Senate inquiry into
military justice on March 1. Photo by WO2 Al Green, 1JPAU(P)
|
Enduring
solutions via major reforms
CA tells
Senate military justice inquiry that problems will be fixed
Opening
statements at the Senate Inquiry into the military justice system:
Chief
of the Defence Force (MP3 format 5.61 Mb)
Chief of
Army (MP3 format, 5.53 Mb)
By
David Sibley
CA LT-GEN Peter Leahy has outlined the Army's major reforms to command,
training, discipline and administrative procedures at the military
justice inquiry.
In
his opening statement on March 1 to the inquiry, conducted by the
Senate's Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee,
Lt-Gen Leahy said the Army would put enduring solutions in place
to improve areas where the Army had performed poorly or had failed.
He
said in the past, the Army had been quite good at identifying problems
and making recommendations to fix them, which, in some areas, had
not been implemented.
"Part
of the reason for this has been the natural churn rate of commanding
officers, coupled with shortfalls in our procedures for the handover
and takeover of unit command," he said.
"This
is the reason. It is not an excuse."
In
response, he had issued a directive to ensure all recommendations
to fix problem areas would be implemented, with:
- A
specific procedure to ensure formal handover of responsibility
by commanding officers for actions on decisions by investigating
authorities.
- Responsibility
for implementing decisions from investigations would be assigned
to officers by name, not just by position.
Lt-Gen
Leahy said the Army had failed to see trends and patterns develop
- "we frankly have not learned enough as an institution from
the errors we have made.
"This
has been largely due to a lack of visibility and senior level management
oversight."
In
response, an Army-wide administrative inquiries database would be
established to monitor the progress of inquiries and the implementation
of decisions.
He
was concerned at the time it took to complete some inquiries, citing
the protracted investigations into allegations against an SASR soldier
in East Timor, but the military justice system had been followed
and seen through to a result.
"I
am on the public record as acknowledging that errors were made during
the investigation and subsequent prosecution of this soldier,"
he said.
"...
I have directed action to rectify defects which this case revealed
in Army procedures and practices."
Lt-Gen
Leahy rejected criticism of the military justice system, saying
claims that the system lacked transparency, was not subject to scrutiny
or review, and the Army could not be trusted to investigate itself
were an affront to the integrity of all officers and soldiers.
The
system of internal checks and balances, of review and counter-review,
of appeal and counter-appeal, had been made extraordinarily resilient
by the appointment of the Inspector-General of the ADF and the Director
of Military Prosecutions.
"Are
we perfect? No, we are not. Are we doing our best? I can assure
you we are," he said.
"But
we must be careful to balance justice - justice for those who have
been wronged and justice for individuals and the system-who have
been inaccurately or falsely maligned."
He
said along with all the other tasks inherent in operating a first-class
army was the constant evolution of the best military justice system
possible, including:
- Army's
Fair Go rules, introduced in 2000, and the Fair Go Hotline.
- Establishing
the Directorate of Personnel Operations in AHQ to provide strategic
direction and coordination for sensitive personnel issues such
as sudden death, serious crimes, and serious harassment allegations.
- Protocols
to deal with the death of Army personnel not on operations, including
prompt reporting, working with bereaved families and monitoring
actions.
- Military
police to triage reported offences to better direct resources
and referral of simple matters to units for investigation.
- Better
support for members under investigation and disciplinary proceedings
by appointing a case officer to look after them and their families'
welfare.
- Mandatory
training for commanders and RSMs to handle unit-level personnel
incidents, including administrative decision-making and disciplinary
law.
- Compulsory
annual equity training for all Army members through packages developed
by Training Command.
- A
specific plan for the safety and welfare of trainees, including
a code of conduct for the treatment of trainees.
Lt-Gen
Leahy said soldiers felt well-served by the military justice system
to which they had voluntarily subjected themselves, although there
would be some who felt it had failed them for a range of reasons.
"Military
justice in the Australian Army is not a zero-defect system - it
is unlikely ever to be, as long as it must deal with individuals
under largely difficult, demanding and often dangerous circumstances,"
he said.
"But
is the military justice system better now than it was 12 months
ago? I believe it is.
"Will
it be better in 12 months than it is now? I can confidently say
it will be. Will it ever be perfect? I daresay it will not, but
it will not be for want of self-critical examination and ongoing
reform, assisted by public inquiries such as this."
Military justice is effective
CDF
says substantial progress made in modernising system
By
David Sibley
SUBSTANTIAL progress has been made in modernising the Military Justice
System (MJS) as a result of previous inquiries, according to CDF
Gen Peter Cosgrove.
In
his opening statement to the Senate's Foreign Affairs, Defence and
Trade Reference committee' s inquiry into the effectiveness of the
military justice system, Gen Cosgrove said previous inquiries had
found that although the system was sound, improvements had been
recommended, including:
- The
appointment of the Inspector General of the ADF;
- the
Director of Military Prosecutions;
- and
the Registrar of Military Justice.
"We
continue to work hard to realise those and further enhancements
and we have made substantial progress in modernising the system,"
he said.
"...
This inquiry gives the ADF a further opportunity to review, consider
and correct any shortcomings, and will contribute to the continuous
improvement that we have made to the system arising from the five
inquiries into the MJS since 1998."
The
results of the 2001 Joint Standing Committee Rough Justice Inquiry
into allegations of brutality had not identified a culture of brutality
within the Army.
The
same year, the report by former Federal Court justice James Burchett
into military justice in the ADF found there was no evidence to
show the prevalence of assaults or unlawful behaviour amounted to
a culture, or a general practice.
Gen
Cosgrove said the misuse of drugs and alcohol, harassment and bullying
had been found to occur in only small areas within Defence, and
there was no evidence of this behaviour as a culture throughout
the organisation.
"Any
justice system is not perfect," he said.
"Occasionally
people get things wrong and some individuals make mistakes.
"The
MJS is no different. We must be careful to separate what may be
systemic shortcomings from those that result from human failings
within the system.
"Where
there are problems, we will address them and implement further reforms
as required.
"In
the ADF, we are all ordinary Australians doing a unique job. We
operate in a most unusual environment under most unusual pressures.
"We
put a great deal of effort into supporting our members to manage
a balance between dealing with the difficult military environment
and community norms of behaviour.
"We
conform in all regards to the spirit and the letter of the laws
that govern all Australians and we do so within a system tailored
to our environment."
Gen
Cosgrove said the ADF's success was also based on a range of command
and management systems of which the military justice system was
a critical part.
He
said the ADF had to accept it needed to better educate Federal Parliament
and the public about the MJS.
"I
also accept we need to continually improve our processes of communication
with those members of the public and those families who have been
directly affected by serious incidents, especially where a member
of the Service has died or been seriously injured," he said.
"We
need to do all of this in a way that will enhance, rather than inhibit,
our operational capability."
He
said the MJS was essential for operational effectiveness and had
proven itself as a robust system through the success of recent operations.
"I
have every confidence that on the whole the MJS is effective and
serves the interests of the nation, the Defence Force and its people.
"That
confidence is born of my long experience in the Service and direct
observation of the people who are responsible for, and subject to,
the MJS, during peace-time activities, routine training requirements
and on operations."
Gen
Cosgrove was followed at the Inquiry by the three Service Chiefs,
the Director General of the Defence Legal Service, the Inspector
General of the ADF and the Director of Military Prosecutions.
|
