by the

Minister for Defence

Stephen Smith MP

on

The Defence Abuse Response Taskforce

Tabled in conjunction with a Ministerial Statement

on

20 June 2013

Introduction

The Government is committed to providing regular reports and updates on its response to allegations of sexual or other forms of abuse in Defence, including to the Parliament.

In April 2011, in the aftermath of the so-called ‘ADFA Skype incident’, I announced a range of Reviews into aspects of the culture within both the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) and the Australian Defence Force (ADF) to address ongoing concern in relation to failure to meet appropriate standards of conduct.

The cultural Reviews included the Use of Alcohol in the ADF, Personal Conduct of ADF Personnel, the Use of Social Media in Defence, Employment Pathways for Australian Public Service Women in Defence and the Management of Incidents and Complaints in Defence.

The Reviews assessed the good work that had been done to date in these areas and examined what further improvements could be made.

In addition to the Reviews into aspects of Defence culture, I also announced at that time two significant Reviews into the Treatment of Women at ADFA and in the ADF generally, to be conducted by the Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Ms Elizabeth Broderick, on behalf of the Australian Human Rights Commission, and the DLA Piper Review into Allegations of Sexual and Other Abuse in Defence.

On 11 April 2011, I also announced that the Chief of the Defence Force would bring forward for implementation by the Government the opening up of all roles in the ADF to women on the basis that determination for suitability for roles in the ADF is to be based on their ability to perform in the role, not gender.

In September 2011 the Government announced it had formally agreed to the removal of gender restrictions from ADF combat roles.

Defence’s comprehensive response to the cultural Reviews, the March 2012 Pathway to Change document, outlines how the recommendations of the various cultural Reviews will be implemented consistent with the wider Defence reform programme.

Pathway to Change sets out the requirement that Defence personnel demonstrate exemplary behaviour commensurate with the nation’s expectations, in and out of uniform, on and off duty, and how the Defence leadership will require these standards are met.

It states that Australia rightly expects that Defence will deliver to consistently high standards, including in everyday personal behaviour and in how personnel treat their colleagues.

This requirement was again underlined by the formal statement by the Defence leadership in October 2012 in response to the Broderick Review into the Treatment of Women in the ADF, which stated that every sexual offender and harasser will be held to account together with leaders who fail to appropriately address such behaviour.

As the Defence leadership stated on that occasion, when the Government and Defence adopted all of the recommendations of the Broderick Reviews, these standards are not open to negotiation.

The failure to meet the standards required of Pathway to Change and the Broderick Reviews was sadly demonstrated by the appalling revelations last week by the Chief of Army, Lieutenant General David Morrison, in relation to an ongoing investigation by the Australian Defence Force Investigative Service (ADFIS), in cooperation with the NSW Police, into the actions of a group of officers and non commissioned officers of the Australian Army.

The matters under investigation are serious and centre on the production and distribution of highly inappropriate material demeaning women across both the Defence computer systems and the public internet.

Three already suspended Army members are the subject of an ongoing investigation by New South Wales Police.

Army has initiated action to consider the suspension of another five members who are the subject of a parallel ADFIS investigation into a number of alleged Service offences.

Pending the outcome of the ongoing ADFIS investigation, the Army may consider further suspension decisions against nine others if the circumstances warrant.

ADFIS is also investigating a further 90 individuals who have been identified as peripheral to the group’s email exchanges.

The Government strongly supports the actions taken by the Chief of Army.

Lieutenant General Morrison has unambiguously reinforced his expectations of appropriate behaviour and demonstrated his resolve to act decisively in response to such despicable incidents.

Incidents such as these do significant reputational damage to the good work of the vast majority of the Australian Defence Force and are symptomatic of a systemic culture problem within Defence.

For two reasons this is a different case of inappropriate behaviour to that of the ‘ADFA Skype incident’.

First, this situation does not involve young men with weeks in the Australian Defence Force. It involves commissioned and non-commissioned officers who have been in the Army for years.

Second, the response on this occasion has been qualitatively different and significantly better than the response in the ‘ADFA Skype incident’.

The response to the ‘ADFA Skype incident’ was wanting and led directly to the Reviews referred to above, as well as the DLA Piper Review into Allegations of Sexual and Other Abuse in Defence.

In contrast to the response to the ‘ADFA Skype incident’, the Government strongly supports the robust response that demonstrates in the post-ADFA Skype environment the zero tolerance of Defence leadership for failure to meet appropriate standards.

General Morrison has unambiguously demonstrated the standard set by the Chief of the Defence Force, the Secretary of the Department of Defence, the Vice Chief of the Defence Force and the Service Chiefs for the Defence leadership’s zero tolerance response to inappropriate conduct.

General Morrison has set the benchmark for future zero tolerance responses to inappropriate conduct.

The Defence leadership is absolutely committed to pursuing the reforms necessary to ensure zero tolerance of inappropriate conduct.

Full implementation of the range of cultural reforms are essential to preventing future such occurrences and ensuring a zero tolerance response is adopted if they do occur.

To ensure that ongoing implementation of the reforms receives the necessary oversight, I have committed to providing an annual report to the Parliament on Defence’s implementation of the cultural reform program.

This is the first of these such annual reports.

On 26 November 2012 I announced the Government’s response to the Report of the DLA Piper Review into Allegations of Sexual or Other Abuse in Defence and on 14 March 2013 I presented to the House the First Interim Report of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce.

Today I provide an update to the Parliament on the Government’s response to the DLA Piper Review and the work of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce, chaired by the Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD,QC.

As well I will Table the Taskforce’s Second Interim Report.

Defence Abuse Response Taskforce

The DLA Piper Review into allegations of sexual or other forms of abuse in Defence received allegations from over 1,000 people.

The DLA Piper Review identified a range of allegations from 775 people which fell within the Review’s Terms of Reference, the overwhelming majority of which were said to be plausible allegations of abuse.

These involve allegations across every decade from the 1950s. The earliest date of alleged abuse is 1951.

The individual allegations, findings, issues and recommendations included in the Report are serious and concerning. They involve complex and sensitive matters which required very careful consideration.

The Government’s response to the Review has been guided by the Recommendations in the Review and will ensure that people who have alleged past abuse in Defence receive a response which is tailored to their individual circumstances and the nature of their experiences.

The Response includes:

• An historic general Apology to members of the Australian Defence Force or Defence employees who have suffered sexual or other forms of abuse in the course of their employment delivered by me in the Parliament on 26 November 2012, and subsequently by the Chief of the Defence Force, General David Hurley.

• The establishment of the independent Taskforce to assess the individual complaints and wider systemic issues headed by the Hon Len Roberts Smith QC; and

• Access to a capped reparation scheme.

Independent Taskforce

The Taskforce is comprised of a Leadership Group appointed by the Attorney-General and me and staff who have been engaged by the Taskforce since its establishment.

The Leadership Group Chair, the Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC is assisted in his role by three other Leadership Group members, Deputy Chair Mr Robert Cornall AO, Member Consultant Ms Susan Halliday, and Ex-Officio Member Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Rudi Lammers APM.

Under its Terms of Reference, the Taskforce is to:

• assess the findings of the DLA Piper Review and the material gathered by that Review, and any additional material available to the Taskforce concerning complaints of sexual and other forms of abuse by Defence personnel alleged to have occurred prior to 11 April 2011,the date of the announcement of the DLA Piper Review;

• include in this assessment the 24 Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) cases noted by DLA Piper and the cases of abuse identified by reports into physical violence and bullying at HMAS Leeuwin, and whether the alleged victims, perpetrators and witnesses in relation to these cases remain in Defence;

• determine, in close consultation with those who have made complaints, appropriate actions in response to those complaints;

• also, as appropriate, gather additional information relevant to consideration of the handling of particular allegations eg relevant records held by Defence;

• take account of the rights and interests of alleged victims, accused persons and other parties;

• liaise with the Minister for Defence, Chief of the Defence Force and the Secretary of the Department of Defence on any implications of its work for Defence’s ‘Pathway to Change’ and other responses to the series of reviews into Defence culture and practices in particular the work done by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner into the ADF and ADFA;

• report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence every 3 months on its progress and issues arising, including whether the funding it has been provided is adequate so as to enable the Attorney General and Minister for Defence to report to Parliament as appropriate;

• report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence by October 2013 on whether, and in what form, the Taskforce should continue in effect beyond the extended 18 month period and the funding that would be required so as to enable the Attorney General and Minister for Defence to report to Parliament as appropriate; and

• to advise whether a Royal Commission would be merited into any categories of allegation raised with the DLA Piper review or the Taskforce, in particular the 24 ADFA cases.

The Taskforce has responsibility for liaising with those who have made allegations of abuse to determine an appropriate response in individual allegations, which can include:

• restorative engagement where a complainant and a senior Defence representative are brought together in a facilitated process;

• referral to counselling (with the Taskforce being funded to provide counselling services beyond those generally available to Defence personnel or veterans) and health and other existing services;

• reparation, to a maximum of $50,000;

• referral of appropriate matters to police for formal criminal investigation and assessment for prosecution; and

• referral of appropriate matters for disposition by the military justice system or other Defence process (for example, considered under the Public Service Act).

All communications made to the DLA Piper Review, including those that were assessed by DLA Piper as being outside the scope of that Review or were referred to an external body, are intended to be reassessed by the Taskforce if consent is given by the individual who contacted DLA Piper for that reassessment.

The Taskforce is also assessing new allegations and complaints received by it since its establishment where those allegations refer to abuse that is alleged to have occurred prior to 11 April 2011 and received by the Taskforce by 31 May 2013.

In March when I tabled the First Interim Report by the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce, the Taskforce was coming to the end of its Establishment Phase.

Taskforce Second Interim Report

The Second Interim Report outlines the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce’s transition into its Operational Phase. It provides important information in relation to the work of the Taskforce.

As the Report outlines, the Taskforce is continuing to gather material and assess both information provided to DLA Piper during its Review and information relating to new complaints registered with the Taskforce since its establishment in November 2012.

As at 31 May 2013, there were 2,410 complaints which will be assessed by the Taskforce.

Of these, 1535 are new complaints received by the Taskforce between 26 November 2012 and by 31 May 2013 and 875 are complaints which came from DLA Piper that the Taskforce has consent from the complainant to reassess.

Approximately 331 complaints have been identified as duplicates or multiple lodgements by the same person. 510 have not yet provided consent for information to be passed to the Taskforce.

These include 173 regarded by DLA Piper as plausible allegations. The Taskforce has received 602 of the plausible allegations made to DLA Piper.

I have asked the Taskforce to follow up with DLA Piper to ensure that individuals who have not yet given consent are given every opportunity for their complaints to be assessed by the Taskforce. If they provide such subsequent consent, their allegations will be assessed by the Taskforce.

By 6 June 2013, the Taskforce had contacted approximately 1380 complainants to answer enquiries, assist complainants complete the Taskforce’s forms and provide supporting information and discuss the options available to complainants and ascertaining which outcomes they wish to pursue.

More than 240 complaints were at various points of the assessment process on 6 June 2013 and eight complaints had been provided to the Reparation Payments Assessor for consideration.

The Taskforce will endeavour to provide resolution in consultation with the complainant, taking into account his or her individual circumstances and wishes.

The Taskforce will only work towards those outcomes the complainant indicates he or she wants.

During the period covered by this Report, the Taskforce has been:

• contacting consenting DLA Piper complainants to advise them their information is now with the Taskforce and requesting they complete a Statutory Declaration to confirm or amend their original personal accounts;

• sending out Personal Account Forms for completion by new complainants who contacted the Hotline or the Taskforce directly;

• liaising with complainants, Defence and other agencies to obtain further information in relation to particular complaints;

• processing, scanning and inputting data and information into the Taskforce’s Case Management System;

• answering complainants’ queries and informing them about what to expect when dealing with the Taskforce and how their matter will be handled and processed through to resolution; and

• assessing complaints to determine if they are within the scope of the Terms of Reference and the allegations are plausible.

About 1,380 complainants have been contacted by the Complainant Support Group which is answering their enquiries, assisting them to complete the Taskforce’s forms and provide supporting information and consulting complainants about the options open to them and the available resolutions they wish to pursue.

Other key achievements by the Taskforce since the first report include:

• scanning and collating over 20,000 documents received from DLA Piper and other sources;

• continuing the creation of case files and input of data into the Case Management System which will, when completed, cover all of the information about complaints received by the Taskforce. Approximately 1570 complaints including over 1920 cases have been recorded in the Case Management System;

• commencing discussions with the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse to agree on an information sharing protocol;

• developing the Counselling Program and in the process of procuring the required counselling services; and

• developing the Restorative Engagement Program and in the process of procuring the required restorative engagement services and working with Defence to facilitate the participation of senior Defence personnel;

• providing training from psychologists to all relevant staff to ensure they deal with complainants in an appropriate manner; and

• providing training on freedom of information, privacy, fraud control, bullying and sexual harassment and other key areas of the Taskforce’s operations.

Reparation Scheme

On 14 March the Government announced that it had approved the operation of the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme.

The purpose of the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme is to recognise that abuse in Defence is unacceptable and wrong.

Individuals who suffered sexual or other forms of abuse in Defence should be afforded some form of financial reparation, as part of a broader acknowledgement that such abuse should never have occurred.

Recognition will be made in the form of a reparation payment to persons who have made plausible allegations of being subjected to sexual or other forms of abuse in Defence.

The Scheme also seeks to recognise individuals who reported abuse and whose cases were then mishandled by Defence management.

Reparation payments are not intended as compensation per se. They are a way of enabling people to move forward.

Payments to individuals will be capped at $50,000, with the amount provided to each complainant determined on a case by case basis taking into account the individual circumstances of the case.

On 30 May 2013 the Attorney-General and I announced that Ms Robyn Kruk AM would be the independent Reparation Payments Assessor.

The making of a Reparation Payment to a person under the Scheme is not intended to affect the statutory, common law or other legal rights of the person. However, a Court or Tribunal may, if it thinks fit, take the making of a Reparation Payment into account in assessing the amount of any damages or compensation otherwise payable to a person under the common law or a Commonwealth, State or Territory Statute.

“ADFA 24” and HMAS Leeuwin

The DLA Piper Review recommended that consideration be given to establishing a Royal Commission to inquire into particular matters, including whether any of the persons who were identified in 1998 as having been suspected of committing rape at ADFA are still in the ADF or whether any persons who allegedly witnessed and did not intervene to prevent these rapes are still in the ADF.

The Taskforce is expressly considering if further investigation through a Royal Commission is required into particular matters identified in the Report of the DLA Piper Review, in particular in relation to ADFA as outlined above and in relation to alleged events at HMAS Leeuwin in the 1960s and 1970s.

The ‘ADFA 24’ is a group of 24 serious allegations of rape from 19 complainants identified in 1998 in the course of the Grey Review (Report of the review into policies and practices to deal with sexual harassment and sexual offences at ADFA), and later in 2011 in the DLA Piper Volume 1 Report.

I asked the Taskforce to prioritise any ADFA 24 cases that came before it, so that it could provide outcomes for the victims and, where possible, identify the perpetrators of the abuse.

In accordance with the long established practice regarding sexual abuse cases, the Taskforce can only assist victims who come forward and consent to their case being assessed.

This ensures that the wishes and welfare of victims are the primary concern. It recognises that a victim might have reasons for not wanting their case to be examined, especially if the abuse occurred a long time ago.

To date only four of the 19 complainants of the so-called ‘ADFA 24’ cases have consented to their complaints being assessed by the Taskforce.

If a victim from the ADFA 24 cases told DLA Piper about their abuse but did not consent to that information coming to the Taskforce, they are still able to provide consent should they decide to do so.

Again, I have asked the Taskforce to follow up with DLA Piper to ensure that any such individual who made a complaint to DLA Piper about the ADFA 24 cases who have not yet given consent are given every opportunity for their complaints to be assessed by the Taskforce. If they provide subsequent consent, their allegations will be assessed by the Taskforce.

The Taskforce however now has an additional 48 complainants alleging incidents of physical abuse, sexual abuse, harassment or bullying at ADFA. The Taskforce is assessing these ADFA cases as well as the HMAS Leeuwin matters reported to it.

At this stage of analysis, several issues are becoming apparent to the Taskforce:

• the allegations of serious abuse at HMAS Leeuwin and ADFA are more widespread and persistent than was reported in the 1971 Rapke Report and in the 1998 Grey Review respectively;

• there are not presently sufficient complainants from those training institutions or detailed information to enable all alleged abusers to be properly identified;

• the particular issues which arose at HMAS Leeuwin and ADFA can also be seen at other ADF recruit schools and training institutions; and

• while powers to gather evidence would assist in examining these matters, the Taskforce is currently of the view that it is by no means clear that a Royal Commission is the necessary or the most appropriate mechanism to do so.

Pathway to Change

In March 2012, the then Secretary of the Department of Defence, Mr Duncan Lewis, the Chief of the Defence Force, General David Hurley, and I released the comprehensive Defence response to the Reviews: Pathway to Change.

The Pathway to Change is Defence’s statement of cultural intent and outlines the strategy for achieving that intent over a five-year program. It outlines how the recommendations of the Reviews will be implemented consistent with the wider Defence reform programme.

Pathway to Change also builds on the institutional and personal accountability reforms in Defence to implement the Review of the Defence Accountability Framework (the Black Review) announced in August 2011.

The Black Review was the first comprehensive review to examine personal and institutional accountability in Defence as a whole.

Implementation of the Pathway to Change covers a series of systemic changes, as well as more immediate and specific initiatives. This includes:

• Increasing diversity within leadership groups;

• Fully implementing reforms at the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) to address safety and behavior issues at ADFA;

• Applying principles of the ADFA reforms to all new starter training institutes across Defence.

Pathway to Change contains 15 key actions to implement cultural change in Defence, which are being implemented.

These are supported through the implementation of 160 recommendations and advice from the culture reviews and other reforms in Pathway to Change including the recommendations from the Broderick Reviews.

All of these recommendations were agreed or agreed in principle.

Ongoing implementation of the Pathway to Change is critical to ensuring that Defence’s culture meets modern Australian community standards.

That is why the 2013 Defence White Paper has formally embedded this cultural reform program in Defence policy.

It will build on personnel reform initiatives including New Generation Navy, the Army Cultural Framework, and the Air Force New Horizon Program.

As at 12 June 2013, a total of 108 of the Pathway to Change Actions and Defence Review Recommendations have been finalised:

• 6 of 15 key actions have been completed;

• 82 of 160 recommendations have been completed; and

• 20 of 160 recommendations have been overtaken by subsequent activities or reviews or have been addressed through other means.

It is expected that many of the remaining actions and recommendations currently being implemented will be completed over the coming year.

Pathway to Change Key Actions

Six Key Actions have been completed. These include:

• conducting Defence-wide discussion on values and behaviours;

• reviewing our communication strategy, including social media strategy, to communicate the Pathway to Change;

• addressing the backlog of grievances and simplifying responses to and management of unacceptable behaviour to make corrective processes faster and more transparent;

• implementing staffing, structures and review processes that enable the Pathway to Change;

• developing supporting policies to ensure full implementation of recommendations and independent culture reviews and associated reforms; and

• establishing research and data collection processes to inform ongoing development and implementation of Pathway to Change.

Defence Culture Reform Priorities

In addition to the 15 Key Actions, three broad priority areas within the cultural reform program have been identified and are being monitored closely. These are reducing sexual misconduct and unacceptable behaviour; reducing alcohol-related harm; and increasing workforce diversity.

Reducing Sexual Misconduct and Unacceptable Behaviour

Analysis by ADFIS shows that there have been on average 80 reports of sexual assault per year over the last five years.

One case of sexual assault is unacceptable. 80 cases is of grave concern.

Of particular concern is research which indicates that approximately 80 percent of victims do not report their experience.

The number of unacceptable behaviour complaints is also higher than one would want to see, increasing since 2009 in the ADF and Defence more generally. Complaints in the ADF increased from 624 in 2009 to 631 in 2012 and in the Australian Public Service in Defence increased from 124 in 2009 to 180 in 2012. Pathway to Change encourages a reporting culture; one in which people are not afraid to come forward and report unacceptable behaviour in the confidence that it will be dealt with.

Initiatives within Pathway to Change which support those who have experienced sexual misconduct and harassment include:

• a Sexual Misconduct Prevention and Response Office (SeMPRO) has been established to provide timely response and support to victims of sexual misconduct and assault;

• ADFA has established a Residential Support Officers scheme and support options regarding health and wellbeing, sexual or personal abuse and violence; and

• redress and grievance processes are being strengthened.

Reducing Alcohol-related Harm (Hamilton Review)

Drinking and inappropriate behaviour often go hand in hand and we continue to need to understand better how to manage unhealthy drinking cultures.

Defence is making steady progress in implementing recommendations in the Review by Professor Margaret Hamilton, an executive member of the Australian National Council on Drugs, into the overall strategy for managing the use of alcohol in the ADF.

Implementation aims to build the capacity of the ADF to effectively manage alcohol and enhance operational capacity, reduce personal harm and minimise organisational costs.

Implementation has commenced on all eight recommendations, the bulk of which are subject to the comprehensive development of an ADF Alcohol Management Strategy.

Immediate and specific initiatives include:

• the preparation of an evidence-based alcohol management strategy for implementation within Defence;

• Defence to ensure that the pricing of alcohol available at Defence establishments is consistent with the alcohol management strategy;

• Commanders to assess situations in which alcohol is proposed to be used informally or formally, and where specific approval would then be required for the use and access to alcohol within an ADF work location; and

• Defence-funded bar hours on bases have been reduced and a Defence-wide bar operating model is to be issued in July 2013.

Increasing Diversity

Defence is committed to increasing the diversity of its workforce and to implementing measures which support the increased representation of, and career pathways for, women.

Recommendations from the reviews being implemented centre around key themes of:

• increasing leadership commitment;

• increasing support and development;

• increasing awareness;

• recruiting strategies; and

• employment conditions, including workplace flexibilities.

These measures build on previous work to increase representation of women in the ADF and we are seeing some gains with the number of women in the ADF increasing gradually over the last six years.

The number of women in the permanent ADF has increased from 6,828 (13.2 percent) at 1 January 2008 to 7,989 (14.2 percent) at 1 April 2013.

The percentage of women recruited to Defence has increased since 2011:

• Navy increased from 21.3 percent in the period 1 Apr 11 – 31 Mar 12, to 22.3 percent in 1 Apr 12 – 31 Mar 13.

• Army increased from 13.2 percent in the period 1 Apr 11 – 31 Mar 12, to 13.8 percent in 1 Apr 12 – 31 Mar 13.

• Air Force increased from 19.7 percent in the period 1 Apr 11 – 31 Mar 12, to 27.5 percent in 1 Apr 12 – 31 Mar 13.

• APS increased from 43.7 percent in the period 1 Apr 11 – 31 Mar 12, to 44.1 percent in 1 Apr 12 – 31 Mar 13.

The proportion of women in the senior leadership group (at Colonel or Executive Level 2 and above) is still lower than we would like, but we are implementing initiatives that will see this increase over time.

An important part of increasing representation of women in Defence is full implementation of the Broderick Reviews into the Treatment of Women in at ADFA and in the ADF.

In addition to implementation of these priority areas, implementation of the full suite of recommendations from each of the cultural reviews is progressing well.

Implementation of the Reviews

The Review of Employment Pathways for APS Women in Defence (McGregor Review)

The review, by Ms Carmel McGregor, examined the effectiveness of current strategies and proposed recommendations across a range of issues regarding employment pathways for Defence APS women.

Recommendations relate to:

• achieving committed leadership support to gender diversity;

• talent management and succession planning initiatives;

• improving workplace flexibilities;

• measures to attract and recruit women to APS roles in Defence; and

• programs to support and develop career pathways for women, in particular, into senior leadership positions.

Work is well progressed in implementing the review’s recommendations. Of the 20 recommendations, 18 have been implemented, including:

• increasing the number of women on senior leadership committees;

• establishing a diversity council and including diversity as a key performance indicator in senior leadership performance agreements;

• establishing a talent management program for Executive Level staff which includes facilitated shadowing and coaching, job rotation and an over-representation of women;

• mandating gender balance on recruitment panels;

• creating senior women’s mentoring and networking initiatives;

• releasing instructions on the financial management of maternity leave provisions for APS staff; and

• establishing an oversight group for the implementation of the review.

Use of Social Media and Defence (Hudson Review)

Mr Rob Hudson, from the external consulting company George Patterson Y & R, led a team to examine the impact of the use of social media in Defence, with the aim of developing measures to ensure that the use of new technologies is consistent with ADF and Defence values.

Four of seven recommendations have been completed, including rewriting Defence’s Social Media policy, establishing an Information Management Steering Committee to ensure a unified strategy across Defence and aligning social media content strategies across Defence.

Management of Incidents and Complaints in Defence (Earley Review)

The Inspector General ADF, Mr Geoff Earley, conducted a review of the management of incidents and complaints in Defence, with specific reference to the treatment of victims, transparency of processes and the jurisdictional interface between military and civil law.

12 recommendations have been implemented and another 14 have been finalised, of which eight recommendations are subject to a broader review into Defence’s investigation, inquiry, review and audit processes.

Immediate and specific initiatives in response to the review include:

• funding was provided as a matter of priority to reduce the grievance backlog of cases;

• training and information provided to ADF members in relation to the management of incidents and complaints is being simplified and improved; and

• Defence’s administrative policies are being amended to provide for administrative suspension from duty, including the circumstances in which a Commander may suspend an ADF member and the conditions which may be imposed on the suspended member.

Review of Personal Conduct of ADF Personnel (Orme Review)

Major General Craig Orme led this review with a focus on assessing the effectiveness of current policies governing ADF conduct, and identifying areas of strength and weakness.

The ADF Personal Conduct Review recommended a culture that is just and inclusive. This has been expanded upon further in Pathway to Change.

Navy, Army and Air Force have substantial programs and initiatives under way which reinforce desired ADF values and behaviours through education and practice.

The Services also continue to improve avenues of communication for members to report concerns about personal conduct through the formal chain of command and through confidential methods of reporting.

Broderick Review Update

Both Phases of the Broderick Review into the treatment of Women in the Australian Defence Force are progressing in accordance with agreed timeframes.

The Phase One Review into the treatment of women at ADFA comprises 31 recommendations, of which 24 are fully or partially implemented. The remainder are on track for implementation by December 2014.

The Phase One Review audit by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner’s team occurred from September 2012 to March 2013. This audit report will be released in July 2013. ADFA is now in the process of ensuring lessons learned from the review are implemented across Defence.

The Phase Two Report encompasses the treatment of women across the wider Defence Force. This report was tabled in Parliament in August 2012, and comprises 21 recommendations.

To date, 10 recommendations have been fully implemented, with the remaining recommendations on track.

Broderick Review into the Treatment of Women at ADFA

Phase One of the Broderick Review, into the Treatment of Women at ADFA, was tabled in Parliament in November 2011.

A number of important actions have been completed, including:

• the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) has developed and articulated a clear, statement about diversity, inclusion and gender equality;

• the Chief of the Defence Force has issued a strong statement in support of ADFA and demonstrate a visible commitment to it;

• ADFA has strengthened the capacity of its Equity Advisers’ Network and embedded Equity and Diversity in all policies and practices;

• the tenure of ADFA Commandants is now a minimum of three years and should not be reduced other than in exceptional circumstances;

• as part of their performance reviews, ADFA staff are assessed against their capacity to implement equity and diversity principles and confidential feedback from cadets and peers;

• Residential Support Officers have been appointed to each first year Division who live in the residential block to provide after-hours supervision;

• ADFA has developed a database relating to individual complaints and this is regularly reviewed by the Commandant; and

• ADFA Midshipmen and Cadets have been provided details of a range of support options regarding health and wellbeing, sexual or personal abuse and violence. ADFA has also developed links with external support services.

Broderick Phase 2 Report – Review into the Treatment of Women in the ADF

Phase Two of Ms Broderick’s review, which considered the treatment of women in the ADF generally, and pathways for women into leadership roles in the ADF, was tabled in Parliament in August 2012.

In November 2012, I announced that the Government and Defence had agreed to implement all the recommendations of the Broderick Review into the ADF generally.

Considerable progress has been made in implementing the recommendations of the Review, with 10 of the 21 having been implemented, including:

• a Sexual Misconduct Prevention and Response Office (SeMPRO) has been established with the operational launch planned for July this year;

• the Chiefs of Service Committee has issued a Foundation Statement which underpins targeted recruitment and retention activity to ensure the ADF is a high performing and attractive environment where both men and women thrive;

• metrics, measures and data pertaining to women’s participation in the ADF will be included in all future annual Defence reports;

• policies have been reviewed and redesigned to ensure gender diversity on all ADF promotion boards;

• each Service has identified a target aimed at broadening the work background of people available to enter into leadership positions and have identified and committed to a growth target for the recruitment of women;

• all relevant policy and legislative provisions have been reviewed to provide for mandatory assessment of an ADF member’s ability to perform the inherent requirements of their job if convicted of any criminal offence, in particular sexual offence; and

• all policies addressing the waiver of Initial Minimum Provision of Service and Return of Service Obligations amended to ensure that a member who has made a decision to discharge from the ADF because of a sexual assault or harassment is able to do so expeditiously.

Broderick Implementation Audits

The third tranche of the Broderick Review reports includes the implementation audits to be conducted 12 months after the release of the Phase 1 (ADFA) and Phase 2 (ADF) reports.

The Phase 1 implementation audit at ADFA is close to completed and is expected to be released by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner in July 2013.

The Phase 2 implementation audit of the Review into the Treatment of Women in the ADF will commence in August 2013 and is expected to report in early 2014.

Currently the Defence Review Team are conducting additional visits to some ADF initial employment training establishments to gauge the implementation of ADFA reforms that will be applied to other New Starter training and institutions in the ADF.

Parliamentary Oversight

The serious nature of the matters being considered by the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce requires the highest levels of oversight.

This is why I support Parliamentary oversight in the ongoing management of these matters.

This has already commenced with the establishment of the Senate Standing Committees on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Inquiry into the Report of the Review of allegations of sexual and other abuse in Defence, conducted by DLA Piper, and the response of the Government to the Review. The Report of this Inquiry is expected on 27 June.

In the context of this Report I propose to discuss with the Chair of the Committee how ongoing Parliamentary oversight of the management of allegations of abuse in Defence and implementation of cultural change in Defence can be effected.

Conclusion

Implementation of Pathway to Change, the Broderick Reviews and the work of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce are all essential to ensuring that Defence continues to serve Australia’s national interests in a way that is consistent with modern community standards.

This includes standards in Defence culture and everyday personal behaviour.

Full implementation of the range of cultural reforms is essential to preventing future occurrences of inappropriate conduct and ensuring a zero tolerance response is adopted and implemented if it does occur.

This requires ongoing attention and oversight from the highest levels.

The Government and the Defence leadership are absolutely committed to pursuing the reforms necessary to ensure zero tolerance of inappropriate conduct.

by the

Minister for Defence

Stephen Smith MP

on

Afghanistan

Tabled in conjunction with a Ministerial Statement

on

19 June 2013

 
 
 
Introduction

The Government is committed to providing regular reports and updates on Afghanistan, including to the Parliament.

This is my third report to the Parliament this year.

I last reported to the House on 16 May, presenting an update on Detainee Management, Australian Defence Force (ADF) inquiries into civilian casualties, Australian Defence Force Investigative Service (ADFIS) processes and local source allegations. 

On 7 February this year I presented an update on transition in Afghanistan. As this process gains pace and we look towards the very substantial drawdown of the ADF in Uruzgan at the end of this year, it is appropriate to again update Parliament and the Australian people on progress towards transition.

This update follows on from my visit to Afghanistan on 2 June.

Australia’s commitment to Afghanistan

It is worth pausing to remember what led to Australia’s commitment in Afghanistan, because we have been there a long time.  We began operations in Afghanistan for clear reasons and with a clear mission.

Following the September 11 2001 attacks on the United States, Australia invoked the ANZUS Treaty and announced an ADF contribution to international operations against terrorism, deploying a Special Forces Task Force of around 150 personnel to Afghanistan.  This initial deployment finished in December 2002.

In September 2005, a Special Forces Task Group of around 190 personnel was redeployed to Afghanistan for twelve months until September 2006 in support of international efforts targeting key insurgents.  Two Army CH-47 Chinook helicopters and 110 personnel commenced operations in support of the Special Force Task Group.

In February 2006, the then Government announced that a 240-personnel Reconstruction Task Force would be deployed to Afghanistan in August of that year for a period of up to two years in support of the Dutch-led Provincial Reconstruction Team in Uruzgan Province.  In August 2006, the Government announced that an extra 150 personnel would be sent to Afghanistan to reinforce the Reconstruction Task Force and to provide enhanced force protection.

In April 2007, the then Government announced the re-deployment of around 300 Australian Special Forces personnel to Uruzgan as the Special Operations Task Group (SOTG), and noted at the time that the total expected ADF deployment in Afghanistan was to ‘peak’ at approximately 1000 personnel by mid-2008, including the Reconstruction Task Force (RFT), the RTF Protection Company Group, the Special Operations Task Group, and an RAAF air surveillance radar capability.

In February 2008, following a careful review of Australia’s strategy in Afghanistan and consultation with our international partners, this Government announced an increased focus on training and mentoring the Afghan National Army in Uruzgan Province.  These changes were announced “noting that the Government of Afghanistan needs to be able to develop the security forces which will provide the security for their own citizens into the future”. 

To achieve the increased focus on training, the Government announced that Australia would deploy an Operational Mentoring and Liaison Team of around 50 personnel to train one Afghan National Army (ANA) Kandak (battalion) in Uruzgan Province.  The core of the mentoring team would be infantry officers and senior non-commissioned officers, as well as force protection troops and assets.

At that time, the authorised strength of Australian personnel in support of Australian operations in Afghanistan was around 1100.

On 29 April 2009, the Government announced an increase in Australia’s troop commitment in Afghanistan from 1100 to 1550 personnel.  The primary focus of the increased troop commitment was two additional Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams of approximately 100 personnel to train the ANA 4th Brigade to take security responsibility for Uruzgan Province.

The increased contribution also included 70 additional personnel for the Mentoring and Reconstruction Task Force; an increase of approximately 70 personnel to the number of HQ embedded staff; an enhanced engineering element of approximately 40 personnel; an Election Support Force of approximately 120 personnel; and an additional 50 logistics and transport personnel, including one additional C-130 aircraft and support crew.

Following the Dutch withdrawal from Uruzgan in August 2010, Australia worked in close partnership with the United States, Singapore and Slovakia as ISAF’s Combined Team – Uruzgan (CT-U), including as the civilian Director of the Uruzgan Provincial Reconstruction Team.  New Zealand also participated in CT-U through one rotation of forces in 2010-2011. 

In October 2012, Australia assumed leadership of CT-U from the United States, allowing Australia to directly manage the transition process to Afghan security control in the province.

Evolution of Role from Mentoring to Advisory to Transition

In July 2012, transition to Afghan security lead in Uruzgan for the four infantry Kandaks and the two combat support and combat service support (logistics) Kandaks of the 4th Brigade of the 205 Hero Corps of the Afghan National Army (ANA) commenced.

In November 2012, the Government announced that all four Infantry Kandaks of the ANA 4th Brigade were now operating independently without advisers in Uruzgan Province.

The commencement of independent operations by the 4th Brigade Infantry Kandaks was a significant step in the process of transition to Afghan-led security responsibility in Uruzgan and confirmed that transition was on track in Uruzgan Province.

With the commencement of independent operations by the four Infantry Kandaks, the ADF transferred control of joint Forward Operating Bases and Patrol Bases in Uruzgan Province to the 4th Brigade.

Australian troops no longer operated from Forward Operating Bases or Patrol Bases in Uruzgan Province and consolidated their presence at the Multi-National Base Tarin Kot.

The ADF Task Group shifted emphasis from partnering and mentoring at Kandak level to advising at Headquarters 4th Brigade level and at the Afghan Operational Coordination Centre – Provincial in Uruzgan.

Independent operations for the 4th Brigade Infantry Kandaks did not mean the end of a role for the ADF in Uruzgan.

The ADF continued to advise the two combat support and combat service support (logistics) Kandaks of the 4th Brigade.

The ADF  task group remains combat ready to assist Afghan Forces should the need arise and the Special Operations Task Group continues to conduct partnered combat operations to disrupt the insurgency.

The 4th Brigade’s operational tempo in the first half of 2013 has been a successful series of clearance operations. These operations were conducted with support from elements of the National Directorate of Security (NDS), the Afghan National Police (ANP), and the Afghan Local Police (ALP). The support provided by, and to, the ANP remains important to maintaining security in the Province.

The success of the clearance operations is a good example of the growing confidence, improved leadership and war-fighting capability of the ANSF.

The ADF remains on track to complete its mission and hand over operational responsibility for security for Uruzgan to the ANSF by the end of December this year.  Our role in Uruzgan will continue as at present until the end of this year.  By year’s end we will see at least 1000 Australian personnel return home.

Consistent with this progress, as the Prime Minister and I announced in March, Multinational Base – Tarin Kot will close at the end of this year, seeing the completion of Australia’s mission in Uruzgan.

Afghan-wide transition

Progress continues to be made on transition across Afghanistan.  ISAF has either closed, or transferred the majority of bases to Afghan forces.  With 18 months left until transition is complete across the country, Afghanistan has now moved to the moment when the ANSF has taken full responsibility for Afghanistan’s security. 

Despite transition and the increasing capability of the ANSF, Afghanistan will remain challenging, particularly in areas removed from population centres.  The Taliban will continue to target the ANSF and Afghan authorities and ISAF through propaganda motivated attacks including high profile suicide bomb attacks as again seen in Kabul on 10 and 11 June as well as yesterday, 18 June itself. 

The use of roadside bombs, the Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), will continue to endanger ANSF and ISAF personnel and the lives of ordinary Afghan civilians. 

Australia welcomes the announcement yesterday 18 June of the fifth and final tranche of transition, which sees Afghanistan’s final Provinces and districts enter transition. 

With the inclusion of these final districts into the transition process, Australia welcomes the achievement of the “Chicago milestone”, where the ANSF officially takes the national lead for security responsibility for all the districts in all of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces, all of which have now entered transition.

Throughout Afghanistan, the ANSF is growing more competent and capable.

The ANSF participate in all operations and are in the lead in 95 per cent of these – from routine tasks, including combat service support missions, medical evacuations and route clearance operations to high-level tasks such as special operations. 

The ANSF indigenous training capability is increasingly developing with the ANSF delivering up to 90 per cent of their own training. 

In keeping with this trend, on 11 April this year, the Australian-led Artillery Training and Advisory Team (ATAT) officially completed its mission to establish a fully autonomous ANA School of Artillery and the ADF personnel have returned home.

Australia’s 2014 Role

In 2014, the Australian commitment in Afghanistan will include a commitment of around 75 personnel, including instructors/advisors, support staff and force protection at the ANA Officer Academy in Kabul with our British and New Zealand colleagues. 

In Kandahar, the ADF will continue to provide advisory support to the 205 Corps of the ANA through an advisor and force protection complement of over 50.  The ADF will also maintain its commitment of 10 advisors to the Logistics Training Advisory Team in Kabul. 

Australia currently has over 100 staff embedded within a range of ISAF Headquarters.  The embed commitment in 2014 is expected to evolve as ISAF prepares for the post-2014 train, advise and assist mission. 

A possible Special Forces role remains contingent on Government consideration and consultation with the United States and ISAF over Australia’s possible post-2014 Special Forces role.

Post-2014 NATO-led Mission

At the Chicago Summit in May 2012, ISAF nations and the Afghan Government agreed to work together to establish a new NATO-led post-2014 mission to train, advise and assist the ANSF.

We are well down that path. At the recent NATO/ISAF Defence Ministers’ meeting in Brussels on 4 June, the Concept of Operations for the post-2014 train, advise and assist mission was endorsed by Ministers. 

Operational planning for the post-2014 mission will continue to develop through the remainder of 2013.

Australia’s post-2014 role

Australia is prepared to maintain an ADF presence in Afghanistan to support stability and security after the completion of nationwide transition at the end of 2014.

Australia will continue to provide training and advisory support to the ANSF through the NATO-led train, advise and assist mission to Afghanistan.

Under an appropriate mandate, Australia is prepared to make a Special Forces contribution, either for training or for Counter Terrorism purposes, or both.

The actual size and scope of Australia’s post-2014 ADF contributed is yet to be determined.

As well, Australia will contribute US$100 million annually for three years from January 2015 as part of international efforts to sustain and support the ANSF beyond transition, a continuation of the US$200 million Australia committed in 2009 to help sustain the ANA in Uruzgan Province over the five years from 2009 until the end of 2014.

Reflecting our long-term interests in a stable Afghanistan that can be responsible for its own security, Prime Minister Gillard and President Karzai signed the Comprehensive Long-Term Partnership in Chicago in May 2012.

In May 2012 the United States also signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Afghanistan, which provides a framework for their long term bilateral relationship.  A number of our international partners, including NATO, the United Kingdom, France, India and Italy have signed similar agreements.

These commitments send a strong signal to the people of Afghanistan, the Taliban and the region that Australia and the international community will not walk away from Afghanistan at the end of 2014.

The Tasks Ahead

Redeployment

Currently, Australia has about 1,650 personnel in Afghanistan and around 800 additional personnel providing support from locations within the broader Middle East Area of Operations (MEAO).  The increase in deployed personnel above the average of 1,550 is due to the over 150 personnel whose task is to commence redeployment, repatriation and remediation activities as part of the transition process.

During my most recent visit to Afghanistan, on 2 June, I was briefed on the significant progress Australian personnel have made in remediating buildings and facilities, and in preparation for redeploying Australian personnel and the transition of security responsibilities in Uruzgan to the ANSF. This complex task is on track, and cargo continues to be removed from Multi National Base – Tarin Kot.

Since the beginning of January, the ADF has used 25 cargo ship trips to bring home major materiel back to Australia, including:

• 13 Australian Light Armoured Vehicles;
• 92 Protected Mobility Vehicles (Bushmasters);
• 4 Unimog trucks;
• 23 general cargo loads, which have included vehicle components, uniforms, weapon mounts and a large range of other material.

Material was flown from Afghanistan to Dubai and then loaded onto ships. In the coming weeks and months the ADF plans to return approximately 100 pallets of general cargo per fortnight.

Australia does not intend to leave military equipment behind.

Over the last six months, the ADF has reduced its inventory of equipment in the Middle East Area of Operations by around two million individual items.

The withdrawal of equipment through Pakistan has also recently begun with the first ground shipment underway.

Locally Engaged Employees

As Australia prepares to leave Afghanistan, we are also making sure those who have assisted our efforts are supported.  Many locally engaged Afghan employees have provided valuable support to Australia’s whole-of-government mission in Afghanistan.

The Government recognises that some of these employees may be at risk of harm due to their support for our efforts in Afghanistan and has a moral responsibility to support those who have assisted us. 

On 13 December 2012, the then Minister for Immigration and Citizenship and I announced a visa policy which will offer resettlement to Australia to locally engaged Afghan employees at risk of harm as a consequence of their employment in support of Australia’s mission in Afghanistan.

This policy is targeted towards locally engaged Afghan employees at the greatest risk of harm. It is consistent with the policy that the Government put in place in 2008 for locally engaged Iraqi employees who supported Australia’s mission in Iraq. 

This is a whole-of-government policy that is being implemented not only within the Department of Defence, but also the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, AusAID, the Australian Federal Police and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. 

Under the policy, locally engaged Afghan employees interested in resettling in Australia will firstly need to be assessed by their employing Australian agency against specific threat criteria.  This will consider the level of direct support the applicant has provided to Australia’s mission in Afghanistan as well as its public profile, location and the period of employment.

If certified as eligible by the relevant Australian agency, the locally engaged Afghan employees will then be able to make an application for a visa under Australia’s Humanitarian Program.  They will be required to meet the standard visa criteria including health, character and security requirements.

Successful applicants will be resettled under Australia’s Humanitarian Program, administered by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.  They will have access to the same suite of resettlement services as any other humanitarian entrants, including accommodation support, basic assistance to set up a household, English language courses and help to access government, community and health services.

Defence and other agencies have received a number of applications for certification under the first step of the process.

The Department of Immigration has also begun to receive applications for visas under Australia’s Humanitarian Program under the second step of the process. 

As I said when I announced the program in December 2013, it is possible that the total number of locally engaged Afghan employees resettled to Australia will be in the hundreds.  Every decision will be made on a case by case basis.

Detainee Management

I now provide an update on detainee operations in Afghanistan in accordance with my commitment to provide regular updates on detainee management and to be open and transparent on these matters.

Australia has a responsibility to treat detainees with dignity and respect and is committed to managing detention matters in accordance with our domestic and international legal obligations.

Numbers of Detainees Apprehended

During the period 1 August 2010 to 14 June 2013, the ADF detained 1909 suspected insurgents. Of these: 158 detainees have been transferred to the National Directorate of Security in Tarin Kot and 106 detainees have been transferred to the Detention Facility in Parwan, now known as the Afghan National Detention Facility in Parwan.

Detainee Management Framework

Since 1 August 2010, when Australia’s current detainee management framework in Afghanistan was introduced, five comprehensive technical audits of the framework and an audit of Australia’s detainee monitoring program have been conducted, with the most recent audit completed in April 2013.  

It included a review of Australia’s interrogation capability, which has been operating since February 2012, consideration of practices and processes at the point of capture, and a review of the ADF’s transitioning detainee management requirements including the scheduled closure of the Initial Screening Area (ISA) in the last quarter of this year.

The audit found that all detention activities conducted at the ADF ISA over the period of the audit were in full compliance with Australian policy, Australia’s international and domestic legal obligations and ISAF requirements.

These audits are an essential part of Australia’s strong governance framework and enable the ADF to proactively address any issues that might arise. Australia can be proud of its detainee management framework in Afghanistan.  Australia has achieved its operational requirements in a manner consistent with Australian values and our legal obligations.

Monitoring

As part of our detainee management framework, Australian officials monitor the treatment, welfare and conditions of all detainees transferred from ADF custody to Afghan custody.

Between 1 August 2010 and 14 June 2013, the Interagency Detainee Monitoring Team, comprised of Australian officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Department of Defence, conducted 143 monitoring visits. This includes: 64 visits to the National Directorate of Security facility in Tarin Kot; 25 visits to the Tarin Kot Central Prison; and 54 visits to the Detention Facility in Parwan/ Afghan National Detention Facility in Parwan.

Interrogation

In February 2012, I announced the deployment of trained ADF interrogators to Afghanistan.

Interrogation is a comprehensive questioning process, which is aimed at collecting intelligence on the insurgency.

Interrogation expands the ADF’s ability to obtain information of operational and tactical value to help protect Australian personnel, the ANSF, and the local population.

It is conducted within strict legal guidelines to prevent physical and mental mistreatment.

Interrogation is conducted by ADF personnel who are qualified in interrogation. Only those personnel who have received specialised training are authorised to conduct interrogation activities.

From February 2012 to 14 June 2013, approximately 41 per cent of detainees apprehended by the ADF in Afghanistan have undergone interrogation within the ISA. 

Allegations of Mistreatment

As I have previously stated, Australia takes all allegations of detainee mistreatment seriously.

Since August 2010, I have provided regular updates on complaints and allegations of mistreatment the ADF has received.

When a detainee is brought into the ISA, they are specifically asked whether they have any complaints regarding their treatment.

Any complaint received is treated as an allegation.

This terminology does not imply any wrong-doing on the part of the ADF, simply that an individual has made an allegation or complaint about the treatment they, or another individual, has received or witnessed during the course of their interaction with the ADF or the ANSF.

During the period 1 August 2010 to 14 June 2013, there have been 201 allegations of mistreatment against Australian forces. Of these, 175 relate to treatment or an incident at the point of capture. To date, 198 of these allegations have been considered and have been assessed as being unfounded.  Three allegations remain under review.

Treatment of Detainees by ANSF

Australia is committed to holding our own personnel to the highest standards on detainee treatment.  If ADF personnel become aware of concerns regarding the treatment of detainees by our ISAF or Afghan partners, this is also treated seriously.

During the period 1 August 2010 to 14 June 2013, 62 allegations of detainee mistreatment have been made against the ANSF at the point of capture on partnered operations. The investigation of these allegations is a matter for the ANSF.

As part of the ADF’s mentoring, ANSF personnel receive human rights training and advice on the correct procedures for handling detainees. They are also trained on the applicable international legal obligations for the treatment of detainees and the protection of the local civilian population.

The ANSF in Uruzgan also receive specific human rights training from the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, which specifically covers the application of those rights when conducting detention operations.

The ADF also provides Afghan personnel practical advice on these issues during partnered operations.

If ADF personnel witness any instances of mistreatment of detainees who are under the control of Afghan forces, they are required to report the matter to Australian authorities so it may be raised with Afghan authorities.

Suspension of transfers to the National Directorate of Security Detention Facility in Tarin Kot

As I advised last month, on 15 March 2013, the ADF suspended the transfer of detainees to the National Directorate of Security detention facility in Tarin Kot, after allegations of mistreatment were raised by non-ADF transferred detainees.

Australia has raised our concerns about this matter with Afghan authorities, Afghan and international human rights organisations and ISAF. 

Australia has reiterated the importance of the proper treatment of detainees and the need to investigate any allegations of detainee mistreatment in a robust and transparent manner.  

I did so again during my 2 June visit to Kabul.

Australia has been informally advised by Afghan authorities that they are in the process of laying charges against a number of Afghan officials as a result of the allegations of detainee mistreatment at the National Directorate of Security facility in Tarin Kot.

It is appropriate for Australia to await the outcome of the Afghan investigation into this matter, and advice on any action to be taken, before Australia will consider a resumption of the transfer of ADF-apprehended detainees to Afghan authorities in Tarin Kot.  

At the time of suspension on 15 March there was one ADF transferred detainee in the NDS detention facility.  He was visited by Australia’s Interagency Detainee Monitoring Team on 12 March and he advised that he had not been mistreated.  That detainee was transferred to the Tarin Kot Central Prison on 19 March, where he is still subject to regular monitoring visits.

Since the suspension has been in place, two detainees have been transferred to the Afghan National Detention Facility in Parwan.  Twenty detainees have been released from the ISA. 

Lessons from Afghanistan

The National Security Interest

In my first statement on Afghanistan to the Parliament as Minister for Defence on 20 October 2010, I said “[t]here can be no more serious endeavour for any country or Government than to send its military forces into conflict”.

To send its men and women in uniform into harm’s way, a country or Government must have a clear national security interest reason to do so.  In my 20 October 2010 statement I said:

The Government’s strong view is that it is in our national interest to be in Afghanistan. 

On the 11th of September 2001, al-Qaeda killed over 3000 people from more than 90 countries, including our own, in its terrible attacks in the United States. 

The Taliban, which harboured al-Qaeda within Afghanistan, refused to condemn al-Qaeda or cooperate with the international community to bring it to account. 

The international community, including Australia, could not stand by and allow such a threat to persist.  So we and others, under a United Nations mandate, still in existence and renewed unanimously by the Security Council in successive years, removed the Taliban from power. 

The 11 September attacks were also an attack upon our long-standing Alliance partner, the United States.  Australia invoked the ANZUS Treaty after the September attacks. That decision was supported by both sides of this Chamber. 

Australia’s contribution in Afghanistan is also an expression of the common interest we share not just with the United States, but the other [45] countries of NATO and the International Security Assistance Force in countering international terrorism. 

Since the 11th of September, over one hundred Australians have been murdered – along with many more from other nations – in terrorist attacks around the world, including in the United Kingdom, Indonesia and India. 

Terrorism in Afghanistan and in its neighbourhood remains a real threat. 

Afghanistan needs the help of the international community, including Australia, to build its capacity so that terrorists are unable to re-establish the type of presence that enabled such terrorist attacks.

Australia’s national security interest in our commitment to Afghanistan – past, present and future – is clear:  to prevent Afghanistan from again being used by international terrorists to plan and train for attacks abroad on innocent civilians, including Australians in our own region and beyond.

The Use of Military Force

Our experience over the last ten years in Afghanistan has highlighted some important general lessons for the use of military force.

It has reinforced the well known point that it is the easiest thing in the world to get involved in major commitments, but it is substantially more difficult to get out.

That is why, when a Government makes a decision about a military intervention, it must very, very carefully consider whether that intervention is required in a country’s national security and national interests.  

In the case of Afghanistan, there was strong international community and bipartisan domestic support for the intervention in Afghanistan with the now 50 country strong ISAF, mandated by the United Nations Security Council in December 2001.

If there had not been a continually renewed UN mandate for Afghanistan, the international community would have withdrawn years ago.

Progress in Afghanistan was substantially undermined as a result of Iraq, which was not the subject of a UN mandate and which did not have bipartisan domestic support in Australia and overseas.

International community focus shifted from Afghanistan in the latter half of 2002, in the lead up to the Iraq War.  This allowed the Taliban to regroup in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region and reassert and rebuild its influence in southern Afghanistan from 2003 through 2005.  As a result, from 2006 onwards, ISAF forces faced fierce opposition from a resurgent Taliban in southern Afghanistan. 

Focus shifted back to Afghanistan in 2008. 

The subsequent surge of international troops and resources into Afghanistan and the sharper international focus led to the transition process and where we are today but the regrettable fact is that valuable years, a half dozen years, were lost to the Afghanistan mission.

International Decision Making

From the earliest days, the Government was forthright in demanding a place at the international table when key decisions were made on Afghanistan. 

My Ministerial predecessors Ministers Nelson, Fitzgibbon and Faulkner did very valuable work on this front.

Australia insisted that strategic level decisions on Afghanistan were taken by the International Security Assistance Force, not just by NATO.

While the Government was prepared to put our men and women in uniform into harm’s way to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a breeding ground for international terrorism, we were equally determined to ensure that from 2008 Australia was part of the decision making process for the international community’s strategy on Afghanistan.

Strategy and Mission

At the Summit in Lisbon in November 2010, leaders from Afghanistan and the NATO and ISAF countries agreed that a conditions-based transition to Afghan led security begin in 2011, with the aim of completing transition by the end of 2014.

NATO and ISAF members also made an important long term commitment to support Afghanistan beyond the transition of security responsibility.

These commitments were reaffirmed by the international community at the Chicago Summit in May 2012.

The international community also agreed at Chicago to continuing to fund, train and support the ANSF post-transition, to consolidate and build on the security gains of the transition strategy.

This is in recognition that it is essential that the international community provides the resources for ensuring the sustainability and effectiveness of the ANSF beyond 2014.

The international community also committed at the Chicago Summit to supporting Afghanistan’s development in the long-term, including through the signature of long term strategic partnership agreements.

Long term support to Afghanistan, its institutions and its security forces are an important signal to the people of Afghanistan, the Taliban and the region that the international community will not walk away from Afghanistan at the end of 2014.

This long term support is an important safeguard against the inevitable pressure the Taliban will seek to bear on Afghan institutions of state and the Afghan security forces with transition to Afghan security responsibility.  Similarly, a continued Special Forces contingent will be important to maintain an active deterrent against the re-emergence of international terrorists. 

These two elements – long term international support and continued Special Forces assistance – will be important both to sustain the transition to Afghan security responsibility and to ensure the viability of what the international community has achieved in Afghanistan.

If, following the transition to Afghan security responsibility, Afghan institutions and the Afghan security forces were to collapse, or Afghanistan was again to re-emerge as a base for international terrorism, the Australian public would rightly question whether stabilisation operations and humanitarian interventions were worth the cost in lives and resources.

That is why Australia has committed to the long term support of Afghanistan and is prepared to maintain an ADF presence in Afghanistan to support stability and security after the completion of nationwide transition at the end of 2014.

That is why I have stressed that under an appropriate mandate, Australia is prepared to make a Special Forces contribution, either for training or for Counter Terrorism purposes, or both.

It is as well why Australia has also strongly supported the notion that in the end stability in Afghanistan will not occur by military or combat action alone, but by peace and reconciliation efforts.

International Collaboration

Australia’s experiences in Afghanistan have been shared with our most important overseas partners.  This includes Australia’s Alliance partner, the United States, traditional partners including the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand, and other partners including NATO.

Australia’s operations in Afghanistan have also enabled enhanced cooperation with our regional partners Singapore and Malaysia through our partnership with Singapore in CT-U and the assistance provided to Malaysian forces transiting to Afghanistan.

We have also enhanced our relationships with non-traditional partners, including the Netherlands and Slovakia, based on our partnership with these countries at various times in Uruzgan.

Australia-US Alliance Lessons

Australia and the US will emerge from our commitment in Afghanistan with closer practical ties than ever before.

We have developed heightened intelligence sharing, and our Special Forces, having worked side by side with US Special Forces, are held in the highest regard.

We have also contributed competent and highly skilled embedded personnel to ISAF and US based Headquarters to shape and influence operations, where their counsel and expertise has been regularly sought and welcomed. 

This has not only enhanced our reputation, but more importantly, has resulted in improved capability and interoperability for the ADF into the future.

We can and will continue to build on these strengthened ties.

Australia-NATO Partnership

Australia’s relationship with NATO has strengthened in recognition of our common values, our experience of working together in the ISAF mission in Afghanistan, and our shared vision to promote stability and peace through cooperation.

As a result, Australia and NATO are working closely to strengthen our relations in areas of mutual interest.

In January 2012 Australia appointed Dr Brendan Nelson, a former Defence Minister, as its first Ambassador to NATO, followed by Mr Duncan Lewis, a former Secretary of the Department of Defence.

Australia’s participation in a unique meeting at the NATO Chicago Summit in May 2012 of NATO and its partners agreed to enhance political dialogue and practical cooperation.

Building on the dialogue and cooperation developed, Australia also signed an Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme in February 2012 with NATO to complement NATO’s expertise and to address future security challenges.

The Rule of Law

The rule of law is an essential basis for international relations and for national security policy.

The force of international law, and the protection it offers the Afghan people, clearly distinguishes the international effort in Afghanistan from the actions of the Taliban and its associates.

On the ground, international humanitarian law – including the principles of military necessity, proportionality, distinction and discrimination – provides the framework for Australia and ISAF’s rules of engagement.

The ADF has built a reputation over the years for professionalism and compliance with such rules of engagement.

We have prided ourselves on our high standards and we have a well regarded international reputation for doing so.

Australian forces take all possible steps to ensure their operations do not endanger the lives of civilians.

When there are civilian casualty incidents they are always investigated.

The law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law also provide a clear legal framework Australia’s detainee management framework.

Governance is of fundamental importance to Australia’s detainee management framework in Afghanistan.

Australia takes very seriously its responsibility for ensuring detainees are treated with dignity and respect as befits the professionalism of our forces and consistent with our domestic and international legal obligations.

In developing this framework, Australia had two priorities in mind.  The first priority is the critical need to remove insurgents from the battlefield, where they endanger Australian, ISAF and Afghan lives.  The second priority is the need to ensure humane treatment of detainees, consistent with Australian values and our domestic and international legal obligations.

The detainee management framework draws on applicable international standards and advice from international organisations.  It is consistent with the Laws of Armed Conflict and the Geneva Conventions.

Following capture, the ADF transfers ADF-apprehended detainees to the purpose-built Initial Screening Area (ISA) screening facility in Tarin Kot in Uruzgan Province for a limited period of time.

The ISA in Tarin Kot is under 24-hour Closed Circuit Television (CTV) surveillance and the facility open to regular inspection by international humanitarian and national human rights organisations.

A team of Australian officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Department of Defence monitors the welfare, treatment and conditions of all detainees transferred to Afghan custody.

The monitoring team visit detainees shortly after transfer, and subject to operational requirements, around every four weeks until the detainee is sentenced or released.

This monitoring is underpinned by formal arrangements with Afghanistan and the US, which include assurances on the humane treatment of detainees and free access by Australian officials and human rights organisations.

Every allegation of detainee mistreatment received or observed by the ADF is reported through the ADF Military Chain of Command.  Once reported, allegations are reviewed or investigated. 

ISAF and Afghan and international human rights and humanitarian organisations are notified of any allegations and the outcomes of any subsequent assessments.

The requirements of Australia’s adherence to the rule of law, our approach to civilian casualties and our detainee management framework, are exacting.  They have however stood the ADF and its well deserved reputation in good stead and allowed the ADF to retain the pride and support of the Australian people in the job they are doing.

Our international reputation, our credibility and our reliability as a partner as a result of our experience in Afghanistan has been enhanced consistent with the finest traditions of Australia and the ADF in combat or war like operations: first class fighters, and respectful of international law and highly conscious of the rights of civilians and locals.

Force Protection

The challenges of operating safely in Afghanistan have not only tested the skills of our deployed personnel, but have also tested our ability to provide appropriate personal and collective force protection.

Following the Force Protection Review effected by my predecessor Defence Minister Faulkner, the Government committed to a package of force protection initiatives worth $1.6 billion.

The ADF now employs a suite of force protection measures to enhance the safety of deployed personnel.  This includes physical measures, such as armoured vehicles, route clearance vehicles, improved body armour, hardened working and accommodation facilities and systems such as CRAM (Counter Rocket Artillery and Mortar).

Our personnel have also utilised constantly evolving tactics, techniques and procedures to enhance their protection levels.

On the home front, the ever evolving threat of IEDs has required scientific innovation, high-end engineering skills and indigenous capabilities from our defence industries to counter effectively.

The success of the Bushmaster vehicle is a very good and obvious example. Over several years, defence and industry engineers have continually improved the design of these vehicles which have ultimately saved soldier’s lives and reduced injuries.

Support to our Veterans

The care of wounded, injured and ill veterans is a high priority for the Government and the Australian community.

The Departments of Defence and Veterans’ Affairs have been working closely together to ensure we are ready to meet the needs of our contemporary veterans.

In February, the Departments signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the Cooperative Delivery of Care and Support to Eligible Persons.

The MOU is aimed at better coordinating the delivery of care and support services between Defence and Veterans’ Affairs.

Put simply, it is to stop our wounded, injured and ill veterans from falling between the cracks in the system.

The new MOU builds on the Support for Wounded, Injured or Ill program, also designed to make sure that veterans do not fall through gaps between Defence and Veterans’ Affairs.

Mental Health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

As we enter the post Afghanistan draw down period there is significant interest in ensuring we are prepared to respond to the mental health impact of the operational tempo of recent years.

Significant improvements have been made to the provision of mental health care as part of a more than $90 million investment into Defence and Veterans’ Affairs by Government. 

An additional $26 million has been identified in the recent 2013 Defence White Paper for the provision of enhanced mental health programs.

Since 2009, substantial progress has been made to improve the services and assistance for ADF members and their families experiencing mental disorders, including post traumatic stress disorder, both during their military service and after they discharge.

Defence has introduced a range of resilience programs, increased the mental health workforce, improved access to mental health care and increased awareness of mental health issues and understanding of post traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide prevention and alcohol misuse.

Comprehensive research has been conducted into the profile of ADF mental health needs, the prevalence rates of conditions such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and the impact of operational service on the health of men and women who have served in the ADF.

As a Government and as a community we are better prepared than we have been following previous wars and conflicts to recognise mental health problems, intervene early, provide effective treatments and enable Defence members to return to work as soon as possible either within or outside of the ADF.

Awareness and education in relation to mental health issues is a key factor in preventing future problems.

We will continue to reduce stigma and barriers to care improving access to treatment that will promote rehabilitation and recovery supporting ADF members and their families to continue to contribute through a working life within the ADF or within the broader Australian if the decision is to leave the ADF.

Defence and Veterans’ Affairs remain committed to building resilience and improving awareness of all mental disorders that impact on ADF personnel, not just post traumatic stress disorder.  We are encouraging current serving and ex-serving personnel and their families to seek help as early as possible.

Combat Fatality Reports

In my Ministerial Statement to Parliament on 9 February 2012, I noted that the past focus of the Inquiry Officer process into Australia’s combat fatalities had been on the public release of Inquiry Officer Reports which had been released as a matter of course.

I stated my view that the focus needs to be on the timely provision of the Report to the family of the deceased. As such, I asked Defence and Army to ascertain the wishes of the family with respect to the public release of the Report.

As well, any decision to publicly release an Inquiry Officer Report rightly comes after weighing the wishes of the family members about publication and the public interest in the release of the Report wider than family members and affected persons to the general public.

I provide the following update into the status of Inquiry Officer Reports into combat deaths.

In my 16 August 2012 Ministerial Statement to Parliament I advised that all Inquiry Officer reports into combat deaths which occurred in 2010 had been completed, the respective families briefed and the outcomes of the Inquiries made public, or not, as appropriate.

In 2011 there were eleven ADF combat deaths from nine separate incidents. Inquiries into all these incidents are complete, and all but one of the families (the family of Lieutenant Marcus Case) have been briefed on the outcomes.

Lieutenant Marcus Case was killed in the crash of the Australian CH-47D helicopter in Afghanistan on 30 May 2011 and his family will be briefed on the findings of the Commission of Inquiry into that incident in the near future following its consideration by the Chief of the Defence Force.

In 2012 there were four incidents resulting in the combat deaths of seven soldiers.  Inquiries into all these incidents are complete, and all but one of the families have been briefed on the outcomes.  Arrangements are currently being made with the family of one of these soldiers to be briefed on the inquiry outcomes.  It is anticipated that this briefing will take place in the near future.

Since my Ministerial Statement on 9 February last year, two Inquiry Officer Reports into insider attacks have been finalised and made public. A further nine Inquiry Officer Reports into eleven combat deaths have been finalised and completion advised to the public.

Afghan-led Peace and Reconciliation Process

I said to the House in my 7 February 2013 statement, that Australia has long supported an Afghan-led peace and reconciliation process, recognising that conflict in Afghanistan will not be ended by military force alone.

Australia welcomes the opening of an office in Doha for the purpose of negotiations between the Taliban and the High Peace Council of Afghanistan as part of an Afghan-led peace process.

Australia also welcomes the fact that United States representatives will meet the Taliban in Doha for talks aimed at achieving peace in Afghanistan.

These talks will necessarily be long, complex and inevitably subject to setbacks, but efforts at peace and reconciliation must continue.

Awards from Operations in Afghanistan

Australia’s contribution to Afghanistan has seen great acts of bravery.

Operations in Afghanistan have seen Australia’s highest military honour, the Victoria Cross for Australia, awarded to three outstanding individuals for their acts of exceptional courage:  Trooper Mark Donaldson, Special Air Service Regiment, received the Victoria Cross in 2008 for actions in Uruzgan Province; Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith, Special Air Service Regiment, received the Victoria Cross in 2010 for actions in Kandahar Province in 2010; and Corporal Daniel Keighran, 6th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, received the Victoria Cross in 2010 for actions in Uruzgan Province.

Operations in Afghanistan have also seen the award of the Battle Honour Eastern Shah Wali Kot to the Special Air Service Regiment and to the 2nd Commando Regiment for their outstanding performance during the Shah Wali Kot Offensive in Afghanistan from May to June 2010.  Eastern Shah Wali Kot is the first Army Battle Honour awarded since the end of the Vietnam War. 

On 10 May this year it was my privilege to attend the presentation of the Eastern Shah Wali Kot Battle Honour to the Special Air Service Regiment at Campbell Barracks in Perth.  Today I have the privilege of attending the presentation of the Eastern Shah Wali Kot Battle Honour to the 2nd Commando Regiment in Holsworthy, Sydney. 

Australian Battle Casualties

Australia’s mission in Afghanistan has come at a price.

We have lost 39 ADF members and 254 personnel have been wounded in action to date. 

We have achieved much in Afghanistan. We still have much to contribute. 

Today in this Parliament, we pay tribute to our wounded warriors and those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.  We will not forget them.

At the time of the incident, five Australian personnel were on board, together with the ISAF aircrew, one Provincial Response Company – Uruzgan (PRC-U) member and one interpreter.

Although the hard landing was not the result of enemy action, Commanding Officer SOTG, LTCOL J (who cannot be named for operational reasons) has praised the SOTG soldiers for their quick reaction in securing the helicopter following the heavy landing.

“The soldiers reacted instantly and quickly took up positions to secure both the helicopter and the aircrew,” said LTCOL J.

“They operate in hostile territory and this fast action prevented the situation from escalating.”

On return to base two SOTG personnel presented with symptoms associated with the heavy landing. One soldier, who presented with symptoms consistent with concussion, has been assessed as wounded in action. The other SOTG soldier returned to duty.

The wounded soldier was subsequently transferred to the Role 3 ISAF Medical Facility at Kandahar Air Field for further medical assessment.

“While the wounding doesn’t appear to be of a serious nature, all precautionary measures are taken before soldiers are returned to duty,” said LTCOL J.

“All of the personnel involved have had the opportunity to contact their families and we will continue to provide support where it is required.

“Missions such as this are not without risk; however they are necessary in ensuring a secure future for the people of Afghanistan.

“We will continue to focus on the long term outcome of transitioning the Afghan National Security Forces to autonomous security lead in Uruzgan province by the end of 2013,” he  said

The other SOTG personnel involved in the heavy landing have returned to duty.

Defence will not release the personal details of the wounded soldier.

The lowering of the 7 RAR Task Group flag and the raising of the 2 CAV Task Group flag at Multi National Base–Tarin Kot represented the formal change of command authority for one of Australia’s largest force contributions to Afghanistan.

Commanding Officer 7 RAR Task Group Lieutenant Colonel Malcolm Wells said the soldiers under his command performed to an exceptional level during their deployment from November 2012 to June 2013.

“The 7 RAR Task Group represented the ADF as a professional and adaptive force at a crucial stage of the transition to Afghan security responsibility,” Lieutenant Colonel Wells said. 

Through the Afghan winter and into the traditional summer fighting season, 7 RAR Task Group advised the 4th Brigade in its conduct of more than 13 independent brigade-level operations to maintain relentless pressure on the insurgency.

Afghan forces conducted clearances of Langar, Shahid-e-Hasas, Char Chineh, Dizak, Khaz Uruzgan, Charmestan, Chora and Kajran to protect and secure the local population. 

Lieutenant Colonel Wells said the success of the 4th Brigade, 205 Corps was not so much measured in the deeds done by Australian soldiers, but by what the 4th Brigade had achieved during the period of advising.

“The 4th Brigade, 205 Corps has achieved significant milestones during the deployment of the 7 RAR Task Group,” Lieutenant Colonel Wells said.

“Successful advising ensured the Afghan National Army enhanced their skills in the key enablers of modern warfare, including counter IED, aero-medical evacuation, offensive support, leadership, literacy and logistics.”  

The Transition of Authority Ceremony was attended by Commander Joint Task Force 633 Major General Michael Crane, ANA 4th Brigade Commander Colonel Kandahari and acting Commander Combined Team Uruzgan Colonel Douglas Cardinale.

2 CAV Task Group will shift its mission focus gradually reducing advisory support as the ANA moves to independence in their Brigade Headquarters, the Combat Service Support Kandak (Battalion) and the Garrison Support Unit.  

Commanding Officer 2 CAV Task Group Lieutenant Colonel Michael Bye said the change in the Task Group’s mission focus reflected the enormous progress made by the ANA’s 4th Brigade, 205 Corps.

“The success of the 4th Brigade is a source of pride, not only in the 205 Corps, but to the people of Uruzgan,” Lieutenant Colonel Bye said.

“The 2 CAV Task Group’s mission reflects the high level of competency within the brigade, with advisory support being given to the headquarters and in the areas of combat service support and garrison support.”

The deployment of the 2 CAV Task Group marks the culmination of an extraordinary military and whole-of-government journey in Uruzgan Province, which has seen great progress from the deployment of the Special Operations Task Group in 2005 and the Reconstruction Task Force in 2006.

“The soldiers of the 2 CAV Task Group are extremely proud to be part of the operation in Afghanistan,” Lieutenant Colonel Bye said.

“We recognise the efforts and sacrifices of our comrades who have gone before us, and will display the same tenacity, focus and courage required to conclude the long mission in Uruzgan.”

Like the 7 RAR Task Group, the 2 CAV Task Group will continue to provide force protection support to Australian and International Security Assistance Force elements in Uruzgan and support the process of security transition in the province which will see governance and security firmly in the hands of the Afghan people.

Imagery is available at http://images.defence.gov.au/S20130381

Vision will be fed to the Canberra Press Gallery shortly.

Media contact:
Defence Media Operations (02) 6127 1999

Sergeant Diddams was shot during an engagement with insurgents while on a partnered mission with the Afghan National Security Forces to target a known insurgent commander in the Chorah Valley.

The patrol’s advanced first aider provided assistance and continued attempts to resuscitate Sergeant Diddams until he was evacuated by helicopter to the Role 2 Medical Facility in Tarin Kot. Sadly, despite the best efforts of all, Sergeant Diddams died of his wounds.

Last week, Sergeant Diddams was posthumously awarded the Medal for Gallantry as part of the 2013 Queen’s Birthday Honours for his actions as a patrol commander with the Special Operations Task Group during this mission.

The Inquiry Officer appointed to examine the circumstances surrounding Sergeant Diddams’ death made one recommendation in his report, that a Commission of Inquiry into the death of Sergeant Diddams was not warranted. This recommendation was accepted by Defence.

The Minister for Defence considered advice from the Chief of the Defence Force and any public interest in the release of the Inquiry Officer Report and decided not to release the Report into Sergeant Diddams’ death.

Defence asks that media respect the privacy of Sergeant Diddams’ family at this time.

Media contact:
Defence Media Operations (02) 6127 1999