Download Complete DLA Piper Exec Summary Inc Vols 1 and 2 Review-Of-Allegations-Of-sexual-And-other-Abuse-In-Defence PDF

TitleComplete DLA Piper Exec Summary Inc Vols 1 and 2 Review-Of-Allegations-Of-sexual-And-other-Abuse-In-Defence
TagsTypes Government & Politics Bills
File Size5.2 MB
Total Pages24
Table of Contents
                            Executive summary
		Chapter 1—Establishment and conduct of the Review
		Chapter 8—Options
                        
Document Text Contents
Page 1

Executive summary | xix

Executive summary

The Review has had before it specific allegations within scope from 847 different people (sources). Many

of these sources have more than one allegation within scope.

We have allegations across every decade from the 1950s to date. The earliest date of alleged abuse is

1951 (on a 13 year old boy, now a man in his 70s). We have allegations of events during 2011.

The allegations which have been raised with the Review are incredibly diverse. They are made by men and

women in respect of conduct by men, women and groups. They involve minors and adults. They span

60 years. They come from diverse geographical locations. They come from different parts of the Defence

organisation. They relate to the full range of possible involvement in the ADF training, normal duties,

deployment, hospitalisation and so on. The incidents range from extremely serious to (relatively) minor. The

behaviour complained of ranges from that which has never been acceptable nor tolerated, to that which,

whilst not acceptable, has in the past been tacitly tolerated.

It is not possible to summarise the nature of the allegations as a group.

Each allegation has been considered in accordance with its circumstances.

Page 2

Volume I

Volume 1 contains:

an explanation of the evolution of the scope of the tasks set for the Review and a brief explanation of
how the Review was run (Chapter 1)

a consideration of abuse risk factors in the ADF (Chapter 2)

an overview of the specific allegations considered by the Review and reported on in detail in Volume 2
of the Report (Chapter 3)

a survey of previous reports and previous Defence material relevant to abuse indicating:

- levels and nature of abuse in different parts of the ADF at different points in time

- inadequacies in Defence management of allegations of abuse in parts of Defence at different
points in time

- themes which emerge from those previous reports and Defence file and other material (Chapter 4)

a discussion of the special issues relating to abuse of boys and young people (Chapter 5)

a discussion of the current impacts of past abuse in the ADF (Chapter 6)

a discussion of systemic issues identified during the conduct of the Review for further consideration in
Phase 2 (Chapter 7)

a discussion of the options for responding to the issues which have been identified during the course
of the Review (Chapter 8)

An appended status report on the allegations raised in the Four Corner program of 13 June 2011.

Page 12

The Chapter also discusses the phenomenon of 'bastardisation' which has been rife in the ADF until very
recently. Bastardisation was commonly inflicted on new recruits to the ADF who were, by definition, boys or
young people. While it seems to have been tacitly accepted as a part of ADF life, it should be noted that the
conduct engaged in was very frequently brutal and would have been likely to attract criminal sanctions if
practised in the civil community.

The argument that such behaviour was 'legal' in the past is discussed in the Chapter and refuted. It is clear
from the examination of previous reports that the practice was recognised as occurring and rejected.

The Chapter contains particular reference to bastardisation practices at RMC Duntroon, including a
description of photographs of such activities provided to the Review but which are not included in the
Report in case the persons shown being subjected to humiliating and degrading treatment can be
identified. The Review reaches the conclusion that, despite the prohibition of such conduct at various
times in the past and attempts to prevent it, the practice kept recurring. The Review considers that this
cycle is likely to keep on recurring unless the prohibition is continuously monitored and enforced.

The Chapter notes and commends the ADF's recent introduction of specific procedures to take into
account the special vulnerability of minors and young people -foliowing an Ombudsman's report in 2005
focused on these issues. However, the fact of the recent introduction of these specific protections
underlines the absence of any such specific protections through the last century when boys as young as
13 were in the ADF.

The Review concludes that it may be that some of the ADF's general processes should have provided
protection for minors and young people in the past. Clearly they failed on many occasions. However, it
seems that the ADF does now have specific procedures in place focused on meeting its responsibilities to
these people. It will be incumbent on the ADF to monitor the effectiveness of these procedures. As has
been seen, the inappropriate culture that policy directives were intended to overcome has been allowed to
creep back in the past and eventually revive. This is an ongoing issue.

XX I Report ofthe Review of allegations of sexual and other abuse in Defence

Page 13

Chapter 6-The current impacts of past abuse in the ADF
This Chapter considers the related legacy issues:

What are the risks that people who perpetrated abuse in the past are still in the ADF?

What are the risks that people who witnessed abuse in the past without intervening or reporting are
still in the ADF?

What are the risks for people who were the victims of abuse and who have not reported that abuse?

How much abuse has not been reported?

This Chapter looks at the extent to which the levels of past abuse in the ADF can be identified and what are
the scale of the legacy issues. This Chapter responds to a request from the CDF to provide data as to the
potential size and scale of the legacy of past abuse.

The Review notes that there are difficulties with accurately quantifying the nature and extent of past
abuse, not the least of which is the under-reporting of incidents (particularly sexual assault incidents)
which the Review has found to exist. What the Review can say (based on the information before it) is that
when considering past abuse in the ADF, the Review has found:

high levels of underreporting

high levels of dissatisfaction and disillusionment with the ADF's application of military justice
processes and approach to complaint handling

an inconsistent (and in many cases, flawed) application of the military justice procedures in place at
particular points in time

flawed investigations under the ADF's discipline system

low levels of prosecutions and/or inaction by the ADF (including administrative or Defence Force
Discipline Act 1982 (DFDA) inaction) in failing to call perpetrators to account for unacceptable
behaviour (including serious instances of abuse).

For reasons which are outlined in the Chapter, the Review is inclined to the view that the allegations of
sexual and other abuse which are before the Review probably represent a relatively small proportion of the
incidents of sexual and other abuse which have occurred in the ADF in the past.

The Review refers to the ADF culture of not reporting because of loyalty, albeit misplaced, to the group and
the likely recriminations that will be visited upon a person who complains.

The Review notes that, in the past, the ADF's military justice system has been largely ineffective in handling
reported instances of serious abuse (particularly sexual abuse). The inadequacies of the military justice
system have been exacerbated by inconsistent and flawed applications of it at different points in time.

The ineffectiveness of the military justice system (which has contributed to diminished confidence in the
system by its members) has directly contributed to an under-reporting of abuse in the ADF.

Examples are provided of unsuccessful attempts to impose penalties on abusers.

The chapter refers to the 2005 Report of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and
Trade Report Reforms to Australia's Military Justice System and notes that, following the Report, an audit
of the ADF's investigative capabilities was conducted in 2006. The audit report found serious flaws and
painted a bleak picture of ADF investigations conducted up until that point in time. The Report found: 'that
the ADF investigative capability is in serious decline and that remediation, even if approached with
unremitting resolve and commitment, is likely to take no less than five years'.

The Review observes that this serious flaw which existed for many years in the ADF's investigative
capability (up until at least 2006) means that it is more likely than not that perpetrators of abuse (including

Page 23

Volume 2

Content of Volume 2
Volume 2 of this Report contains the Review's preliminary assessment of, and recommendations in
respect of, each allegation.

For each of the allegations under consideration by the Review, Volume 2 will contain:

an Assessment Worksheet

a Request for Statement form (some matters will also contain one or more Additional Statement
forms).

For each Fairness and Resolution and ADFlS matter being reported on, Volume 2 will contain an
Assessment Worksheet.

Structure of Volume 2

The bulk of Volume 2 comprises the reports about each allegation before the Review.

These are presented in Volume 2 in the following hierarchy:

Tier 1-matters are grouped by the Review's high level recommendation for future management of the
matter (Further External Investigation during Phase 2; Internal Referral; External Referral; No Further
Action).

Tier 2-matters are next grouped according to the part of Defence the subject was in at the time of the
alleged event (Navy, Army, Air Force, APS, ADFA, Other, Unknown).

Tier 3-matters are next grouped in chronological order.

The main reason for choosing this categorisation is to make it easy for further action to be taken in respect
of each matter, based first on the general type of action to be taken and second on the source of the
matter. For example, it will be easy to identify Army matters for referral to external organisations for
progression.

The recommendations in Volume 2 are limited to existing o~tions and/or referral to a bodv like this Review.

If anv of the O~tions outlined in ChaDter 8 of Volume 1 are adopted, then it would be ap~ro~r ia te to for
manv of the recommendations in Volume 2 to be reconsidered.

Volume 2 also contains Assessment Worksheets for certain matters within the Fairness and Resolution
branch unacceptable behaviour database and certain matters under management by ADFIS. Given that
these are current (or at least very recent) matters generally not raised directly with the Review, the Review
will report on Fairness and Resolution and ADFlS matters on an 'exception basis'. That is, Volume 2 only
contains a report of those Fairness and Resolution and ADFlS matters where an issue has been identified
about whether the matter is being handled properly and appropriately by Defence.

Redaction of identifying information

A significant task for the Review has been explaining to people their options for confidentiality and
obtaining their consent (or otherwise) to publication of identifying information in the Report.

Many people have not consented to their identifying information (including not just personal information,
but also information from which identity could be inferred) being included in the Report. The Review has,
therefore, redacted identifying information contained in many matters.

Executive summary I d

Page 24

In respect of matters referred to the Review by the Minister's Office, the Review takes the view that
consent to disclose identifying information is implied, unless there are words to the contrary within the
person's submission or the person has later changed their position.

The Review has taken the following approach to redaction of identifying information:

The Review has aimed to redact not just personal information, but information from which the Identity
of the source/victim could be deduced.

If the source did not consent to disclosure of their identifying information, the Review has also
redacted the names of alleged perpetrators, witnesses and other victims.

If the source did consent to disclosure of their identifying information, the Review has not redacted the
names of alleged perpetrators, witnesses and other victims, except in limited circumstances. Those
circumstances include where the source's submission is implausible or preliminary investigations have
not borne out serious allegations made against named individuals.

The Review has felt able to take this a ~ ~ r o a c h because its Re~ort Is onlv to the Minister and the Secretarv,
The alleeations contained within the Re~ort are untested and unverified. Caution needs to be exercised in
the use of Volume 2 of the Re~ort so that damage is not done to ~eoole who have not had anv o~~or tun i ty
to know the allegations made about them. let alone an o~~ortuni tv to resoond or natural iustice.

ii I Repon of the Review of allegations of sexual end other abuse In Defence
. -

Similer Documents