A report critical of Australian generals’ leadership in Afghanistan was given to the Defence Minister Richard Marles in November 2023, but was not published until after the McBride sentencing. Stuart McCarthy on a travesty of justice.
I wonder if any of the mainstream media will challenge him on this. Would this help McBride’s appeal?
Prolly not, and it really shouldn’t have gotten to the appeal stage, he’s already in jail (I think). Whether or not he intended what followed is moot, he’s a whistleblower in fact and should be protected as such. That he is not is a chilling indictment on the Australian government, and especially the Labor Party, we expect this crap from the Libs, but this is egregious. Yet another reason to vote Green.
I tend to vote independent, but I’m interested to see if the Greens expand or retain their gains from the last election at the next one
Fair cop, depends on your local situation, still nice to have something other than duopoly.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Marles’ repeated attempts to conceal the report until the announcement of McBride’s five-year prison sentence obliterate Prime Minister Albanese’s remaining platitudes about improved government transparency, accountability and whistleblower protections.
Months before the panel’s final report was sent to Marles late last year, government refusals to properly investigate senior defence force commanders had already provided the trigger for those officers to be referred to the International Criminal Court prosecutor.
Echoing the command responsibility doctrine codified in the ICC Statute, the panel found “multiple signs” of war crimes were ignored, concluding “personal knowledge or direct involvement of the senior officers in the causes or behaviour that led to the corporate failure are not required.” The oversight report also says:
Not only do the Afghanistan oversight panel’s findings and conclusions vindicate McBride’s concerns and echo the command responsibility doctrine codified in the ICC Statute, Marles’ and his department’s handling of the report further highlights the abuse of security classifications as a means of preventing scrutiny of wrongdoing by senior government officials.
When OSI Director-General Chris Moraitis testified to Senate Estimates last year about the legality of rules of engagement and targeting orders given to special forces troops in Afghanistan, he deflected key questions back to Defence, the organisation he’s supposed to be investigating.
Not only does Marles’ repeated defiance of Senate orders based on non-existent “advice” constitute contempt of Parliament, his obfuscation to the Royal Commission shows a similarly contemptuous attitude towards the ultimate avenue of government transparency available under the Australian democratic model.
The original article contains 1,741 words, the summary contains 251 words. Saved 86%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
