Download Defence Abuse Response Taskforce First Interim Report to the

Defence Abuse Response Taskforce
First Interim Report to the Attorney-General and
Minister for Defence
Ma rch 2013
ISBN: 978-1-922032-05-8
© Commonwealth of Australia 2013
All material presented in this publication is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence
(www.creativecommons.org/licenses).
For the avoidance of doubt, this means this licence only applies to material as set out in this document.
The details of the relevant licence conditions are available on the Creative Commons website as is the full legal code for the
CC BY 3.0 AU licence (www.creativecommons.org/licenses).
Use of the Coat of Arms
The terms under which the Coat of Arms can be used are detailed on the It’s an Honour website (www.itsanhonour.gov.au).
Contact us
Enquiries regarding the licence and any use of this document are welcome at:
Business Law Branch
Attorney-General’s Department
3–5 National Cct
BARTON ACT 2600
Telephone: 02 6141 6666
[email protected]
DEFENCE ABUSE RESPONSE TASKFORCE
8 March 2013
The Hon Mark Dreyfus QC MP
Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Management
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
The Hon Stephen Smith MP
Minister for Defence
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Attorney-General and Minister
I am pleased to present the First Interim Report by the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce, in accordance with the
Terms of Reference issued by you in December 2012.
The report provides an update on the important steps undertaken by the Taskforce during its Establishment Phase.
The Taskforce is now commencing transition to the Operational Phase, and is starting to assess complaints.
Yours sincerely
The Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC
Chair
Defence Abuse Response Taskforce
Contents
Foreword
v
Executive Summary
1
Background
2
DLA Piper Review
2
Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence Culture
2
Taskforce Overview
3
Australian Government Response to the DLA Piper Review
3
Recommendations from the DLA Piper Review
3
Terms of Reference
3
The Scope of the Task
3
Phases of Operation
4
Operations and Resourcing
6
The Leadership Group
6
Role and Work of the Leadership Group
7
Composition of the Taskforce
8
Leadership Support Unit
8
Report Director
8
The Executive
8
Complainant Support Group
9
Assessment Group
10
Crime Group
10
Reparation Group
11
ADFA Group
11
HMAS Leeuwin Group
12
Taskforce Funding
12
Establishment of Processes and Appropriate Actions
13
Gathering Complaints and Allegations of Abuse
13
Engagement with Department of Defence and the ADF
14
Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol
14
Engagement with the Police Services
14
Referral for Police Investigation
14
Counselling
15
Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme
15
Restorative Justice
15
Strategy and Implementation
16
Establishment Phase
16
System for Handling Allegations and Complaints
16
Hypothetical Case Studies: Taskforce System for Handling Complaints and Allegations
17
Progress Report
21
Delivering Results
21
Initial Observations
22
Preliminary Observations on ADFA Cases
22
Preliminary Views on Issues Arising in the ADFA and HMAS Leeuwin Cases
22
Cultural and Systemic Issues
23
Conclusion of the Establishment Phase
23
APPeNDICES
Appendix A: Recommendations of the DLA Piper Review
24
Appendix B: Defence Abuse Response Taskforce Terms of Reference
26
Appendix C: Defence Abuse Response Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol
27
Appendix D: Overview of the Taskforce Organisation Chart
28
Appendix E: Key Establishment Meetings Undertaken by the Taskforce Chair
29
Foreword
Three months ago this Taskforce did not exist. It commenced on 26 November 2012 with my appointment as Chair,
the appointment of Mr Robert Cornall AO as Deputy Chair and Ms Susan Halliday and Mr Rudi Lammers as members. Mr Lammers is a currently-serving Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police and his is an exofficio appointment.
Six officers of the Attorney-General’s Department were seconded as the initial staff of the Taskforce. They were Mr
Matt Hall, Executive Director, Ms Melissa Peat, Mr Danny Ramsden, Ms Kate Wandmaker, Ms Celeste Moran and
Ms Glynis Harwood.
The Taskforce operates out of, and is resourced by, the Attorney-General’s Department. It is funded by the Department of Defence (Defence).
As at the writing of this First Interim Report, the Taskforce is:
An established but flexible organisation constructed on function-focussed operational groups with dedicated logistical
and administrative support.
Specifically designed to produce the outcomes required by the Terms of Reference and the Government’s intent.
Underpinned by solid governance and work processes.
Equipped with high-level technical support, including a purpose-modified electronic Case Management System.
The Taskforce is privileged to have staff encompassing high-level skills and experience across a diverse range of
disciplines. These include seconded senior police officers with particular expertise in the investigation of sexual offences, case officers experienced in Ombudsman and other governmental agency investigations, psychologists,
Reparations Group staff with backgrounds in victim support and victims of crime compensation schemes, IT support
staff, lawyers and intelligence analysts, amongst others.
The work of the Taskforce will fall into three phases. Phase One – Establishment, Phase Two – Operational and
Phase Three – Conclusion and Legacy Issues.
This Report is primarily concerned with Phase One.
In addition to devising, setting-up, staffing and resourcing the organisation, it was necessary to establish liaison and
protocols with external departments, agencies and individuals, most importantly with Defence. This has been done
and will be ongoing.
It was also necessary to secure from DLA Piper and Defence all those documents and records from the DLA Piper
Review which resulted in the creation of the Taskforce.
This stage is taking longer than expected. Both Defence and DLA Piper took the position that privacy concerns prevented them passing that material to the Taskforce, in some instances at all, and in others, without obtaining further
consent from complainants.
Although these difficulties were eventually overcome, the process is still taking some time.
The Taskforce now has (or will shortly have) the bulk of that material, and it is being examined and scanned into the
Taskforce database.
The Taskforce is now preparing to transition into Phase Two – the Operational Phase.
To have progressed this far in only three months, with the Christmas and New Year breaks intervening, is an extraordinary achievement by all members of the Taskforce.
I wish to place on record my acknowledgement of the outstanding commitment, dedication and hard work of them all.
Finally, this achievement would not have been possible without the full support of the Minister for Defence, the Hon
Stephen Smith MP; the former Attorney-General, the Hon Nicola Roxon MP; the present Attorney-General the Hon
Mark Dreyfus QC MP; the Chief of the Defence Force, General David Hurley AC DSC; the Secretary of Defence,
Mr Dennis Richardson AO; and the Secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department, Mr Roger Wilkins AO.
I also acknowledge with appreciation the commitment and support expressed by the Shadow Minister for Defence
Personnel, Mr Stuart Robert MP on behalf of the Federal Opposition in his address to the House of Representatives
on 26 November 2012.
The Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC
Executive Summary
The Defence Abuse Response Taskforce was established as part of the Government’s response to the DLA Piper
Review into allegations of sexual and other abuse in Defence announced on 26 November 2012.
Between April and June 2011 DLA Piper received communications about alleged abuse from 1,112 people.
All communications made to DLA Piper, including those that were assessed as outside the scope of that review or
were referred to an external body, will be reassessed by the Taskforce.
The Taskforce will also assess new allegations and complaints received since its establishment where those allega-
tions refer to abuse that is alleged to have occurred prior to 11 April 2011.
Since its establishment, the Taskforce Chair and Executive have sourced experienced staff to conduct the work necessary to meet the Australian Government’s mandate.
The Taskforce has developed and adopted protocols to ensure all complainants are heard, thoroughly assessed and
there are appropriate governance and case management systems to complete all operational goals in a clear and
efficient manner.
The Taskforce has tested its protocols and systems to ensure they work properly and is now commencing transition
to the Operational Phase.
Any cultural and systemic issues identified with implications for Defence will be reported according to the Taskforce
Terms of Reference to enable appropriate action to be taken by Defence. Where appropriate, the Chair may also refer matters to the Sex Discrimination Commissioner for consideration following the Review into the Treatment of
Women in the Defence Force.
Background
The Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (Taskforce) was established as part of the Government’s response to the
DLA Piper Review into allegations of sexual and other abuse in the Australian Defence Force and the Department of
Defence (collectively referred to as Defence).
The DLA Piper Review and the 2012 Defence strategy for cultural change, entitled Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence Culture are the two key documents informing the work of the Taskforce.
DLA Piper Review
In April 2011, the so-called ‘ADFA Skype incident’ triggered numerous allegations of sexual or other forms of abuse in
Defence. In response to these claims, the Secretary of Defence engaged law firm DLA Piper to conduct an independent review into the allegations, and to develop recommendations for further action.
DLA Piper received communications from 1,112 people. Of these, 1,095 discrete allegations of abuse, raised by 775
sources, fell within the scope of the review and were assessed.
DLA Piper considered that the overwhelming majority of allegations formed plausible allegations of sexual assault or
other forms of abuse by Defence personnel. Allegations span over six decades, dating back to 1951.
DLA Piper provided their Phase 1 Report, including Volume 1 (General Findings and Recommendations) and the first
tranche of Volume 2 (Individual Allegations) to the Minister for Defence in October 2011. On 17 April 2012, DLA Piper
provided the full and final tranche of Volume 2 to the Minister.
Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence Culture
On 7 March 2012, the Minister for Defence, Secretary of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) jointly announced a strategy for cultural change and reinforcement in Defence: Pathway to Change: Evolving Defence
Culture.
Pathway to Change complements Defence’s wider Strategic Reform agenda, and seeks to address the findings from
a number of recent independent reviews into areas of Defence culture. It acknowledges the complex and sensitive
history of cultural concerns in parts of Defence, and forms a statement of cultural intent and a strategy for implementing it.
The statement of cultural intent outlines the values and behaviours expected of Defence personnel. These include
that they should trust and respect each other, be candid and speak up at all times and, create inclusive and fairminded teams.
The strategy calls on individuals to accept responsibility for their conduct and requires leaders to model the
new culture so that other personnel can emulate their values and behaviour.
Through Pathway to Change, Defence commits to the implementation of 15 actions falling within six areas: Leadership and Accountability; Values and Behaviour; Right from the Start; Practical Measures; Corrective Processes; and,
Structure and Support.
Taskforce Overview
Australian Government Response to the DLA Piper Review
On 26 November 2012, the Minister for Defence announced the Australian Government’s response to the DLA Piper
Review. The response included:
A general apology to those who experienced abuse, delivered in the Australian Parliament by the Minister
for Defence on behalf of the Government, and a general public apology made by the CDF;
The establishment of an independent Taskforce to assess individual allegations made to DLA Piper and additional
allegations made to the Taskforce concerning abuse in Defence occurring before 11 April 2011;
Implementation of a capped compensation scheme to make reparation payments where appropriate; and
A telephone Hotline (1800 424 991) to provide information to complainants on the response, and to obtain information
on new allegations and complaints.
Recommendations from the DLA Piper Review
As part of its report to the Minister for Defence and the Secretary of Defence, DLA Piper produced a series of recommendations to assist the Australian Government in developing an appropriate response to the findings of the Review. A full list of those recommendations and the Government response, including actions to be undertaken by the
Taskforce is set out at Appendix A.
Appendix B
The Appointment of the Taskforce Chair and Taskforce Terms of Reference were executed by the Attorney-General
on 3 December 2012 and the Minister for Defence on 16 December 2012 (see Appendix B).
Subject to any extension, the Terms of Reference require the Taskforce to meet its key operational goals over the
course of a 12 month period.
The Scope of the Task
The primary focus of the Taskforce is the assessment and referral for resolution of all individual allegations considered by DLA Piper. All allegations communicated to DLA Piper during the review, including those considered out of
scope, referred to the Commonwealth Ombudsman or received after the deadline will be assessed by the Taskforce.
The Taskforce will also assess and refer for resolution all new allegations of sexual and other abuse experienced by
Defence personnel that are reported to it where the abuse is alleged to have occurred prior to 11 April 2011.
The Taskforce Terms of Reference include a specific requirement to focus on the ‘ADFA 24’ and HMAS Leeuwin allegations of sexual and other abuse. The ‘ADFA 24’ refers to 24 allegations of serious sexual assault that were alleged
to have occurred at the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) from 1994 to 11 April 2011, identified by
DLA Piper as part of its review.
These cases and the circumstances surrounding them will be dealt with as a matter of priority. With respect to these
cases, enquiries will also be made to determine if alleged victims, perpetrators or witnesses remain in Defence. If so,
a recommendation will be submitted to the CDF by the Taskforce Chair for consideration of appropriate administrative
action.
The assessment of allegations and complaints will be considered in accordance with the Taskforce’s protocols. The
Taskforce will consider whether the matter is:
Appropriate to be considered and assessed under the Taskforce Terms of Reference;
Suitable for referral to existing counselling services should the complainant need additional counselling;
Suitable for consideration under the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme;
Suitable for restorative justice/conciliation processes, including apologies from appropriate Defence officers;
Suitable to be referred to police for assessment and possible formal criminal investigation and prosecution;
Suitable to be referred for disposition by the military justice system or other Defence process;
Suitable to be referred to another external entity, such as the Defence Force Ombudsman; and
In a category of allegations that merits further inquiry by a Royal Commission.
Although the Taskforce is not directly responsible for resolution of allegations, it is responsible for determining the
response necessary and referring the matter to the appropriate entity. Following an initial assessment the Taskforce
will, in consultation with the complainant, determine the most appropriate response action to allow for resolution of
the matter.
A complainant may receive a number of outcomes from the Taskforce in relation to the one complaint (for example,
referral to the Police, a reparation payment and counselling).
In all instances any action will take into account the rights and interests of the complainants, alleged perpetrators and
other parties.
Where necessary, the Taskforce will gather additional information about the handling of particular allegations by Defence in order to decide the appropriate response action. This material will also help determine whether any amendments are recommended to Defence Instructions (General) in order to provide simpler advice and guidance to De-
fence management where incidents of abuse are reported to them.
All information assessed and analysed will be considered to ascertain whether there are any implications for Defence
in the work it is undertaking in its Pathway to Change, or arising from other Reviews. If any such implications are identified, they will be provided to the Minister for Defence, CDF and the Secretary of Defence for their consideration.
The Taskforce will report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence every quarter on progress and whether
any systemic issues are identified.
Before October 2013, the Taskforce will report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence on whether, and in
what form, the Taskforce should continue beyond the initial 12 month mandate and the funding required.
Phases of Operation
Establishment
Following the creation of the Taskforce through the Australian Government response to the DLA Piper Review and
subsequent Terms of Reference which set out the Taskforce’s operational goals, the Taskforce has been in an Establishment Phase.
During this time, the Taskforce has designed, constructed, staffed and resourced an organisation that is well placed to
produce the outcomes required by the Terms of Reference.
The Chair of the Taskforce as well as other staff have held extensive meetings at different levels, given briefings to,
and established liaison with, a range of government departments and agencies as well as other organisations and
individuals.
Policies, protocols and work processes have been formulated to give effect to the Terms of Reference, ensure confidentiality and privacy, and to take account of the rights and interests of alleged victims, accused persons and other
parties.
Assessment, Enquiry and Action
At the end of the Establishment Phase the Taskforce will move to the Operational Phase.
During this phase the Taskforce will conduct an initial assessment of DLA Piper and other allegations of abuse and
Defence mishandling of reported allegations. Preliminary enquiries of plausible allegations will be made, including
obtaining further information and material from Defence and other sources.
In consultation with complainants, appropriate action will be determined and where necessary appropriate allegations
will be referred to external agencies such as Police agencies, the Defence Force Ombudsman or other entities.
With respect to the ADFA and HMAS Leeuwin cases, enquiries will be made as to whether alleged victims, perpetrators or witnesses remain in Defence. Where the circumstances so require, the Chair will make recommendations to
the CDF in relation to appropriate action he may wish to pursue.
The Taskforce Chair will also make recommendations for action to the Minister for Defence, Secretary of Defence and
CDF or other Service Chiefs in Defence as appropriate in individual cases. Further, the Chair will liaise with the Minister, Secretary and CDF on any implications for Pathway To Change or other reviews.
Every quarter the Taskforce Chair will provide interim reports to the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence in accordance with the Terms of Reference.
Conclusion and Legacy
The final phase of the Taskforce will be the Conclusion and Legacy Phase. During this time the Taskforce will provide
the Final Report to the Attorney-General and the Minister for Defence detailing the work conducted and the outcomes
achieved.
Recommendations will be made with respect to any ongoing action required or outstanding matters that require resolution after the Taskforce has completed its role and been disbanded (for example, monitoring any subsequent prosecutions or other action).
The storage and delivery of all Taskforce materials will be organised to adhere to appropriate requirements of handling and storing such material.
Operations and Resourcing
The Leadership Group
The Taskforce is comprised of a Leadership Group (who were appointed by the Attorney-General and Minister for
Defence under the Taskforce Terms of Reference) and staff who have been engaged since establishment.
The Leadership Group Chair, the Honourable Leonard (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 (AFP) Assistant Commissioner Rudi Lammers APM.
The Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC
Following a distinguished legal career, which spans more than four decades, Len Roberts-Smith is well placed to
Chair the Taskforce.
From 1978 he was the first Director of the Legal Aid Commission of Western Australia, before going to the Bar in early 1989 and being made a Queens Counsel in December that year.
From 2000 to 2007, he served as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Western Australia and from February 2005 was
one of the inaugural Judges of the Court of Appeal.
Between 2002-2007, as a Major General in the Australian Army Reserve, he was the Judge Advocate General of the
Australian Defence Force.
In May 2007 he was appointed the Commissioner of the Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia, a
position which he held until his retirement on 31 January 2011.
Len Roberts-Smith is a Trustee Director of the Australian Defence Force Assistance Trust and the Patron of the Citizens’ Advice Bureau of WA (Inc).
Mr Robert Cornall AO
Mr Robert Cornall brings considerable expertise to the Taskforce after a career as a solicitor, legal administrator, and
legal policy maker.
From 2000 to 2008, Mr Cornall was the Secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department.
In 2006, Mr Cornall was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for his service to the community
through contributions to the development of public policy. Mr Cornall’s particular contributions included counterterrorism arrangements in a changing global security environment, and advice and governance across a diverse
range of responsibilities within the civil justice system.
Between 1995 and 2000, Mr Cornall was Managing Director of Victoria Legal Aid and from 1987 to 1995 the Executive Director and Secretary of the Law Institute of Victoria.
Ms Susan Halliday
Ms Susan Halliday brings significant expertise to the Taskforce in areas including corporate governance, human rights and employment law, workplace policy and strategic planning.
Having worked with ASIO and BHP, Ms Halliday was appointed Assistant Director of the Council for Equal Opportunity in Employment (1991 to 1994) and Assistant Director of the Business Council of Australia (1995 to 1998). She was
Sex Discrimination Commissioner from 1998 to 2001 and Acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner from 1999 to
2000. Ms Halliday has run an employment law consulting and investigation firm for 12 years.
The inaugural Chairperson of the regulatory authority the Victorian Institute of Teaching (2002 to 2011) Ms Halliday
continues to Chair the Institute’s disciplinary hearings. A non-executive director of forensic psychology firm Caraniche
Pty Ltd for seven years, Ms Halliday became Chair of the Caraniche Board in July 2012. In 2010 Ms Halliday completed a nine year term on the Board of the State Library of Victoria.
Assistant Commissioner Rudi Lammers APM
Assistant Commissioner Rudi Lammers brings specific expertise to the Taskforce from a career in policing dating
back to 1982.
Assistant Commissioner Lammers has worked in Australian Capital Territory Policing and the AFP in the areas of
community policing, investigations, prosecutions, technical operations, human resources and information and communications technology (ICT).
Assistant Commissioner Lammers has led a diverse range of areas in the AFP, headed international projects, and
developed significant capabilities to support operations and investigations in several countries.
In December 2008, Assistant Commissioner Lammers was appointed Chief Information Officer of the AFP, and is
responsible for delivering ICT systems, and leading the development and implementation of ICT strategies to support
police investigations, policies, frameworks and standards.
Role and Work of the Leadership Group
The Executive authority of the Taskforce is vested in, and exercised by, the Chair. The Chair is responsible to the Parliament through the Attorney-General and Minister for Defence.
The members of the Leadership Group advise and assist the Chair in the overall guidance, policy and direction of the
operation of the Taskforce, and particularly in the areas of their specific qualifications or expertise.
Within the Leadership Group, specific areas of responsibility are:
Chair – overall guidance, direction and decision-making and spokesperson for the Taskforce;
Deputy Chair Consultant – overall administration, governance and initial assessment processes;
Member Consultant – development of the Defence Abuse Reparation Scheme and support for complainants; and
Assistant Commissioner – serious abuse and criminal matters.
Since 26 November 2012 the Leadership Group has met on five occasions. The individual members have each also
worked to make significant personal contributions to the development of policies, practices and methodologies.
Mr Robert Cornall has done extensive work on the establishment of a governance framework, including a complaints
protocol; a risk management analysis; an Allocation of Responsibilities for the Terms of Reference; a Brief on the Protection of the Rights and Responsibilities of Complainants, Accused Persons and Others; and consolidating Standard
Operational Procedures across the Taskforce, amongst others.
Ms Susan Halliday’s work has particularly been on the Reparation Scheme and with the Assessment Group and
Complainant Support Group in developing appropriate methodologies and protocols for engaging with complainants
and others.
Assistant Commissioner Rudi Lammers has been instrumental in securing the JADE software through the auspices
of the AFP, as the Taskforce’s Case Management System. He has also established liaison with other state and territory police agencies and had given close guidance on the development of the Crime Group processes and protocols.
Composition of the Taskforce
Taskforce staff have been carefully selected from a range of disciplines, and include:
Experienced AFP officers, including investigators and intelligence analysts, to assess the allegations received, and,
gather and examine additional information on the reporting and management of allegations of abuse by Defence
personnel;
Registered psychologists and counsellors to provide staff support and to assess whether complainants require additional counselling and/or are suitable for referral to existing counselling services;
Former investigators or inquiry officers from the Ombudsman’s Office;
Staff with expertise in the management and delivery of compensation to victims of crime and crime support;
A highly experienced legal team well versed in the areas which are likely to be raised;
Skilled media and communications advisers; and
Experienced personnel in policy, information and communications technology, operations, business, project, case
management and administration.
Leadership Support Unit
The Leadership Support Unit reports directly to the Taskforce Chair, providing strategic advice and support, particularly in relation to stakeholder engagement and liaison with the offices of the Minister for Defence and the Attorney-
General.
The Unit is the first point of contact for media enquiries and interview requests on behalf of the Taskforce Chair and
the Taskforce. The Unit is also responsible for the ongoing assessment of potential media, parliamentary, public and
political sensitivity in relation to the Taskforce and reporting on any emerging issues to the Taskforce Chair.
Key deliverables to date include media communications, the public announcement of the Terms of Reference and the
development of the Taskforce public information website.
Report Director
The Report Director reports directly to the Taskforce Chair and provides strategic advice and support, particularly in
relation to the creation and development of all reports required under the Taskforce’s Terms of Reference.
Key deliverables to date include the first Taskforce Interim Report, completed following the collation of relevant material and information.
The Executive
The Executive is responsible for managing the overall operational capacity of the Taskforce, and reports to the Chair
to ensure the Taskforce is well placed to deliver the key operational goals set out in the Terms of Reference.
As well as managing the formation of the Taskforce the Executive is responsible for managing staff to ensure complainants are dealt with professionally and their allegations and complaints are dealt with in a fair, consistent and
timely manner.
The following groups and teams fall directly under the Executive:
Legal Support Team. The team provides legal advice, to the Leadership Group and other members of the Taskforce.
Advice is provided either by the team, or is outsourced where necessary to providers such as the Australian Government Solicitor;
Defence Liaison and Strategic Support Team. The team facilitates engagement between the Taskforce and Defence
and primarily manages requests for access to Defence information, documents and personnel; and
Operations and Administration Team. The team delivers every facet of the Taskforce’s operational needs, including
securing and configuring office space, information technology requirements, recruitment, procurement, a customised electronic Case Management System, and the mapping of workflows on Taskforce business processes. The
team works closely with other groups to assist them to meet their business needs and objectives
The Executive has made solid progress to deliver results for the Taskforce since its establishment. It has:
Developed an operating budget and is finalising funding arrangements between the Department of Defence and the
Attorney-General’s Department;
Secured and configured Taskforce office space in Canberra, Perth and Sydney;
Recruited expert staff with a sound mix of skills and experience; and
Procured and customised a Case Management System for handling allegations and complaints.
Aside from overseeing the Teams falling directly under it, the Executive is also responsible for overseeing the work of
the remaining Taskforce Groups, including the:
Complainant Support Group;
Assessment Group;
Crime Group;
Outcomes Delivery Group;
ADFA Group; and
HMAS Leeuwin Group.
Complainant Support Group
The Complainant Support Group comprises the Complainant Liaison Team, Case Coordination Team, Restorative Justice Team, the Psych Team and the Hotline.
Hotline
The Hotline is currently administered by DLA Piper. The Hotline staff receive and log telephone calls and emails for
the purpose of referral to the Complainant Liaison Team and Assessment Group.
Complainant Liaison Team
The Complainant Liaison Team makes initial contact with complainants where consent has been given. It provides
information on the role of the Taskforce, including the process for assessing complaints; the different options open to
complainants; the role of Taskforce case coordinators to support and assist complainants; and access to counselling.
Case Coordination Team
The Case Coordination Team will provide a consistent point of contact for the complainant as his or her complaint
moves through each stage of the process from start to finish. This is to ensure that no matter whether a case is referred for consideration by, for example, the Crime Group, ADFA Group or Reparation Team the complainant may ring
his or her Case Coordinator to ask questions and receive advice throughout the process.
Restorative Justice Team
The Restorative Justice Framework is under development by the Restorative Justice Team. The key objective of the
Framework will be to provide a carefully managed facilitated process for complainants to be heard, acknowledged
and where appropriate receive an apology. These processes may be direct, face to face meetings or indirect processes. The process will be governed by underlying principles which meet the needs of complainants.
Psychological Support Team
This Team advises the Taskforce Leadership Group on options for the provision of counselling services Australia-wide
to complainants who are assessed as needing this type of support. Importantly, the Taskforce is consulting Ex-service
Organisations, Victim Advocacy Groups and Health Care Agencies, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs, to
ensure the full range of expertise is brought to bear in determining counselling and appropriate related outcomes.
The Team also provides in-house psychological support to Taskforce staff and consultancy services to the Complain-
ant Liaison Team and Case Coordination Team in their work with complainants, including advice and recommendations on referrals to counselling.
Assessment Group
The Assessment Group is responsible for the primary collation of information on each allegation of abuse or complaint of mishandling by Defence. The Group compiles all allegations received whether directly from a complainant or
another source into the Case Management System. It then assesses and analyses this information, and provides
complaint summaries for use by other Taskforce groups.
The Group includes the professional standards officer who will review the practices and procedures of the Australian
Defence Force Investigation Service (ADFIS) and Defence’s internal administrative processes to determine the quality of investigations and management by Defence personnel of allegations and complaints.
The Group works closely with other Taskforce staff to facilitate the swift and appropriate treatment of cases.
Key deliverables to date include the creation of the Group’s protocols, procedures and workflows, uploading information on complaints into a records management system, and the commencement of assessments of complaints.
Over the next three months, the Group will catalogue additional information from DLA Piper and Defence and all new
allegations and complaints, and continue its assessment work and the creation of case summaries.
Crime Group
The Crime Group’s central function is to carry out preliminary enquiries on possible criminal matters that may require
referral to Commonwealth, State or Territory Police.
Matters identified as potential criminal offences will be analysed and subjected to preliminary enquiries with a view to
determining criminal activity, and identifying information gaps. The Group independently reviews and assesses these
allegations on their own merit.
Where the Chair forms the view that an allegation of abuse may constitute criminal conduct, and there is (or is reasonably likely to be on further investigation), evidence of it, the group refers the matter to the Police agency in the
jurisdiction in which the offence was alleged to have occurred for possible further action.
The Group will provide the receiving Police agency with a Referral and Briefing Pack containing relevant information
and analysis to assist with their investigations. Such referrals will only occur with the consent of individual complainants. It is for the relevant Police jurisdiction to decide whether or not to investigate any matter referred to it. The outcomes in these matters will depend on the merit of each case.
Key deliverables to date include the creation of the Crime Group’s protocols, procedures and workflows, and initial
consultations with Police agencies in every jurisdiction on a National Protocol on the Dissemination of Information to
Commonwealth, State and Territory Police. If adopted, the National Protocol will guide the effective and sustainable
transition of referrals for further investigation.
Reparation Group
The Reparation Group comprises the Reparation Team and Service Delivery Team.
Reparation Team
The Reparation Team has worked throughout the Establishment Phase to develop options for a reparation payment
scheme for complainants. The proposed Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme is with the Government for
consideration and approval. Once approved, the team will process applications under the Scheme to enable the
Taskforce Chair to make a recommendation to the independent Reparations Assessor to make a decision on whether
or not a reparation payment should be made to a complainant and if so, in what amount.
Service Delivery Team
The Service Delivery Team will ensure any determination to make a reparation payment to an individual occurs quickly and in accordance with set protocols. The Team will work with relevant external agencies as necessary to process
and deliver payments.
ADFA Group
The Assessment, Crime and ADFA Groups will assess allegations and complaints of sexual or other forms of abuse
said to have taken place at ADFA since its establishment in 1986.
Matters identified as potential criminal offences will be analysed and subjected to preliminary enquiries with a view to
determining criminal activity, and identifying information gaps. Where matters are referred to the Chair, if he forms the
view that an allegation of abuse may constitute criminal conduct, and there is (or is reasonably likely to be on further
investigation), evidence of it, the matter will be referred to the Police agency in the jurisdiction in which the offence
was alleged to have occurred for possible further action.
In line with the Taskforce Terms of Reference the Crime Group together with the ADFA Group will consider as a matter of high priority the ‘ADFA 24’. As noted previously, the ‘ADFA 24’ refers to 24 allegations of serious sexual assault
that were alleged to have occurred at ADFA from 1994 to 11 April 2011 received by DLA Piper as part of its review.
In assessing allegations the ADFA Group will review all cases referred to it by DLA Piper as well as material available
on the public record, reports and reviews. As part of its assessment, the ADFA Group will examine the circumstances
surrounding these cases, in particular noting any issues that may have contributed to the incidents arising. The ADFA
Group will also ascertain whether alleged victims, perpetrators and witnesses remain in Defence.
Once all allegations concerning abuse at ADFA received by the Taskforce have been assessed, the Group will report
to the Chair with recommendations on whether a Royal Commission to inquire in the ADFA cases is warranted.
Since forming, the Group has held preliminary interviews with a number of people, including Defence personnel and
commenced review of documents received and available.
The Group expects to deliver a preliminary report on its assessment of the ADFA cases to the Chair ahead of the
Second Taskforce Interim Report.
HMAS Leeuwin Group
The HMAS Leeuwin Group is conducting a focused assessment of events which are alleged to have taken place at
HMAS Leeuwin in the 1960s and 1970s. Part of that assessment includes consideration of whether alleged victims,
perpetrators and witnesses remain in Defence. As with the ADFA cases, the circumstances contributing to the incidents of abuse at HMAS Leeuwin will also be examined.
Once it has assessed all allegations available to the Taskforce, the Group will report to the Chair with recommendations on whether a Royal Commission to inquire into the HMAS Leeuwin cases is warranted.
Since forming, the Group has commenced a review and analysis of material available on the public record, material
provided by Defence, including reports, transcripts and other associated materials, and an initial review of case summaries provided by DLA Piper.
The Group will deliver a preliminary report on its investigations to the Chair ahead of the Second Taskforce Interim
Report.
Taskforce Funding
On 21 January 2013, the Taskforce provided a preliminary budget estimate to Defence representing its total operating
budget and costs associated with delivering Taskforce outcomes. This budget estimate includes:
Staff and operational resources; and
The provision of free counselling, support and restorative justice to complainants.
The budget necessary to provide free counselling, support and restorative justice to complainants will largely depend
on the number of cases the Taskforce receives. The Taskforce has received approximately 15 new matters each
week since its establishment on 26 November 2012.
The preliminary budget estimate does not include the costs of the actual reparation payments, nor costs associated
with formal police investigations or the prosecution of cases assessed by the Taskforce.
The Secretaries of the Attorney-General’s Department and the Department of Defence will agree the arrangements
for the management of the Taskforce’s operational costs.
Establishment of Processes and Appropriate Actions
Gathering Complaints and Allegations of Abuse
Hotline
As part of its response to the DLA Piper Review, the Australian Government launched a free call information Hotline
to operate immediately following the announcement of the establishment of the Taskforce. The Hotline is currently
administered by DLA Piper.
As at 4 March 2013, the Hotline has received 1041 contacts comprising 781 telephone calls and voicemail messages
and 260 emails which include 328 people with new matters that have never previously been communicated to DLA
Piper. Future surges in contact are expected following any media coverage on the Taskforce.
DLA Piper
The Taskforce is assessing all of the allegations and complaints from the DLA Piper Review, as well as the new cases
raised directly with the Taskforce.
The number of cases before the Taskforce is building steadily. In addition to the more than 1000 DLA Piper cases, the
Taskforce is receiving approximately 15 new matters per week through the Hotline.
The Taskforce is working closely with DLA Piper to facilitate the steady transfer of case files. As of 4 March 2013, the
Taskforce has received 524 case files from DLA Piper and in January 2013 the Taskforce also received the 19
Phase 1 ‘conflict of interest’ cases which had been referred to the Defence Force Ombudsman.
Acquiring these case files has proven to be a resource intensive process. The documents comprising these files were
in hard copy and ‘locked down’ electronic form. Significant work has been necessary to convert them into consolidated records that can be imported into, accessed and analysed by the Case Management System.
In addition DLA Piper needed fresh consent to be sought from all complainants before their file information was able
to be provided to the Taskforce.
The handling processes for the case files are labour intensive, take time, and require a great deal of care to ensure
the appropriate handling of what is highly sensitive information.
ADF Investigative Service
On 21 December 2012, the ADF Investigative Service (AFDIS) provided 24 archive boxes of materials and four
smaller envelopes to the Taskforce. The materials were in the form of hard copy documents, video and audio cassettes and floppy discs.
Cataloguing commenced in January 2013. Cataloguing of the materials is taking a considerable amount of time as
the contents of the boxes were not ordered or categorised and did not accord to any singular or particular incident,
complaint or person.
Further work is required to ensure documents are recorded against the correct incident, complaint or person. The
Taskforce is now cross-checking the names discovered in the materials provided by ADFIS and DLA Piper.
Engagement with Department of Defence and the ADF
The Taskforce needs to gain access to Defence material in a timely, complete and organised manner in order to meet
key organizational goals under the Terms of Reference.
In the initial six weeks after the Taskforce was established, significant delays were experienced in attaining critical
information from Defence about many of the serious abuse allegations identified by DLA Piper. These delays were
primarily caused by Defence concerns about the privacy of those who were alleged to have perpetrated abuse.
These issues have for the most part been resolved following legal advice.
Defence had previously established the Organisational Response Unit (ORU) as the central point of contact
to facilitate and expedite requests for access to Defence information, documents and personnel.
Following its establishment the Taskforce set up a dedicated Defence Liaison and Strategy Team to be the primary
contact with the ORU, and to facilitate formal requests for information and/or assistance.
Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol
Following initial difficulties the Chair and other members of the Taskforce met with the Deputy Secretary, Defence People and other Defence representatives and agreed a Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol (Appendix C).
The Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol articulates, at a high-level, the interaction between the Taskforce
and Defence.
While a considerable amount of the interaction between the Taskforce and Defence will be facilitated through the Defence Liaison and Strategy Team and the ORU, the protocol does make it clear that there will be direct liaison between the Taskforce and relevant areas of Defence.
The primary objectives of the protocol are to:
Facilitate and expedite meeting Taskforce requests for Defence material;
Enable the coordination of Taskforce requests to avoid multiple requests for the same Defence material from different
Taskforce personnel; and
Assist the Taskforce to identify, locate and obtain Defence material potentially relevant to the Terms of Reference.
The protocol has been disseminated to all members of the Taskforce and within Defence.
Engagement with the Police Services
The Crime Group has contacted Police agencies in every jurisdiction. The Group will consult with all Police jurisdictions with the aim of agreeing on a National Protocol on the Dissemination of Information to Commonwealth, State
and Territory Police. The Group is keen to ensure an effective and sustainable transition of referrals on matters that
require further investigation.
Referral for Police Investigation
Where the Chair forms the view that an allegation of abuse may constitute criminal conduct, and there is (or is reasonably likely to be on further investigation) evidence of it, the Taskforce will refer the matter to the Police agency in
the jurisdiction in which the offence was alleged to have occurred. Such referrals will only occur with the consent of
individual complainants. Police will then proceed in accordance with their individual jurisdictional policies and procedures. Any decision to conduct further investigations will be determined by the relevant Police jurisdiction.
Counselling
Case coordinators in the Taskforce work closely with complainants as their matters are dealt with by the Taskforce. If
psychological support is required, case coordinators will refer complainants to registered external counselling providers. Taskforce psychologists and case coordinators will not provide counselling to complainants, rather they will assess whether complainants require counselling and refer the complainant to an appropriate external provider.
Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme
The Australian Government recognises that 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. The purpose of the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme is to recognize that abuse in
Defence is unacceptable and wrong, and is not condoned. 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. 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.
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 common law or statute.
The Taskforce developed the Scheme as a matter of high priority, and significant resources were applied to developing options and considering the range of legal and policy issues in question. The Taskforce provided detailed advice
through AGD to assist Ministers to settle on a preferred scheme. The Scheme is now with the Government for consideration and approval.
The Scheme is intended to be implemented quickly by Government, so that payments can be finalised within the operational life of the Taskforce. The Scheme provides a sufficiently simple, but transparent and consistent framework
for the making of payments, whilst recognising accounts of individual circumstances of alleged abuse.
Restorative Justice
The Restorative Justice Framework is under development. As noted earlier in the report, the key objective of the
Framework is to provide a carefully managed facilitated process for complainants to be heard, acknowledged and
where appropriate receive an apology. These processes may be direct, face to face meetings or indirect processes.
The process will be governed by underlying principles which speak to the needs of complainants.
Strategy and Implementation
Establishment Phase
Throughout the Establishment Phase, the Taskforce has focused on developing processes which are robust, effective
and transparent to ensure allegations and complaints are assessed and referred for resolution in a timely manner. As
noted above, this phase has not been without logistical challenge.
During the upcoming Operational Phase possible obstacles may also arise and pose delays or other barriers to outcomes, especially as the Taskforce is relying on a number of external parties to provide much of the information
needed to assess each allegation or complaint.
The Taskforce has been working closely with all external parties, such as DLA Piper, Defence and Police agencies, to
ensure protocols and systems are in place to allow for the transfer of information back and forth in a secure and timely manner, cognisant of the sensitive material that is being handled.
During the Establishment Phase the Taskforce has been careful to test all protocols and systems to ensure that it is
as well-equipped as possible to meet all of its key operational goals in a thorough, fair and efficient way.
System for Handling Allegations and Complaints
The Taskforce has adopted an electronic Case Management System to ensure the swift and thorough handling of
allegations of abuse, and any complaints of mishandling of these allegations by Defence. In accordance with specific
direction from the Taskforce Terms of Reference, the Taskforce is prioritising the assessment of the ‘ADFA 24’ and
HMAS Leeuwin cases.
As a first step, the Complainant Support Group will contact complainants who provided information either through
DLA Piper, the Office of the Minister for Defence or directly to the Taskforce.
The Assessment Group will then enter all allegations provided by complainants, DLA Piper, Defence, the Defence Force Ombudsman and the office of the Minister for Defence into the Case Management System. The Group
will analyse this information, and gather any additional information necessary. If the matter falls within the Taskforce
Terms of Reference, the Group will refer the matter to other teams in the Taskforce together with case summaries
which identify the key issues of each complaint, and highlight any inconsistencies or deficiencies in evidence.
Where complainants have consented to being contacted by the Taskforce, a Case Coordinator will work closely with
them as their matter undergoes assessment. At the outset, all contact with complainants will be initiated through the
Complainant Support Group to ensure that the welfare, rights and wishes of the complainant are carefully protected,
that experienced professionals oversee engagement with complainants, and all necessary support is provided when
it is needed.
Case Coordinators will keep complainants informed of the progress of the Taskforce’s handling of their case, and will
also bring matters to the attention of the Executive when action needs to be escalated.
Matters which are identified as potential criminal offences will be assessed by the Crime Group with a view to determining criminal activity, and identifying information gaps. Where necessary, additional information will be requested
from Defence to ensure possible criminal matters are subject to a comprehensive assessment.
Should the Chair form the view that a matter warrants further investigation by the Police, the Taskforce will refer it to
the law enforcement agency in the jurisdiction in which the alleged offence was said to have been committed. Any
such referral will first require the consent of the individual complainant.
Should the Chair determine any other response action this will be undertaken in consultation with the complainant.
If psychological support is required at any stage, case coordinators will refer complainants to registered external counselling providers.
Hypothetical Case Studies: Taskforce System for Handling Complaints
and Allegations
The following case studies provide a practical illustration of how the Taskforce will manage the handling of cases to
deliver prompt outcomes for complainants.
Example One
DLA Piper gathered information on a complaint involving an alleged physical assault which took place on an Army
base. The complainant alleges he required medical attention following the assault. The complainant said he tried
to report the matter to his supervisor who told him “not to be a sook, and to toughen up”. This response was repeated by his Commanding Officer, to whom he had subsequently complained.
As a result of the assault and his supervisor’s dismissive response, the complainant said he had experienced an ongoing psychiatric medical condition. He had resigned from the Army, but has remained an active member of the
Army Reserve.
The complainant approached DLA Piper to seek reparation for the alleged abuse. However, he did not wish to pursue
the matter for prosecution.
Assessment Process for Example One
A Complainant Liaison Officer CLO from the Complainant Support Group (CSG) establishes first contact with the
complainant. The Complainant Liaison Officer provides a brief outline of the Taskforce’s process for handling the
complainant’s case.
After the first contact has been made, the Assessment Group determines whether the complaint is within the scope of
the Terms of Reference. If in scope, the Assessment Group considers the DLA Piper case files and identifies gaps
in information, such as the complainant’s relevant Army medical history relating to the incident. The Assessment
Group requests the information from Defence through the Defence Liaison and Strategy Team, which liaises with
Defence.
Once all relevant information is collected, the Assessment Group prepares a case summary. The case summary in
this instance noted that:
Medical records corroborate the complainant’s claim that he received medical treatment for an alleged physical
assault;
The complainant was serving at the Army Base at the time of the alleged offence;
Witnesses named have been confirmed as also being at the Army Base, and there were no apparent significant
inconsistencies in their accounts; and
The officer who allegedly rejected the complaint was still a serving Army officer.
At this stage, the complainant is assigned a Case Coordinator from the CSG who works with him to identify any specific needs, such as immediate counselling, and discusses possible next steps, including the process for any
payment under the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme. The Case Coordinator also discusses the investigation of prosecution processes and reconfirms the complainant does not want to seek prosecution of the alleged offender.
After taking into account all of the information provided by the Assessment Group, complainant and others, the CSG
makes a recommendation to the Taskforce Chair on whether or not the complainant would benefit from counselling. Counselling in this case is recommended and approved so arrangements for external counselling are organised for the complainant in his home suburb.
Parallel to the above process, the Case Coordinator refers the case to the Outcomes Delivery Group who progresses
the application for payment.
The Outcomes Delivery Group prepares an Assessment Report to the independent Reparations Assessor for consideration of payment to the complainant under the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme.
The independent Reparations Assessor makes a decision as to whether a reparation payment is appropriate and
refers his or her decision back to the Outcomes Delivery Group. In this case the Reparation Assessor determines
that a payment should be made for $10,000 and the Outcome Delivery Group facilitates payment by Defence.
At the same time, the Assessment Group prepares a separate brief to the Chair recommending that the matter be
referred to the Chief of the Defence Force for possible administrative action against the still serving Commanding
Officer where consent to this course has been provided by the complainant.
The Chair approves the brief from the Assessment Group, and makes a recommendation to CDF or a Service Chief
for appropriate action.
The complainant receives his payment.
The Taskforce (or if the Taskforce has concluded, the person responsible for ongoing monitoring of the complaint)
receives a report on the administrative action taken in relation to the Commanding Officer, and informs the complainant of the action taken.
The case is closed.
Example Two
DLA Piper gathered information on a complaint involving an alleged sexual assault which took place at the ADFA in
1992. The complainant, a Navy Midshipman, alleged she was sexually assaulted in her room by an officer cadet
while another cadet watched. The complainant said she required medical attention but did not report the matter to
military or civil police because she feared being victimised by the wider cadet group. The complainant said she also sought assistance from the ADFA Chaplain and the Canberra Rape Crisis Centre.
The complainant alleged that, as a consequence of the sexual assault and the environment which seemed to condone the behaviour, she experienced ongoing depression and anxiety. However, she has continued to serve in
the Royal Australian Navy.
The complainant approached DLA Piper to report her sexual assault and other experiences at ADFA and to seek
compensation for the abuse she experienced.
Assessment Process for Example Two
A Case Liaison Officer the CSG establishes first contact with the complainant. The Case Liaison Officer provides a
brief outline of the Taskforce’s process for handling the complainant’s case.
After the first contact has been made, the Assessment Group determines whether the complaint is within the scope of
the Terms of Reference. If in scope, the Assessment Group considers the DLA Piper case files and identifies gaps
in information. As the complainant has provided names of the alleged respondents, the Assessment Group seeks
confirmation of the alleged respondents’ service at ADFA through a request from the Defence Liaison and Strategy Team to Defence.
After all relevant information is collected, the Assessment Group prepares a case summary with the following observations:
The complainant was serving at ADFA at the time of the alleged offence;
The alleged respondents were at ADFA at the same time as the complainant;
The witnesses named were at ADFA at the same time as the complainant; and
Medical records received from ADFA corroborate the complainant’s claim that she received medical treatment for
an alleged sexual assault.
At this point the complainant is assigned a Case Coordinator from the CSG who works with her to identify specific
needs and discusses possible next steps, including the process for any payment under the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme. The Case Coordinator also clearly explains to the complainant the investigation and
prosecution processes required if she wants to seek prosecution of the alleged respondent.
In this example, the complainant wants to seek prosecution and provides her consent to refer the matter to the Crime
Group for additional assessment for possible police investigation.
The Crime Group assesses the information provided in the Assessment Report and identifies any additional information needed for possible police investigation. In this instance, the Crime Group asks the Defence Liaison and
Strategy Team to request the additional information from Defence.
The Crime Group also identifies the point in time legislation that criminalises the alleged behaviour (e.g. Section 54(1)
of the Crimes Act 1900 – Sexual Intercourse without Consent) and that ACT Policing is the policing agency with
jurisdiction.
In this example, the Crime Group collects enough information for a possible prima facie case to be made and makes
a recommendation to the Taskforce Chair regarding referral to ACT Policing. The Taskforce Chair approves this
action and the Crime Group forwards a referral package to ACT Policing for possible criminal investigation.
The Crime Group advises the Case Coordinator that the complaint has been referred to ACT Policing, and the Case
Coordinator advises the complainant.
ACT Policing will, if appropriate, accept the referral and conduct an investigation in line with its own organisational
policies and procedures, including contacting and liaising with the complainant during its investigation.
The Crime Group receives regular updates from ACT Policing regarding its investigation. Updates are also provided
to the Crime Group when anything exceptional (e.g. media interest) occurs during ACT Policing’s investigation.
Parallel to the above process, the Case Coordinator refers the case to the Outcomes Delivery Group who progresses
the application for payment.
The Outcomes Delivery Group prepares an Assessment Report to the independent Reparations Assessor for consideration of payment to the complainant under the Defence Abuse Reparation Payment Scheme.
The independent Reparations Assessor makes a decision as to whether a reparation payment is appropriate and
refers his or her decision back to the Outcomes Delivery Group. In this case the Reparation Assessor determines
that a payment should be made for $45,000 and the Outcome Delivery Group facilitates payment by Defence.
At the same time, the Assessment Group prepares a separate brief to the Chair recommending that the matter be
referred to the Chief of the Defence Force for possible administrative action against the still serving alleged respondent where consent to this course has been provided by the complainant.
The Chair approves the brief from the Assessment Group, and makes a recommendation to CDF or a Service Chief
for appropriate action.
The complainant receives her payment.
The Taskforce (or if the Taskforce has concluded, the person responsible for ongoing monitoring of the complaint)
receives a report outlining the results of any Police action or Defence administrative action taken in relation to the
matter.
The case is closed.
Progress Report
Delivering Results
As indicated throughout this report, the Taskforce has delivered a number of results during the Establishment Phase,
including:
Announced the Taskforce Terms of Reference;
Secured and configured accommodation in Canberra, Perth and Sydney;
Recruited experienced staff with relevant disciplines and experience;
Held extensive meetings at different levels and given briefings to, and established liaison with, a range of government
departments and agencies as well as other individuals and organisations;
Set up Taskforce leadership processes and governance arrangements for the conduct of all aspects of operation;
Commenced receiving cases from DLA Piper;
Received Phase I conflict of interest cases referred by DLA Piper to the Defence Force Ombudsman;
Received and commenced cataloguing 24 archive boxes and other envelopes of information from the
ADF Investigative Service;
Liaised with Defence and agreed the Taskforce/Defence Protocol;
Contacted Police agencies in every jurisdiction in order to meet and agree upon a Taskforce/Police National Protocol;
Developed the Defence Abuse Reparation Scheme through AGD, which is with the Government for consideration
and approval;
Procured and configured a Case Management System with User Acceptance Testing currently underway;
Developed initial contact scripts and case notes for complainant contacts;
Work has commenced on the development of the Restorative Justice Framework;
Developed a case summary template;
Developed a Police Referral and Briefing Pack template;
Started to collate and organize information received regarding allegations and complaints;
Started to input cases into the new Case Management System;
Undertaken a preliminary assessment of a small number of high priority cases or cases from the Hotline which have
required escalating. These cases have been referred together with case summaries to the appropriate Groups
and Teams;
Commenced detailed reviews of information currently before the Taskforce regarding the ‘ADFA 24’ and HMAS
Leeuwin cases;
Documented Taskforce workflows and business processes which are being tested in conjunction with the Case Management System; and
Developing protocols, procedures and workflows for all Groups.
Initial Observations
Preliminary Observations on ADFA Cases
The Assessment, ADFA and HMAS Leeuwin Groups are still receiving information on the allegations and complaints
associated with the ADFA and Leeuwin cases. As a result, it is not possible for the Taskforce to provide conclusions
on individual matters at this stage.
An analysis of all available ADFA related Defence Inquiries, reports and reviews, however, suggests difficulties arising
from ADFA’s hybrid military/education institutional model. The difficulties that have been evident provide a context and
may illuminate the circumstances of the individual allegations the Taskforce is required to assess.
Preliminary Views on Issues Arising in the ADFA and HMAS Leeuwin Cases
An analysis of all available ADFA- related Defence Inquiries, reports and reviews suggests there are difficulties arising
from ADFA’s hybrid military/education institutional model. These afford a context and may illuminate the circumstances of the individual allegations the Taskforce is required to assess in this area also.
Based on an analysis of the material currently available to it about the events which are alleged to have taken place
at HMAS Leeuwin in the 1960s and 1970s, the Taskforce has noted that:
There is a consistency between material available on the public record regarding events at HMAS Leeuwin in the
1960s and 1970s and the substance of the individual complaints made to the Taskforce;
It appears that bullying and violence of a widespread and serious nature occurred at HMAS Leeuwin during the
1960s and 1970s;
Much of the alleged bullying and violence appears to have been unreported;
Abuse alleged to have occurred at HMAS Leeuwin during this time period included:
Abuse alleged to have been perpetrated by peers, including numerous allegations of physical assault and frequent allegations of sexual assault;
Abuse alleged to have been perpetrated by staff, including some allegations of serious sexual assault and several
allegations of physical assault;
Allegations that some training practices were carried out in a manner that was perceived as abusive, including for
example, requiring recruits to run holding rifles over their heads, or to ‘bunny hop’ while holding rifles over their
heads for long periods of time, beyond any reasonable training purposes; and
Some allegations of sexual assault perpetrated by ‘sponsors’, who accommodated recruits in family homes on
weekends.
Many of those who allege that they suffered abuse at HMAS Leeuwin during this time period also describe significant
detrimental long-term impacts such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or serious depression, which they attribute
to their experiences at HMAS Leeuwin.
Cultural and Systemic Issues
Over the course of its assessment of the allegations of abuse and/or mishandling of complaints of abuse by Defence,
the Taskforce may identify possible cultural concerns or systemic issues for referral to Defence.
In accordance with its Terms of Reference, the Taskforce will bring any such matters to the attention of the Minister
for Defence, Chief of the Defence Force, and the Secretary of the Department of Defence to ensure Pathway to
Change addresses, or is amended to address, the concerns of systemic issues. Where appropriate, the Chair may
also refer matters to the Sex Discrimination Commissioner for consideration following the Review into the Treatment
of Women in the Defence Force.
Conclusion of the Establishment Phase
As a result of the significant work undertaken in the Establishment Phase, the Taskforce is now well placed to commence the transition into the Operational Phase of its duties under the Terms of Reference.
Appendix A: Recommendations of the DLA Piper
Review
Government Response to DLA Piper Recommendations
Recommendations – DLA Piper Report
Government Response
Recommendation 1
We recommend that, for people whose detailed further information has not been received or fully considered before Volume 2 is delivered:
(i) any further detailed information which the Review
receives should be considered and reported on in
a supplementary report to the Minister and Secretary; and
(ii) the supplementary report should report on whether the preliminary assessment and recommendations which went into Volume 2 to be changed.
Agreed.
The Taskforce will examine additional allegations
concerning incidents to 11 April 2011.
Recommendation 2
The Review recommends that Phase 2 undertake
discussions with Defence as a matter of urgency with
a view to the clarification and, if necessary, amendment of DI(G) PERS 35-4 to permit administrative
action to be taken in respect of actions which may
constitute sex offences under applicable criminal law.
The other DI(G)s that seem to be relevant to these
issues should also be examined.
Consideration should be given to having a DI(G)
which directs the relevant Commanding Officer to
consider taking administrative action even though the
same incident has also been referred to civilian police
and to review the status of the matter at regular intervals to see whether administrative action should be
taken.
Agreed.
The Taskforce will examine these matters in the
course of its work.
Regard should be had to the desirability of Defence
procedures following the APS model for running administrative processes during or after criminal processes
for the same facts.
A broader examination should be undertaken of the
management of actions which may be sexual offences under applicable criminal law and ‘unacceptable
behaviour’ and the relevant DI(G)s redrafted to provide simpler and appropriate advice and guidance
to management.
Recommendation 3
If a new complaint resolution scheme is established, it
should not be limited to people who have come to this
Review but should be open to people who have not
raised matters with this Review.
Agreed.
The Taskforce will examine additional allegations.
Recommendation 4
If a new complaint resolution scheme is established,
each allegation reported on within Volume 2 should be
reviewed to see if the allegation is suitable for the new
scheme. This is particularly important to allegations
identified in Volume 2 for ‘no further action’. That recommendation is based on the remedies currently
available for the members concerned. If new remedies are put in place, some of the ‘no further action’
matters may be suitable for reparations under the new
system.
Recommendation 5
There should be further investigation of matters identified during Phase 1 as raising real concerns as to the
occurrence of abuse and/or mismanagement by De-
Agreed.
The Taskforce will directly handle resolution of complaints to DLA Piper.
Agreed.
The Taskforce will gather additional information as
appropriate and report to the Minister on implications
for ‘Pathways to Change’.
fence of reports of abuse.
Recommendation 6
Further investigations to be made during Phase 2
should be conducted by an external review body. A
body similar to that which has conducted Phase 1 of
the Review should be established for this purpose.
Agreed.
The Taskforce is oriented towards the resolution of
cases.
Recommendation 7
Consideration should be given to establishing a
capped compensation scheme for the victims of
abuse within Defence. During Phase 2 a detailed proposal for a capped compensation scheme could be
developed for the Government’s consideration at the
end of Phase 2.
Recommendation 8
Consideration should be given to establishing a
framework for private facilitated meetings between
victims, perpetrators and witnesses of abuse within
Defence. During Phase 2 a detailed proposal for such
a framework could be developed for the Government’s consideration at the end of Phase 2.
Agreed.
A capped compensation scheme will be administered by the Taskforce.
Agreed.
Restorative justice is one of the options open to the
Taskforce to resolve individual complaints.
Recommendation 9
Special counselling and health services in place for
the duration of this Review should be extended into
Phase 2 of the Review whilst a plan for providing
health services to victims of abuse is prepared.
Thereafter, the plan should be implemented such that
victims of abuse within Defence have access to counselling and health services.
Agreed.
The Taskforce will be funded to provide additional
counselling and will also liaise with and provide referrals to existing services.
Recommendation 10
A suite of options should be adopted to provide
means for affording reparation to persons affected
by abuse in Defence comprising:
public apology/acknowledgements;
personal apology;
Agreed.
capped compensation scheme;
The Government response is based on a similar
suite of options.
facilitated meeting between victim and perpetrator;
health services and counselling.
A body or team should be tasked to develop detailed
proposals for the suite of options, so that they may
be presented for a decision on implementation.
While the suite of options are being developed, there
should be further external investigation of matters
recommended in Volume 2 for further external investigation. There could be referral of matters recom-
The Taskforce will be responsible for an expanded
role than that recommended by DLA Piper and is
strongly oriented towards the resolution of cases.
mended for internal/external referral. Volume 2 recommendations are limited to existing options. Accordingly, matters recommended for ‘no further action’ in
Volume 2 should be ‘held’, pending the development
of the proposals and then – where appropriate – considered for possible action under any new processes
adopted. There should be appropriate communication
to complainants as to what will happen during the
transition stage and into Phase 2.
Appendix B: Defence Abuse Response Taskforce
Terms of Reference
We hereby appoint the Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC to lead the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce to operate
in accordance with the following terms of reference as part of the Australian Government’s response to DLA Piper’s Report
of the Review of allegations of sexual and other forms of abuse in the Australian Defence Force.
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;
will also, as appropriate, gather additional information relevant to consideration of the handling of particular allegations e.g.
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 Australian Defence
Force (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, in what form, the Taskforce should
continue in effect beyond the initial 12 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 terms and conditions of the engagement by the Commonwealth of the Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC are to
be governed by an agreement between the Honourable Len Roberts-Smith RFD, QC and Roger Wilkins AO, Secretary of
the Attorney-General’s Department.
The Hon Nicola Roxon MP
The Hon Stephen Smith MP
Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Management
Minister for Defence
Dated:
Dated:
Appendix C: Defence Abuse Response Taskforce/Defence Liaison Protocol
The Department of Defence (Defence) has established the Organisation Response Unit (ORU) headed by a One Star Officer as the point of contact with the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (Taskforce) to facilitate and expedite Taskforce
requests for access to Defence information, documents and personnel (Defence material).
The Taskforce will establish Defence Liaison Officers (DLOs) to be the point of contact with it.
The primary objectives of this arrangement are to:
facilitate and expedite meeting Taskforce requests for Defence material;
enable the coordination of Taskforce requests to avoid multiple requests for the same Defence material from different Taskforce personnel;
assist the Taskforce to identify, locate and obtain Defence material potentially relevant to its Terms of Reference.
It will often be the situation that Taskforce case officers seeking Defence material concerning or relevant to the cases which
they are investigating, will have as their points of contact, Defence personnel in particular locations or appointments, with
specific knowledge of, or responsibility for, that Defence material. In such circumstances the Taskforce case officers will
ordinarily liaise with those personnel.
If the Taskforce is unaware whether Defence material exists (or where it is located), or there is some other reason why more
formal assistance is necessary to obtain Defence material, the case officer or other Taskforce personnel will raise the matter
with a Taskforce DLO who will make or coordinate an appropriate request for facilitation to the ORU.
The ORU will then facilitate and expedite the provision of the requested Defence material.
Defence (or ORU) will not seek to monitor the work of the Taskforce nor interfere with its enquiries or investigations.
However, the ORU will, in consultation with the Taskforce, track requests for information from the Taskforce to the extent
necessary to ensure that responses are as timely and complete as possible, and as necessary to validate their accuracy.
The Taskforce was established by the Minister for Defence at the direction of Cabinet, as an independent body, to execute
its Terms of Reference (ToR).
Those ToR require the Taskforce to (amongst other things) conduct enquiries and investigations into particular cases of alleged sexual or other abuse within Defence.
To undertake the work the Taskforce will require free and unhindered access to all Defence material relevant to its ToR or
the individual cases.
Much of the information will be confidential and subject to privacy constraints. Many of the (serving or former) Defence personnel to whom the Taskforce will wish to speak, or who may wish to speak the Taskforce, about relevant matters, will
not do so if the fact that they do so (and the content of what they say) is made known to or within Defence. That would
significantly impair the work of the Taskforce. Serving or former Defence personnel (and other persons) who require it,
must be able to be assured their communications with the Taskforce will remain appropriately confidential.
Appendix D: Overview of the Taskforce Organisation Chart
Appendix E: Key Establishment Meetings Undertaken by the Taskforce Chair
Some Key Establishment Meetings Undertaken by the
Taskforce Chair
27 November 2012
Meeting with Elizabeth Broderick, Australia’s Sex
Discrimination Commissioner
28 November 2012
Meeting with Air Marshall Mark Binskin AO, Vice
Chief of the Defence Force
Meeting with Brigadier Mark Holmes MVO and Captain Bryan Parker (RAN), Provost-Marshall, Australian Defence Force
29 November 2012
Meeting with General David Hurley AC, DSC, Chief
of the Defence Force
Leadership Group Meeting
Meeting with the Hon Nicola Roxon MP, AttorneyGeneral
30 November 2012
Meeting with Tony Negus APM, Commissioner, Australian Federal Police
Meeting with Geoff Earley AM, Inspector-General –
Australian Defence Force
10 December 2012
Meeting with General David Hurley AC, DSC, Chief
of the Defence Force
Meeting with Brigadier David Luhrs, Commandant,
Royal Military College – Duntroon
11 December 2012
Meeting with Carmel McGregor, Deputy Secretary,
Defence People
Meeting with Commodore Bruce Kafer AM, CSC,
RAN, Commandant, Australian Defence Force
Academy
12 December 2012
Leadership Group Meeting
13 December 2012
Meeting with Bronwyn Grey, former Director of Defence Equity Organisation
Meeting with Geoff Earley AM, Inspector-General –
Australian Defence Force
Meeting with Roger Wilkins AO, Secretary, AttorneyGeneral’s Department
Meeting with Carmel McGregor, Deputy Secretary,
Defence People; Major General Gerald Fogarty and
Air Commodore Henrik Ehlers
Meeting with Dennis Richardson AO, Secretary of
the Department of Defence
19 December 2012
Meeting (Perth) with Dr Brian Steels and Dr Dorothy
Golding, Curtin University
14 January 2013
Meeting with Major-General Ian Westwood AM,
Chief Judge Advocate
Meeting with Neville Tomkins, Air Commodore
Kathryn Dunn and Mitchell Jones, Defence People
Group
Meeting with Robert Bromwich SC, Commonwealth
Director of Public Prosecutions
15 January 2013
Meeting with Brigadier Lyn McDade, Director of Military Prosecutions
17-18 January 2013
Leadership Group Meeting
11 February 2013
Meeting with General David Hurley, AC, DSC, Chief
of the Defence Force
12 February 2013
Briefing with the Attorney-General and the Minister
for Defence
Meeting with Ian Campbell, Secretary of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Meeting with Air Commodore Kathryn Dunn and
Mitchell Jones, Defence Sexual Misconduct and
Response Office (SemPRO)
14 February 2013
Leadership Group Meeting
15 February 2013
Meeting with Dennis Richardson AO, Secretary of
the Department of Defence
27 February 2013
Meeting with Carmel McGregor, Deputy Secretary,
Defence People
4 March 2013
Meeting with MAJGEN Gerard Fogarty (Rethinking
Systems of Inquiry, Investigation, Review and Audit
in Defence Briefing)
Meeting with Air Marshal Geoff Brown AM, Chief of
Air Force
7 March 2013
Leadership Group Meeting
12 March 2013
Meeting with Police Jurisdictional Heads of Sex
Crimes Investigations Units
18 March 2013
Meeting with Chief of Army, Lieutenant General David Morrison AO
20 March 2013
Meeting with Elizabeth Broderick, Australia’s Sex
Discrimination Commissioner