Andrew wrote this opinion piece, originally published in The Guardian, about the importance of respect for the rule of law and separation of powers in the Ben Roberts-Smith case. You can also read the piece below:
We’ve seen grotesque interventions in the Ben Roberts-Smith case – even before it really gets under way
There are few things which reveal the worst instincts in Australian politics more clearly than accusations of war crimes. And this is on full display again in response to the recent arrest and charging of Ben Roberts-Smith.
I think in the minds of most Australians, the charging of Roberts-Smith will give some comfort, especially after the seemingly glacial pace of the investigation into the horrific war crimes allegedly committed by Australian soldiers in Afghanistan.
Of course, Roberts-Smith enjoys the presumption of innocence and indeed has gone to great lengths already in civil proceedings to plead his innocence. Commendably, our criminal legal system has long-established practices and precedents, and is now well placed to test this matter to the highest standard of proof.
But since Roberts-Smith’s arrest we’ve seen from some in public life a grotesque and entirely inappropriate intervention before the case has even begun. In my opinion they are wrong to excuse the alleged conduct, for instance Senator Pauline Hanson has, quite bizarrely, I suggest, pledged her steadfast support for Roberts-Smith.
Well, if Hanson doesn’t understand the complexity of this issue, the importance of the rule of law and the meaning of separation of powers, then could someone in her party please explain it to her? Or is Hanson not meaning to engage properly with this complex legal issue, instead just wrapping herself in the flag again in an appeal to scavenge more votes off the Liberal and National parties?
Australia’s richest person, and key conservative voice, Gina Rinehart, has also expressed her incomprehension at the arrest and prosecution of Roberts-Smith, as well as the associated costs and impact on Australian defence force morale. Seems to me she fails to properly consider the impact of any deterioration of the high standards the ADF is held to. We don’t protect our soldiers by brushing aside or papering over alleged atrocities.
Even the former prime minister Tony Abbott has weighed in, speaking effusively about special forces soldiers and seemingly shifting blame for potential wrongdoing from individual soldiers to the system.
Now I’m a former soldier, and I can fully understand why some members of the community object to highly decorated soldiers like Roberts-Smith being treated in this way. Yes, the battlefield is incredibly dangerous, sometimes decisions must be made in seconds, and the enemy may themselves be ignoring the laws of war. Surely we should cut our diggers some slack, people might say.
But Australia has rightly prided itself on the integrity of our armed forces. The ADF has long had a global reputation as a humane and disciplined force. Acceptable behaviour and rules of engagement are drilled into its members from day one, and it is one of the reasons the ADF has historically been such an excellent peacekeeping and peace-making force.
Special forces applicants in particular go through a rigorous selection process which has a good record of ensuring that only the most proficient, intelligent and grounded people make the grade. So, while Special Air Service Regiment and Commando Regiment soldiers often face the toughest jobs on the battlefield, they also tend to be the most carefully selected and highly trained.
All of this is to say that Australians have reason to be proud of the ADF, even when they’re deployed on ill-considered operations by governments which should know better. But there is no reason to excuse the inexcusable, or to immunise all soldiers from their responsibilities to adhere to the standards we expect. To paraphrase the former chief of the defence force Lt Gen David Morrison and Gen David Hurley before him, the standard we walk past is the standard we accept.
So if Australia goes down the path of ignoring credible allegations of war crimes and other breaches of the rules of war, we can see where it leads. We need only look to the current regimes in the United States, Israel and Iran, to see the endpoint of such impunity. Surely most Australians would agree that we can and should hold ourselves to a higher standard than that.
I fully appreciate that the soldier’s job is incomprehensible to those who have not experienced it. But at the end of the day the rule of law matters, which is one of the honourable things which sets us apart from many of those we wage war against.