Last week the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade select committee considered a resolution from Keith Locke (Greens) calling for an inquiry by the committee into the allegations raised in the recent Metro article, that NZ Defence Forces in Afghanistan had handed detainees over to other forces (US and Afghani) who were known to torture prisoners for information. This would be in breach of the Geneva Convention, the UN Convention Against Torture, human rights in general and make a mockery of our current participation at an international level on the UN Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture.
The Nats on the committee decided to block this inquiry. Labour and the Greens voted in favour of it and the Nats rolled us with their majority.
At the end of last year, I asked for the NZ Defence Force to come to the FADT committee and explain how the “rules of engagement” in war worked and how we maintained our commitment to our well known anti-torture position, especially in Afghanistan. This was long before there was a whiff of a story from Jon Stephenson (Metro). Kevin Riordan (NZDF’s head legal man) came and gave us a full briefing in public session (although noone from the public was there!), explaining that when detainees are held by NZDF soldiers, the decision on who to hand them over to, particularly if we knew they were likely to be tortured, went right back to the head of our NZDF. This isn’t a decision made by anybody in the field – it goes right to the top – in this case, GG-designate, Gerry Mataparae.
Why wouldn’t we have an inquiry into this? Our international reputation is being impugned by this journo. Are there any grounds for that? Even if it happened on Labour’s watch, wouldn’t we want to know so that it didn’t happen again? Labour is happy for an inquiry to occur. Why did the Nats vote it down?
Exactly, they should let the public know!
It’s not being impugned by the journo but by our actions. The journo just reported those actions.
No Spud, they shouldn’t. So, do you all advocate the prosecution of NZDF soldiers? Because that’s what you’re opening the door to.
No softstarter. The command structure have the responsibility. The soldiers follow orders.
The outcome of an enquiry might be to upgrade the rules of engagement.
Mind you the foray of the SAS into a neighbouring province was not a revenge attack and since they killed a number of “insurgents” the question of taking prisoners was resolved.
“Our international reputation is being impugned by this journo.”
Seriously, we are such a small player on the world stage that John Key and Phil Gough could be caught in a gay S and M tryst and it would barely raise an eybrow outside NZ.
Why did the Natz vote it down you ask Maryan… Well because they have something to hide of course.
People should be prosecuted if they have acted in breach of the law (no matter their position) and for all intents and purposes it appears that international laws have been breached. Therefore the Natz have declined an investigation to protect Mateparae’s and their own arses. This is an immoral action by National, who must be beyond reproach in appearance and actions. That is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship.
Anything less than a full inquiry, will not only besmirch our international name, it will damage parliaments and our armed forces image. Apparently this is not of concern to National to a degree that would overrule their fear of being found guilty of complicity in torture.
Has anyone thought that this is a simply a nefarious journalist who has come up with some extremely unbalanced and unproven accusations, just to sell newspapers?
http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/news/media-releases/2011/20110502-sbcodfrn.htm is the Chief of Defence Force’s refutation of this pure rubbish from this reprobate of a journalist. If the government were to indulge in every unproven accusation, every whimsical and unproven qualm levelled by pinko jounalists, the NZDF would quickly lose its ability to conduct its mission. Can Labour not see this? I can understand the Green party being so foolish / prejudiced against our fighting troops, but surely Labour supports our soldiers and does not want to waste their time with sideshows like this.
@softstarter – people want to know, they would be fine.
Jimmy, have you read the article?
He cites serving members of the SAS who raised their concerns with him. Care to call them reprobates and pinkos who seek only to sell newspapers?
The military are sworn volunteers who are obliged to follow orders ultimately give by civilian leadership. that is, historically, a rare and precious thing. As citizens we owe the military a duty to hold the politicians giving those orders to account.
Jimmy, I look forward to the following headline one day
Serving Head of Defence Force admitted when asked today by journalists, that NZ regularly flouts the Geneva Convention etc etc
Given that will never happen, a denial must be read in that context
Having served in Afghanistan, a few of locals will say anything to anybody if it means they get some coverage/money.
Numerous times we were told “he is Talibian”, only to find out it is neighbours having a fight over land etc. It is the most corrupt country in the world.
I laugh at all these people taking a crack at NZDF personel, while sitting at home and never deployed apart to the local pub.
So, do you all advocate the prosecution of NZDF soldiers?
If they have broken the law, yes. What other answer can there possibly be?