Complete bullshit. Regimes that punish whistleblowers harder than war criminals reveal themselves as dreaming of tyranny.

The entire trial was cooked, and I’m furious :(

That non parole period is nuts too, pure revenge. What danger does this man represent? If he’s out on the streets some war criminals better watch their backs?

edit: I should add, it’s also quite frustrating that at the end of all this top brass has had no light shone on them, which was his initial goal on leaking. He thought the SAS was being investigated overmuch as a distraction from leadership failures. I guess we’ll never know. A slap on the wrist for the executioners, no systematic investigation, and an inconvenient man in gaol.

  • Zagorath
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    If you sign an NDA with a private company, they can sue you for violating that NDA.

    If the reason you violated the NDA was to reveal that the company is doing something illegal, you are legally protected from that lawsuit.

    The same ought to be true with the government. We have laws describing what the defence forces are and are not allowed to do in the execution of their military objectives. These are laws passed by the Australian Parliament in order to keep us in line with the internationally-accepted standard laid out in treaties. If the military is violating Australian law, it’s important that they be made to stop this. Ideally that would be done by a soldier reporting the crime to their superior, but what if the crime was ordered by superiors? Or if it’s a widespread institutional problem widespread across the military?

    Well for that, we have whistleblower protection laws. We created these laws specifically so that whistleblowers would be allowed to reveal crimes. And McBride had 2 expert witnesses lined up to support his whistleblower defence. But the government stopped them from being allowed to testify, making a ridiculous claim of “national security”. I say ridiculous, because courts are allowed to be closed to the public & press for precisely this reason. We don’t know what the evidence he sought to bring in was, but we do at the very least know it’s not “identities of agents or codes”, thanks to comments from McBride’s lawyer.

    The fact that he was prosecuted in the first place in a gross violation of Australia’s principles. The fact he was not allowed to present evidence in his defence is a gross perversion of the justice system. This is absolutely indefensible.