Mark Ron: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — Second Reading 
Mark Ron: Armed Forces Law Reform Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12177] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to add some comments in support of the report back to the House on the Armed Forces Law Reform Bill. Interestingly I note right from the outset that the Minister of Defence Phil Goff was quite open in consulting cross-party on this bill. In fact I recall being in meetings with the honourable Dr Wayne Mapp at the beginning of the process and it is good to note that on an issue such as this there has been cross-party co-operation right from the outset. I have noted that the need for the bill was clearly highlighted and there was definitely a need to upgrade to modernise and to bring into the 21st century the armed forces’ justice systems. There was a definite need to recognise the human rights declaration and we were briefed quite well on the need to incorporate within the law the principles contained in what the military referred to as the seven samurai. 
The first the maintenance of discipline is absolutely essential in such an organisation as the New Zealand Defence Force. I must say that about the maintenance of discipline under what can be very trying and very difficult circumstances—circumstances that average New Zealanders really would not have a clue about and would never understand until they themselves chose to don uniforms pick up firearms and put themselves in the same situation and under the same risk. 
The second is consistency in all strategic environments and that is specifically with reference to and recognition of the fact that the defence forces are deployed all over the world in the air at sea and on land. They can be in foreign countries and in differing types of peacekeeping and peacemaking operations where the rules of engagement differ where the political scenarios can often be very very delicate and where the rights of the soldier the sailor and the airman so engaged can very often be described as being razor-blade-ish. One decision—interpreted by the media as being an inappropriate decision regardless of the circumstances—can have huge political consequences that can reverberate internationally and drag the country into political debate far far beyond the imaginations of the average rifleman in one battalion. 
The third is portability which again emphasises the need for military law to be able to be transported to be enacted and to be implemented anywhere around the world under the most difficult and trying of circumstances. 
Expedition is the fourth and it is exceedingly important that matters of discipline within the military be dealt with expeditiously. If there is one lament that New Zealand First continues to have in this House it is that we do not see the same devotion or same commitment towards the expeditious implementation of disciplinary measures within the police force. By contrast the police seem to have had a habit—in fact they seem to have made an art form—of dragging their officers through the grill year after year without any regard to the consequences for their families and children. All too often at the end of those rather lengthy processes where officers have been stood down on full pay for years and have not known fully where they stood they are found to be innocent or it is found that charges will not be laid. People have an expectation that the officers will put that behind them forgive everybody’s tardiness or lack of expeditiousness and simply get on with the job as though nothing had happened. 
Thankfully the military cannot and does not act in such a way but I do recall—and I would like to put it into  
Hansard 
—an incident up in Helwan Camp. I am reflecting back to about 1983 a time after I had come back from a tour of duty in the Middle East as part of the inaugural deployment into the Sinai Peninsula. I was second-in-command of a unit and I watched three New Zealand soldiers get rammed through hearings at 1.30 in the morning in a tent in the field without being given the opportunity to seek legal counsel or to get legal advice as to what the consequences of a guilty plea would be. That was despite the fact that the police had initially been called in to investigate the allegations against the three soldiers and that the police had told the commanding officer—in fact the task force commander—that they would not refer charges because there was no case to answer. The military of course has differing standards—and rightly so—as to what is proper or improper conduct and therefore reserves the right to charge a person even though the police may believe there is no charge to answer. As the second in command of a unit what I found reprehensible—and what I put myself in the firing line on—was the fact that those soldiers were put through the disciplinary process in a manner that could only be described as showing undue and unfair haste which seriously jeopardised and compromised the ability to prove their innocence or to at least mitigate their case. 
I am not going to tell the House what the charges involved were; all I am going to say is that my primary concern then as a captain in the New Zealand Army was that justice was fair consistent and properly carried out. I still to this day look back on that incident with some discomfort. I tell members that in defence of those soldiers I led the charge for a redress of wrongs. I put their case and attempted to get their case reheard. Unfortunately I was posted on a course for 3 months and some people rushed the redress through while I was away and got the same result. It still leaves a very sour and bitter taste in my mouth that we could act in such a way. 
The charges these soldiers were facing were serious and involved a young lady and a young soldier whom was married at the time. I want to put on the record that in that particular incident one officer—whom I will not name out of fairness to him—took it upon himself to put the young soldier into a car which was driven all the way back to Linton camp and had him front up under escort to his wife and tell her what he had done. His wife got very upset punched the window and slashed her arm. They called an ambulance put the soldier back in the car drove him back to Waiouru and locked him up. That was an appalling incident; one that I have never forgotten. I shall never forget the name of the officer who ordered that to be done. It has always left me feeling that there are some things about the military justice system and the way in which it is implemented that clearly no matter how perfect the system will always rely on the judgment and integrity of the officers charged with its implementation and the responsibility of that. New Zealand First could probably go into history and look at a number of cases in which military justice is seen to be pretty ruthless. Thankfully the military is not what it was in years gone by. We have a distinctly different class of leadership today to what we had in some other eras. We are very comfortable with that. 
New Zealand First notes and wants to put on the record that the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee has made numerous recommendations for adjustments to the bill that the Minister of Defence has said he supports. I have read this report. I have looked for a minority report from the National Party. I simply say to the House that unlike with the Criminal Justice Reform Bill I hope that if an issue should arise out of here that the select committee and the National Party did not see fit to write about we will not see another outrageous claim by someone in National—such as with Simon Power on the Bail Act—that they were always against that element when quite clearly there is no mention of that in this report. Other parties that do not sit on these select committees rely on the integrity of the select committee members to report back fully and completely. New Zealand First is taking this report as a true and accurate feeling of what National sees as necessary. We will look with interest at any further amendments that might be brought to the floor through necessity by National in particular in the Committee stage. But at this point as the bill sits we will support it through the House and look forward to its passage and final assent.