Former military lawyer David McBride has given up his fight against charges he broke the law by leaking classified material to journalists.
Key points:
- Former army lawyer David McBride pleads guilty to three charges of stealing and unlawfully sharing secret information
- The ACT Supreme Court heard he was concerned about "excessive" investigations of troops' alleged misconduct in Afghanistan
- McBride is expected to be sentenced in the new year
McBride's trial began this week but was delayed by his failed appeal against a preliminary decision that he had no legal duty to defy orders that were against the public interest.
The ACT Supreme Court also knocked back a bid to include as evidence documents the defence team believed were vital to their case.
In court today, McBride pleaded guilty to three charges of stealing and unlawfully sharing secret military information.
His plea put an end to a trial before a jury, which was scheduled to be selected on Monday.
The court heard this week that, while serving as an army lawyer in Afghanistan, McBride became concerned by what he believed was the "over-investigation" of alleged misconduct by special forces troops.
Prosecutor Patricia McDonald noted that McBride believed the investigations were "excessive" and undermined the soldiers' safety.
The whistleblower handed classified documents related to these investigations to journalists Andrew Clarke, Chris Masters and Dan Oakes.
The ABC later published what became known as The Afghan Files, which detailed Australian troops' alleged illegal killings in Afghanistan.
McBride had planned to defend himself against the charges by relying on the oath of service he swore to the Queen when he joined the military.
His lawyer, Stephen Odgers, argued that this oath gave McBride a duty to reveal information if it advanced the interests of the Australian public.
But Justice David Mossop found McBride had no legal right or obligation to breach orders, and his actions were not justified by public interest.
This preliminary ruling would have shaped what the jury was told, when it convened next week.
Outside court, defence lawyer Mark Davis foreshadowed a possible appeal.
He noted the judge's decisions meant important trial evidence would have been heard in secret, away from the jurors, dealing McBride's defence "a fatal blow".
"That limits what we can say to the jury on his behalf, in terms of his duty as an officer and the oath he took to serve the interests of the Australian public," Mr Davis said.
"Well, the ruling was he doesn't have a duty to serve the interests of the Australian people; he has a duty to follow orders.
"And that's a very narrow understanding of law in our view, that takes us back to pre-World War II."
Mr Odgers had sought to challenge the ruling in the ACT Court of Appeal, where he also sought to postpone the case.
He told the court there was no question his client had committed military offences.
"The question is whether or not, in the case of a criminal offence … there is the same duty to obey orders," Mr Odgers said.
He had told the court that, if McBride lost the appeal, he might be forced to plead guilty.
ACT Chief Justice Lucy McCallum noted the long delays in hearing the case, saying the charges related to events six to 10 years ago.
She said if the trial was delayed further, it might not be run until later next year.
McBride is expected to be sentenced early next year.
https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMicWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmFiYy5uZXQuYXUvbmV3cy8yMDIzLTExLTE3L21pbGl0YXJ5LXdoaXN0bGVibG93ZXItZGF2aWQtbWNicmlkZS10cmlhbC1sZWFrZWQtYWRmLXdhci1jcmltZXMvMTAzMTE5ODA40gEoaHR0cHM6Ly9hbXAuYWJjLm5ldC5hdS9hcnRpY2xlLzEwMzExOTgwOA?oc=5
2023-11-17 04:59:23Z
2604853432
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Military lawyer David McBride pleads guilty to unlawfully sharing secret allegations of Australian war crimes - ABC News"
Post a Comment