Trial of star-ranked Navy officer raises global defence industry fears, government transparency concerns

A military prosecution of a senior Australian naval figure is prompting concerns across global defence companies with industry figures revealing the sensitive matter is now being discussed at international crisis meetings.

The Nightly this month revealed details of the case involving a “star ranked officer” and lucrative contracts in Western Australia which transparency experts warn could remain hidden from public view.

Over the weekend The West Australian revealed the corruption watchdog had also been asked to examine the allegations, but the matter was ultimately handed back to the Defence Department for investigation.

A trial period of up to six weeks has been set down for the court martial which is scheduled to begin at a Canberra defence facility in September and be heard before the ADF’s Chief Judge Advocate, Maj-Gen. Michael Cowen KC.

Details of the case, which sources have described as “complex and significant”, have been suppressed by Maj-Gen. Cowen until at least September when the court martial begins.

Following a five-day pre-trial hearing at Perth’s HMAS Stirling naval base last month, Maj-Gen. Cowen issued a non-publication under the Defence Force Discipline Act preventing the identity of the accused being made public.

“I order … there be no publication of the name or rank of [redacted] or anything tending to identify the accused, other than by referring to the accused as ‘A Star Ranked Officer in the Royal Australian Navy’.”

The suppression order protecting the identity of the accused, given the pseudonym “Officer Brown”, will “remain in force until the commencement of the trial unless otherwise ordered to continue”.

Defence Minister Richard Marles has insisted a military court martial is the “appropriate” way to prosecute the case which has rocked his department, despite former officials raising concerns about a lack of transparency.

Former independent senator Rex Patrick, who previously served in the Royal Australian Navy and now campaigns for transparency, also believes the military is likely to push for details of the case to remain suppressed during the court martial.

“We’ve already seen loss of confidence in matters relating to this prosecution after former controversial NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton, also a Major General, declined to deal with the issue and instead passed the matter back to Defence.”

“The presiding judge in this prosecution is also a Major General, which will undoubtedly create an apprehension amongst members of the public that he will lean towards the protection of the reputation of a senior officer and/or engage in overreach in the protection of defence information in the proceedings, which could severely undermine confidence in the military court.”

“Major General Cowen will need to manage this trial with great care”, the former senator cautioned.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge has argued that because the case now being handled by a court martial involves “public money” it needs “public accountability”, but Defence and the Albanese government are failing to provide it.

“We have always said that Defence, with its multibillion-dollar procurement failures, desperately needs an independent corruption watchdog. It still does, but the watchdog is meant to bark and bite, not just roll over to have its belly tickled like the NACC.”

If the matter were to be transferred to a civilian court, transparency advocates warn the government could then invoke the National Security Information Act to prevent certain details becoming public, as occurred during the high profile prosecution of Witness K and Bernard Collaery.

Multiple industry sources have also told The Nightly that since the case was made public earlier this month it has prompted widespread discussion inside senior levels of defence companies across Australia and even internationally.

The Nightly has learnt of crisis meetings at the top levels of one European based global defence giant over concerns the company’s Australian arm could be implicated in the allegations that will be soon examined by a court martial.

“A lot of defence companies are now assessing their possible exposure to this matter and asking questions of their Australian subsidiaries,” one senior industry figure tells The Nightly, speaking on the condition of anonymity.