Mr. Derek Priestley:

The Senator asked about the Defence Forces regulations and who is responsible for that. A DFR is similar to a statutory instrument, SI, and the Minister ultimately is responsible for that. However, with the scope of representation, there are areas on which we should be consulted. I think that is really the point the Senator is alluding to that where amendments are being made to the DFRs, there should be some form of consultation. However, it is the Minister's responsibility, to answer the Senator's query on that.

The role of the court liaison officer was the other question. It may be a little bit historical but back in the day, it was always a requirement that the officer was attending court when a member of the Defence Forces was involved. The officer went down on the day as such to record the outcome of the case and then report back through the chain of command. Over time, that role has kind of evolved and more and more often, defence counsels would have called the court liaison officer to the stand because they would know that officer would have the personal HR file of the individual and would look for narratives in it that were positive. This would then be portrayed as a character witness for the defendant. That would be in our eyes a misappropriation of that file in a sense that it was not meant for that purpose. The officer was following instructions in that regard. It is unfortunate then post trial that this is shown as the Defence Forces coming out in support of someone who has been convicted of a serious offence, but that was not the intent. That is probably enough to say on that.