Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Presentation 
National Mediation Conference 11 September 2014 
James Unkles 
Unchartered Waters, the Government’s response...
This presentation discusses 
1.The Government’s decision to review abuse allegations, and 
2.The adequacy of the restorati...
Defence Abuse Response Taskforce 
•allegations of sexual and other abuse; 
•the adequacy and appropriateness of Defence re...
On 26th November 2012, Defence Minister Smith and then Attorney General Roxon announced the Defence Abuse Response Task Fo...
DART Mission 
The Defence Abuse Response Taskforce was established as part of the government's response to the DLA Piper R...
Outcomes include 
•COUNSELLING 
•REPARATION PAYMENT TO A MAX OF $50,000 
•FORMAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION 
•RESTORATIVE ENGA...
Why an Administrative process instead of Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry? 
•There is evidence that abuse was or remai...
Dr Gary Gumble The lawyer who led a high-level review into sexual abuse in the Defence Force has called for a Royal Commis...
Restorative Engagement Program 
The Defence Abuse Restorative Engagement Program offers an avenue for people who have suff...
Is The Restorative Program The Most Effective Process for ADF Victims or Politically Driven? 
Does restorative justice emb...
Process that brings together all the parties affected by an incident of wrongdoing to collectively decide how to deal with...
Deficiencies 
•Process owned and managed by Defence 
•DART not chaired by a person independent of Defence 
•Restorative pr...
DART Restorative Process is Not! 
•direct communication, confrontation, and reconciliation between ADF victims and offende...
QUESTIONS/COMMENTS
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

2014 James Unkles Unchartered Waters, the Government's Response to Abuse / harrassment in the ADF - best mediation practice or political expediency

267 views

Published on

2014, National Mediation Conference, Melbourne

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

2014 James Unkles Unchartered Waters, the Government's Response to Abuse / harrassment in the ADF - best mediation practice or political expediency

  1. 1. Presentation National Mediation Conference 11 September 2014 James Unkles Unchartered Waters, the Government’s response to abuse / harassment in the ADF –best mediation practice or political expediency Expedient: ‘a regard for what is politic or advantageous rather than for what is right or just; a sense of self-interest’ ( http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/expediency) Copyright © James Unkles 2012
  2. 2. This presentation discusses 1.The Government’s decision to review abuse allegations, and 2.The adequacy of the restorative engagement process for victims / perpetrators
  3. 3. Defence Abuse Response Taskforce •allegations of sexual and other abuse; •the adequacy and appropriateness of Defence responses to allegations of abuse; and •systemic cultural issues within Defence http://www.defenceabusetaskforce.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx
  4. 4. On 26th November 2012, Defence Minister Smith and then Attorney General Roxon announced the Defence Abuse Response Task Force Major General Roberts-Smith QC is Chair of the Taskforce
  5. 5. DART Mission The Defence Abuse Response Taskforce was established as part of the government's response to the DLA Piper Review into allegations of sexual and other forms of abuse in Defence. The Taskforce was established to assess and respond to individual cases of abuse in Defence, occurring before 11 April 2011. This means that the fundamental work of the Taskforce is to determine, in close consultation with complainants, the most appropriate outcome in individual cases. Taskforce has received approximately 2,400 complaints of abuse in Defence
  6. 6. Outcomes include •COUNSELLING •REPARATION PAYMENT TO A MAX OF $50,000 •FORMAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION •RESTORATIVE ENGAGMENT CONFERENCE The Framework is the model of restorative engagement adapted by the Taskforce to meet the Government’s objectives and the needs of the particular circumstances of complainants to the Taskforce. The Framework is underpinned by the best practice principles and values of restorative practice and mediation.
  7. 7. Why an Administrative process instead of Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry? •There is evidence that abuse was or remains systemic and the result of a deep-seated and force wide cultural problem •truth must be determined to restore institutional and individual reputations •a Royal Commission or judicial inquiry would prevent politicisation of an issue involving the ADF as a necessarily apolitical national institution •The DART process is hidden from public scrutiny unlike a Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry to test allegations in an independent and transparent manner •The RC into sexual abuse is working, why not a RC or Judicial Inquiry into abuse in the ADF?
  8. 8. Dr Gary Gumble The lawyer who led a high-level review into sexual abuse in the Defence Force has called for a Royal Commission to expose rapists and abusers in the military's senior ranks. http://www.news.com.au/national/dr-gary-rumble-wants-sexual-abuse-in-defences-senior-ranks-exposed/story- fncynjr2-1226754492904
  9. 9. Restorative Engagement Program The Defence Abuse Restorative Engagement Program offers an avenue for people who have suffered abuse in Defence to have their personal account of abuse heard, responded to and acknowledged by Defence through a process of restorative conferencing
  10. 10. Is The Restorative Program The Most Effective Process for ADF Victims or Politically Driven? Does restorative justice embedded in the DART Process work? •Restorative justice is a social practice commonly embedded in the criminal justice system •intended to heal at both the individual, group and social level •Focused on victim, perpetrator and organisation
  11. 11. Process that brings together all the parties affected by an incident of wrongdoing to collectively decide how to deal with the aftermath of the incident and its implications for the future THE DART model is deficient: •what concrete and measurable effects restorative justice has had on recidivism rates in the ADF •How the program is measured •It may be cathartic for the abused, but what about the perpetrator who is absent from the process •Absence of interaction between victim and perpetrator and facilitated apology •Apology only comes from a Defence representative
  12. 12. Deficiencies •Process owned and managed by Defence •DART not chaired by a person independent of Defence •Restorative process precedes any legal action against a perpetrator •Apology comes from a senior Defence member appointed by the ADF, not from the perpetrator •Victim has no certainty of what action is taken against a perpetrator post Restorative process
  13. 13. DART Restorative Process is Not! •direct communication, confrontation, and reconciliation between ADF victims and offenders •At best, it is indirect restorative justice, a process that serves political interests, to be seen by the public to be doing something without any certainty that individual complaints will result in affirmative action to hold the Defence organisation and perpetrator/s to account •Not subjected to judicial process, like a RC
  14. 14. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS

×