Page:R v McBride (No 4).pdf/11

 was aware, from a discussion with the CJOPS and another officer, that they were aware of a disagreement between deployed forces and military police regarding the circumstances under which military police had a right to ask questions about operational incidents.

37․ In late 2013, while deployed in Afghanistan, Mr McBride advised four ADF members of an issue that he was having with another more senior ADF officer. His concern related to search warrants obtained by military police of the Australian Defence Force Investigative Service (ADFIS) in relation to the SOTG. Mr McBride believed that the SOTG should not be subject to such action.

38․ Upon his return from deployment in late 2013, Mr McBride advised his supervisor that he held concerns that there were soldiers doing their operational duties on behalf of the Commonwealth who were being held to account for actions on operations that were appropriate in the operational context, but that were being misconstrued, misinterpreted or recast as contrary to the ROE by persons in the chain of command who were outside Afghanistan. Mr McBride advised his supervisor that he intended to raise a complaint with the Inspector General of the Australian Defence Force (IGADF). Mr McBride's supervisor believed that this was the appropriate avenue available for Mr McBride to resolve the matters that concerned him.

39․ In the middle of 2014, Mr McBride met with two senior ADF officers and advised them that he was working on an IGADF complaint about ADFIS' conduct in Afghanistan. One of the senior officers was frustrated by what he perceived to be Mr McBride's work performance and asked Mr McBride, "why are you persisting with the complaint to the detriment of your work". Further, this senior officer said, forcefully, "what are you trying to achieve?" and "how will it benefit you, Command and the army?". The officer was one who often spoke in a forceful manner. That senior officer did not say that Mr McBride should not make a complaint.

Misappropriation of documents

40․ In early 2014, when Mr McBride resolved to make a formal complaint, he did so because he was dissatisfied with certain practices in the ADF which he considered to be corrupt.

41․ As part of his employment, he had access to ADF records on a record management system which ran on a secure ADF network. That system could hold information up to and including the SECRET classification.

42․ In May 2014, Mr McBride began accessing documents on the record management system and storing them in a personal folder on his ADF computer at the Bungendore headquarters after his ordinary work day had ended. He printed several documents and