Australia’s military justice chief inadvertently omitted 10 occasions in which he sought advice from the head of the National Anti-Corruption Commission on Defence matters from his official evidence to parliament and quietly uploaded a corrective letter of explanation after questions from the ABC.<\/p>\n
The ABC can reveal Paul Brereton’s advice on defence matters has been sought by the Inspector-General of the ADF (IGADF), James Gaynor, on 21 occasions while Mr Brereton has been head of the federal integrity watchdog, rather than the eleven originally disclosed.<\/p>\n
Mr Brereton recently stepped away from all defence corruption referrals.<\/p>\n
The ABC wrote to the Department of Defence on Monday after a freedom of information request revealed three instances of consultation which Mr Gaynor had failed to disclose during Senate estimates and in parliamentary declarations.<\/p>\n
The Department of Defence missed its deadline to provide more information, sought more time, and uploaded a correction to parliament on Monday hours after receiving the ABC’s media enquiry.<\/p>\n
A Defence spokesperson said that at the time of his October 9 Senate estimates appearance, Mr Gaynor “understood that 11 queries had been put to Mr Brereton”.<\/p>\n
“Subsequent searches of office records revealed there were 21 queries. The inspector-general wrote to the committee on November 15 identifying the error and correcting the record,” the spokesperson said.<\/p>\n
The apology letter is dated November 15, but metadata shows it was created at 4:45pm on November 17, three and a half hours after the ABC’s questions reached Defence.<\/p>\n
Two sources not authorised to speak publicly told the ABC the relevant Senate committee received the letter after that time.<\/p>\n
“During the hearing I stated that my office had sent queries to Major General Paul Brereton on 11 occasions since 1 July 2023. At the hearing I also provided the dates when these queries were sent to Major General Brereton,” Mr Gaynor’s letter read.<\/p>\n
“I wish to correct this evidence. Since 1 July 2023 my office has sent 21 queries to Major General Brereton.”<\/p>\n
In a statement on its website, the NACC said Mr Brereton was stepping away from Defence investigations given the potential for a perceived conflict of interest given his military ties, but added there was no “actual conflict” and the step was “unnecessary”.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the watchdog’s inspector, Gail Furness, confirmed she is actively examining two complaints, including one from a former watchdog employee, relating to Mr Brereton’s military ties.<\/p>\n
Last month the ABC revealed Mr Brereton was continuing to consult for the IGADF, despite suggestions he had cut ties with the body.<\/p>\n
After that reporting, Mr Gaynor disclosed 11 dates on which he had “put queries” to the NACC Commissioner regarding the Afghanistan war crimes inquiry.<\/p>\n
Neither NACC chief executive Philip Reed nor Ms Furness were aware of this consulting arrangement.<\/p>\n
The apology letter confirms Mr Brereton was consulted on 21 occasions.<\/p>\n
“The additional instances my office consulted with Major General Brereton were accidentally omitted from my evidence given at Senate Estimates because some consultations commenced before he became the National Anti-Corruption Commissioner, but further engagement on the subject matter occurred following his appointment. Other records were stored in isolated databases not readily searchable by all staff,” the letter reads.<\/p>\n
“Three of the instances were also cancelled after the queries were sent and no activity was undertaken to respond, but they are disclosed for transparency.<\/p>\n
“I also consider it is important to advise the inclusion of these additional instances my office sent queries to Major General Brereton does not change the other evidence I gave to the committee which noted the necessity of this engagement.<\/p>\n
“These consultations, while usually very limited and incidental in nature, were essential because of Major General Brereton’s extensive knowledge and experience regarding sensitive issues related to potential war crimes.”<\/p>\n
A spokesperson for the integrity watchdog told the ABC: “Questions regarding the IGADF’s evidence to Senate Estimates are a matter for the IGADF”.<\/p>\n