Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

There are two aspects to your question. The first is in relation to command accountability. It is the case that commanders can be held criminally responsible for being directly or indirectly or knowingly concerned in or party to the commission of a war crime. This would be a matter for the Office of the Special Investigator. Command accountability action may be considered where it is found that a commander is morally responsible for the actions of their subordinates, regardless of their involvement in the specific acts.

With respect to the Afghanistan inquiry, the Inspector-General found the alleged criminal behaviour was conceived, committed, continued and concealed at the patrol commander level. Above that level, the inquiry found commanders were not recklessly indifferent to whether their subordinates were allegedly committing war crimes and did not fail to take reasonable steps to discover the behaviour, although the inquiry does find that commanders bear moral responsibility and accountability. In relation to the second part of your question, I do think that's been canvassed in estimates. As you know, the decision to grant an honour can be referred to the tribunal. (Time expired)