Remit of State's Defence Forces tribunal 'too narrow and vague'

Diane Byrne, of Women of Honour, said that 'the terms of reference are too narrow and too non-specific'. Picture: Gareth Chaney/Collins

The two main groups representing survivors of abuse and mistreatment in the Defence Forces have rejected the terms of reference for an upcoming tribunal.

The Canary Movement and the Women of Honour group, who represent more than 350 abuse survivors between them, say the tribunal’s remit is “too narrow and too vague”.

In addition, the groups say it will do “nothing” about the culture of abuse and victimisation in the Defence Forces and that the tribunal now amounts to little more than a “box ticking” exercise.

The tribunal is the main recommendation of the Independent Review Group panel report, which was published in March. It detailed allegations of brutal and “sadistic” abuse, including the rape of both male and female soldiers.

It concluded that “at best, the Defence Forces barely tolerates women and, at its worst, verbally, physically, sexually and psychologically abuses women in its ranks”.

One of the five main terms of reference for the tribunal is to establish whether the complaints processes in the Defence Forces in relation to complaints of abuse were fit for purpose.

Alan Nolan, spokesman for the Canary Movement, said: “Having seen the terms of reference, and just how narrow the remit is, this just looks like a glorified box-ticking and damage-limiting exercise.

“The terms of reference do not reflect what is necessary in order to identify the truth required to effect the depth of change needed in the Defence Forces.

“They have been drawn up with minimal real face-to-face engagement with victims and survivors.

“The fact that the minister of defence and his secretary general have been involved in drawing up the terms of reference runs, we believe, contrary to our constitutional right to natural justice and fair procedures."

Diane Byrne, of Women of Honour, said: “We do not accept the terms of reference.

“We have long held the view that if you want to exact real change in the Defence Forces, you need to go after the people at the higher level of the organisation who have enabled abusers.

“We need to know what they knew and what they did or didn’t do.

“The terms of reference are too narrow and too non-specific.”

A Department of Defence spokesperson said: "Draft Terms of Reference were prepared in consultation with the Attorney General and shared with a wide variety of interested parties.

"The Tánaiste received correspondence from a number of interested parties on the Terms of Reference and held meetings with a number of stakeholders, accepting many of the additional terms sought.

"The Tánaiste intends to revert to Government in the coming weeks to seek approval for the Terms of Reference and the appointment of a Judge to Chair the Tribunal."