Defence Forces Tribunal: Officer declines to answer whether 'a good soldier' would complain

The tribunal has heard claims there was a culture in the Defence Forces that discouraged complaints of abuse.

As the Defence Forces Tribunal resumed on Wednesday, a senior officer involved in human resources declined to answer whether “a good soldier” would complain.

The question was asked by senior counsel Gareth Compton, who represents serving and former members of the Defence Forces. 

The exchange led to objections from a barrister for the State.

Earlier, Colonel Daragh O’Brien was asked if it had ever occurred to him that the Defence Forces’ complaints process should be run externally.

Mr Compton told him serving and former soldiers had repeatedly testified that they have “no confidence that the current (complaints) process is confidential”.

He asked if the notion of taking the complaints process “outside the chain of command to an external body” had ever occurred to him.

The cavalry officer, who has also served in the Defence Forces transformation management office, replied: “I cannot speak to that. It’s outside my remit.” 

Mr Compton said that such a move would “seem like a natural conclusion” but replied: “I cannot comment.”

Mr Compton then asked: “Would a good soldier complain?”

Col O'Brien, whose duty abroad includes tours in Lebanon, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Mali, remained silent and the barrister sat down after there were objections about his question.

The questions came after the tribunal heard a presentation about the evolution of the complaints process between 1983 and 2024 from ColO’Brien, whose roles included assignments at the Defence Forces military academy and human resources J1 Branch.

His presentation was given under direct examination by tribunal senior counsel Aeden McGovern.

Wednesday marked the beginning of the second public hearing module of the tribunal, which was established in June 2024 by then tánaiste and defence minister Micheál Martin after a report of a review into allegations of brutal and “sadistic” abuse was published.

Those allegations, in the March 2023 Independent Review Group (IRG): Defence Forces Report, included the rape of both male and female soldiers groomed by senior officers for sex.

The IRG report described a “discernible pattern of rape and sexual assault” in barracks, naval boats, swimming areas, showers and abroad while serving with the UN.

The extent to which soldiers suffered reprisals for complaining about abuse will be one of the issues dealt with in the new public hearing of the tribunal.

In setting out what it will cover, senior counsel Niall Beirne, for the tribunal, said the module will also identify any systemic failures in the Defence Forces complaints process.

Mr Beirne said that since the last public module ended in July, the Defence Forces has produced an additional 2,257 pages of extra evidence requested by tribunal lawyers.

He said further requests are due to be made.

Of the 53 witnesses who have given evidence so far, Mr Beirne said their contribution is “greatly appreciated”.

The new module will, he said, run into next year and encompass the first five terms of reference, which include whether the complaints process is fit for purpose and if procedures were correctly followed.

The tribunal will examine any systemic failures in the complaints process and claims there was a culture that discouraged complaints of abuse.

This module will also to what extent anybody who complained about abuse was subjected to intimidation and other reprisals.

Mr Beirne said Ms Justice Ann Power should be in a position after the conclusion of the second module to make a ruling on evidence heard during both public modules.

The tribunal would then look at issues such as how the defence minister directly handled complaints of abuse and how the complaints process dealt with allegations around the exposure of air corps personnel to toxic chemicals.