Chapter 10
Australian Federal Police
10.1
Australian police have been involved in peacekeeping operations since
1964 when officers were sent to Cyprus as part of the United Nations Force
(UNFICYP).[1]
However, police involvement in overseas deployments, including peacekeeping, has
increased in the last decade: the Australian Federal Police (AFP) is currently
deployed in Cyprus, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Nauru, Tonga, Vanuatu,
Cambodia and Afghanistan.[2]
As of January 2008, the total number of AFP officers deployed to international
missions was 323. This number rose to 393 with the additional 70 who went to
Timor-Leste in February 2008. The majority of deployed AFP officers are serving
in peacekeeping operations in Solomon Islands (208) and in Timor-Leste (130).[3]
10.2
In this chapter, the committee examines the changing nature of peacekeeping
operations and its impact on the AFP. It looks at the AFP's preparedness and
capacity to meet the growing demands of these operations and its pre-deployment
training regime, taking account of any additional skills required for
peacekeeping.
Changing AFP contribution
10.3
Police carry out the function of maintaining law and order for the
community. Their role in peacekeeping operations, while consistent with this
broad function, presents particular challenges for AFP personnel. They are
expected to deliver a police service and exercise discretion in a country that
may have a different political and legal system and where law and order and the
judicial system are failing or broken down completely. Increasingly, they are
required to operate in multidimensional situations and actively participate in
capacity building. AFP personnel may be called on to provide a range of police
services and technical skills or train others in police functions; undertake
investigations of alleged human rights abuses; and assist in managing refugee
movements.
10.4
The contribution that the police make to peacekeeping is widely
recognised.[4]
Assistant Commissioner Walters, AFP, stated:
There is a growing recognition, in the UN and in other
organisations, of the importance of policing, particularly in postconflict
societies. Once you create a security pause and law and order is restored, the
role of policing in capacity building, in law enforcement and in the law and
order institutions of those states is absolutely critical to building a solid
foundation for economic growth and good governance.[5]
10.5
He also highlighted the role that the AFP is undertaking, particularly
capacity building in the region:
We are very much trying to put our resources at the front end of
what some people call failing or fragile states to make sure that they do not
slide into the category of failed states where a lot more effort and resources
need to be put into rebuilding institutions. Our focus is very much at that
front end of trying to arrest the deterioration of conditions in those
countries.[6]
10.6
He further acknowledged that the task at hand is 'very much a
generational issue and will require long-term commitment'.[7]
The following section looks at the AFP's capacity to meet the demands of
today's peacekeeping operations.
Capability
10.7
Unlike the ADF, the AFP does not have a deployment tradition—it has not
been part of AFP culture.[8] In 2004,
however, the government recognised the need to establish a dedicated group
within the AFP with the full time responsibility of international deployments.
The establishment of the International Deployment Group (IDG) in 2004 was
intended to assist planning within the AFP and overcome 'operational drawbacks
linked to ad-hoc deployments, ensuring there are resources dedicated
exclusively to the Group's activities, rather than other operational demands'.[9]
Australian Federal Police in Solomon Islands
During
the riots in Solomon Islands in April 2006 (image courtesy AFP).
International Deployment Group
10.8
Assistant Commissioner Walters explained that the IDG is 'a capability
through which the AFP could deploy police officers and unsworn personnel
offshore'.[10]
Its tasks are to contribute to 'offshore law enforcement initiatives' and
participate in 'capacity development programs within the Law and Justice
Sector'.[11]
10.9
In March 2007, the IDG employed over 600 people: approximately 250 were
Australia-based and 350 were involved in overseas operations.[12]
Of the 350, 100 officers had been seconded from Australian state police
and thirteen Pacific Island countries.[13]
The 250 Australia-based personnel were mostly unsworn officers and worked in Canberra
in areas such as HR, finance, contracts and logistics, capacity building and
training.[14]
10.10
Commissioner Mick Keelty has noted that while a proportion of the IDG is
directed to security, the IDG has a broad spectrum of skills. Its major skill
is 'a capability for capacity building to train police in developing countries
and also a forensic capability' with only a proportion of the total number in
the IDG directly related to riot control and security. According to Commissioner
Keelty:
We are one of the only countries in the developed world that has
a capacity in policing to put offshore to deliver part of the legal justice
systems in other countries and it is something that has become quite a key
focus for both the organisation and, indeed, governments.[15]
10.11
Associate Professor Elsina Wainwright thought the expansion of the IDG
was 'the right trajectory for the AFP':
I think that the expanded IDG is a good idea, if they can find
the right personnel, because there has been a shortage of police to do these
kinds of tasks, and training up police in a standing body does...make good sense,
particularly as it will decrease the need to backfill from the states.[16]
10.12
It should also be noted that the IDG has UN accreditation as a training
organisation.
Operational Response Group
10.13
In 2006, the government announced that it was lifting the IDG's
capability by establishing a 150-strong Operational Response Group (ORG). This
initiative allows the IDG to have a group in 'a constant state of readiness for
emergency responses to law and order issues and stabilisation operations'.[17]
The AFP informed the committee that the ORG has 'highly-skilled capability in
crowd control and riot management with rapid deployment capability, as well
as...the infrastructure to support our offshore missions'.[18]
10.14
By July 2007, the ORG had grown to encompass around 200 personnel
including an operational arm of 150 split into a group of approximately 50
tactical operators—'the traditional SWAT members who are trained up to that
level'—and a group of around 100 to comprise a riot response group with lethal
capability. The remaining group of 50 provide support across areas such as
dogs, marksmen, maritime, and aviation ground surveillance capability.[19]
10.15
Dr Anthony Murney, Manager, Planning and Development, IDG, noted that the
ORG gives the AFP the ability to operate in environments that it 'has not been
able to operate in initially, in previous kinds of interventions, in as
professional a way as we might like'.[20]
Associate Professor Wainwright thought there is a need for this sort of
capability:
It makes good sense to build up the capability the AFP has to go
in at the sharp end of activities, more alongside the ADF. This is, I think, in
response to a clear need that was perceived in East Timor...[21]
10.16
Furthermore, Assistant Commissioner Walters told the committee that the AFP
and the ORG had learnt a lot in the last two years and are now at the 'cutting
edge' with training initiatives.[22]
Committee view
10.17
The committee believes the establishment and expansion of IDG and the
development of tactical capability through the ORG are necessary for the AFP to
be able to participate in, and contribute to, international peacekeeping
operations. The committee acknowledges the pioneering nature of the ORG which
epitomises the AFP commitment to developing the particular skills necessary for
the challenges of modern peacekeeping. It supports the AFP's work in this area
and believes that the AFP is now at the forefront in developing a broad-based
capability to assist other countries to deliver an effective policing service.
Personnel
10.18
The Police Federation of Australia (PFA) drew attention to an AFP
shortage of police officers despite budget increases for recruitment.[23]
Like the ADF, the AFP is experiencing recruitment and retention difficulties.
The AFP noted that, with the rapid expansion of the national security sector
over the past few years, policing 'now faces one of its most critical
challenges in continuing as a sustainable and steadfast national and community
resource'.[24]
10.19
It should also be noted that while Commissioner Keelty acknowledged that
there are 'a finite number of people able to be deployed', he indicated that
the IDG had no difficulty deploying, at short notice, the 70 extra AFP officers
required in Timor-Leste in February 2008. He acknowledged that there was a
limit to what the IDG could do but that 'at the moment we are managing the
requests that are coming from the government'.[25]
Recruitment process
10.20
The Australian Government announced in August 2006 that it had allocated
$493 million for the IDG to increase its staffing levels to 1,200 personnel by
June 2008.[26] The increase
in funding would strengthen the IDG's capacity to deploy 'skilled personnel for
long-term capacity-building, peacekeeping missions and bilateral programs', and
to relieve the pressure of seeking contributions from state and territory
police services.[27] It would
enable the IDG to deploy around 750 sworn officers offshore and at short
notice.[28]
10.21
In July 2007, Assistant Commissioner Walters told the committee that IDG
recruitment was on track and 'very attractive to a lot of people', with
applications coming from AFP and state and territory police officers and former
police officers wanting to rejoin the service.[29]
10.22
Some submitters expressed concern about the recruitment for the IDG
having an adverse affect on other police jurisdictions in Australia. In response
to this claim, the AFP pointed out that only 0.02 per cent of the total
police strength in Australia is seconded from state and territory services to
the AFP.[30]
Committee view
10.23
The committee supports the AFP's endeavours to attract quality staff to
the IDG and believes that this places the AFP in a strong position to respond
to the demands of international deployments.
Equipment and logistics
10.24
Until now, the AFP has not had primary responsibility for the full range
of equipment and logistics necessary for international peacekeeping operations
because it has been either part of UN missions or able to rely on ADF
capability. Assistant Commissioner Walters informed the committee that the AFP
has decided to expand its own capabilities due to the increasing number of
missions and because the AFP may be required to deploy to missions not
involving the ADF.[31]
10.25
Major General Adrian Clunies-Ross, RSL, argued that the AFP needs
to build independent capabilities:
They will inevitably be working in conjunction with the Defence
Force, and it would seem to me reasonably logical that they would have their
own means of transport, communications and various other things. It would be
impossible for them to work from the Defence Force's capabilities...[32]
10.26
Although the ADF and the AFP are separate organisations and have their
own requirements for self-sufficiency, the AFP is not looking to build a
'complete logistical capability' within the IDG, as Assistant Commissioner Walters
noted:
Our preference is not to do that but to utilise ADF where we
feel that is appropriate and where ADF resources are available. We find the
current arrangements with PDL [Patrick Defence Logistics] to provide the
logistical support is probably the most effective and efficient way for us to
provide the capability.[33]
10.27
He further stated that the IDG's capability development cell will be
looking at AFP requirements, best practice and new technologies in consultation
with other organisations, including Defence.[34]
More recently, Commissioner Keelty indicated that a number of their contracts
were 'on the back of the interoperability between the AFP and ADF...[to] maximise
the benefits for the government in terms of what we acquire and how much it
costs'.[35]
10.28
One proposed major acquisition is protected response vehicles. The committee
understands that, due to the sometimes volatile situations that the IDG
officers face during overseas deployments, the AFP is looking to buy such
vehicles to 'provide the most secure capability' for its officers.[36]
According to Commander Steve Lancaster, Manager, ORG, the AFP is looking at a
combination of small and large vehicles, some enclosed and some open-air troop
carriers suitable for the tropics.[37]
He explained that observing the capacities of other forces in East Timor had
given the AFP an opportunity to assess the most appropriate kinds of transport
for the IDG's role in the Asia–Pacific region. For example, the Portuguese
police unit used 'smaller, nimble teams' that are able to respond effectively
to multiple strikes around the city. In contrast, the Royal Malaysian Police proved
effective for 'big public demonstrations' and used open-air troop carriers to
move around en masse.[38]
The AFP provided no information on the number of vehicles required or the
budget allocated for the procurement. The committee understands that the first
of the new vehicles are expected to be delivered at the end of 2008.[39]
10.29
In February 2008, Mr Andrew Wood, Chief Operating Officer, AFP, stated
that under the current budget allocation for 'supplier expenses', the IDG had a
little over $150 million which, in his view, was 'quite reasonable resourcing'.[40]
Committee view
10.30
The committee notes the need for the AFP to have logistical capability
of its own. It accepts the view that the AFP cannot build 'a complete logistical
capability', and in some cases will rely on the resources of the ADF to assist
it during a peacekeeping operation. It recognises that where the AFP requires
its own capability, compatibility with Defence systems should be a primary
consideration.
Recommendation 9
10.31
The committee recommends that the AFP adhere to a procurement policy
that requires, where possible, any equipment purchased for use in a
peacekeeping operation to be compatible with equipment or technology used by
the ADF.
Training for peacekeeping operations
10.32
The AFP started to train its officers for overseas deployments in 1999
but it was not until 2004, with the establishment of the IDG, that increased
attention and resources were given to train and prepare police for
multidimensional and complex missions overseas.[41]
10.33
In the following section, the committee discusses the AFP's
prerequisites for employment with the IDG, examines pre-deployment training for
international operations and assesses its adequacy. The committee then looks at
training in areas of health, safety and wellbeing.
Prerequisites for international
policing
10.34
The AFP informed the committee that in practice, an officer for
deployment to a peacekeeping operation is required to have more than four years
policing experience.[42]
Commissioner Keelty explained:
There is no point in sending police overseas to train and
develop foreign police if they are not developed themselves in the domestic
environment.[43]
10.35
He noted that the biggest challenge for the AFP is:
...to ensure that all AFP members have: an incredibly clear and
focussed understanding of the basic tenets of policing; a deep knowledge of the
principles underpinning the profession of policing; a comprehensive
understanding of the AFP's stated values, and, most importantly, the ability to
apply all of this knowledge in an appropriate cultural framework.[44]
10.36
Officers must also meet several other requirements including that of
being 'Use of Force' qualified (certified competency to use weapons) for the
duration of deployment.[45]
10.37
According to Assistant Commissioner Paul Jevtovic, IDG, officers with
particular skills or expertise may also be recruited by the IDG. He noted in an
interview that in the early years, the recruitment for missions such as RAMSI was
more about 'getting people offshore, but as the missions have evolved along
with our understanding of the challenges, we now advertise specific positions'.
He further explained that through this process, the AFP can better assess
people's skills and match them with roles AFP officers may have in the future.[46]
Pre-deployment training
10.38
Assistant Commissioner Walters explained that there is 'a fairly
comprehensive training program', depending on the officers' skills, level of
experience and status of being either sworn or unsworn.[47]
State and territory police officers can join the AFP through the lateral entry
program in which officers are trained in AFP processes and procedures.[48]
10.39
The IDG Learning and Development Branch reviewed training requirements
in 2006 in light of the various environmental and jurisdictional challenges
encountered during deployments.[49]
A restructured training program commenced in March 2007. It is conducted in three
stages:
- pre-deployment training (PDT);
- mission update information sessions—conducted immediately prior
to deployment together with administrative and logistics tasks; and
- in-country briefing—conducted by the force in command of the
specific mission.[50]
10.40
The PDT is a five-week (35-day) course, compulsory for all personnel undertaking
overseas duties under the IDG. It focuses on core skill requirements (with two
broad themes, capacity development and safety), on assessment and performance
feedback. The course is divided into three parts: operational safety and
administration; formal instruction; and scenario phases.[51]
10.41
The first ten days are reserved for use of force qualification or
re-qualification; the rest of the program focuses on 'providing participants
with the skills to live and work in a foreign environment'. The participants
learn a 'coaching approach to capacity development...delivered within a setting
of cultural appropriateness, values and human rights'.[52]
10.42
The course content is modified in accordance with changing mission
requirements. It usually covers topics such as culture and mentoring skills, capacity
building, humanitarian assistance, and the UN Standard Generic Training Modules
(SGTM), the minimum skill and knowledge requirements for United Nations Police.[53]
In addition, police officers are trained in negotiation and conflict
resolution.[54]
Human rights training, delivered by the AFP's legal team, covers child and
gender issues, based on the UN training package.[55]
Legal training provides an overview on the criminal process of host nations.[56]
Theoretical knowledge is then put into practice in the scenario phase, a practical
nine-day field exercise during which the 'participants are immersed in a
fictional mission developed to simulate a variety of situations the members may
encounter when deployed overseas'.[57]
10.43
Professor Andrew Goldsmith, Flinders University, observed the challenges
facing the AFP in preparing officers for international deployments:
I know of no other single police force in the world that has had
to respond in such a way across areas which, if we are to be completely frank,
are not just about policing; they are about community development and broader
social development. A police officer from Belconnen is not necessarily
naturally well-prepared to do capacity development in Baucau, East Timor.[58]
10.44
In an attempt to foster situational awareness and help manage the
challenges associated with preparing officers for international deployments in
low-resource settings, the AFP has established an innovative training complex
at Majura, ACT. The Wanggirrali Ngurrumbai Centre includes a site which
simulates village or town conditions in a developing country. Various training
scenarios are utilised to replicate deployment environments and include: a
general store, burning buildings, exploded vehicles, roaming animals, limited
toileting facilities and erratic water and power supply. The site also has a
CCTV capacity which can be used to film recruits for training and development
purposes.[59]
10.45
During and after the pre-deployment training, police officers have time
to decide if they want to go ahead with overseas deployment. Assistant Commissioner Walters
explained:
They go through the predeployment training and into, as best as
we can create here, the operating environment they will be working in. We have
had instances of people self-selecting themselves out of deployment because,
having put themselves in that environment, they realise, ‘Maybe this is not
what I thought it was going to be.’ We think that is a positive.[60]
10.46
Assistant Commissioner Walters noted that so far the AFP has had
'sufficient interest' in voluntary terms but that '[t]here is scope for the
commissioner to direct people to undertake duties'.[61]
AFP—training for peacekeeping operations
AFP's Wanggirrali Ngurrumbai Centre, Majura, ACT (image
courtesy AFP).
AFP pre-deployment training exercise, Wanggirrali Ngurrumbai
Centre, Majura, ACT (image courtesy AFP).
AFP pre-deployment training exercise, Wanggirrali
Ngurrumbai Centre, Majura, ACT (image courtesy AFP).
Adequacy of pre-deployment training
10.47
During the inquiry, many witnesses praised the way in which the AFP prepares
and trains its officers to meet the growing demand for their services in
peacekeeping and the high standards they have achieved in such a short period.[62]
Mr Norman Webber, UN Police Association of Australia (UNPAA), thought
that the AFP 'have turned out one of the best, if not the best, UN policing
groups in the world'.[63]
Associate Professor Wainwright agreed with this assessment, saying that the IDG:
...is at the cutting edge of policing, stabilisation and
post-conflict reconstruction and capacity-building operations at a time when
internationally there are far too few civilian police to deploy to such
operations and to meet the need which is there.[64]
10.48
While some submitters to the inquiry regarded the AFP's performance as
very positive, particularly the recent improvements since the formation of the IDG,
they saw room for improvement through further consolidation and expansion.[65]
The main area of concern was in coordination and cooperation particularly with
the ADF and in language and cultural awareness training. These matters are
dealt with in Chapters 11, 14 and 18. The PFA stated that it is 'satisfied that
pre-deployment training meets all agreed protocols provided such training is
regularly re-assessed'.[66]
10.49
On this matter of scope for improvement, the committee notes, in
particular, the efforts that the AFP is taking to ensure that it is getting
independent evaluation of its performance. There are a number of projects
underway, including a joint venture with Flinders University and the Australian
National University (ANU) on a three-year evaluation called 'Policing the
Neighbourhood'. Commissioner Keelty noted that one of the preliminary findings
of this project helped in the development of a more focused course of training
for our own police, particularly on human rights, on language and coaching
skills.[67]
The AFP is also collaborating with the University of Queensland in the
development of performance measures to assist the AFP assess its contributions
to peacekeeping operations.[68]
Committee view
10.50
The committee commends the AFP for its pre-deployment training which, it
believes, equips AFP personnel to assist other nations build capacity in the
area of law and order. It notes, in particular, the AFP's open and flexible
approach to developing new ways to improve its effectiveness, especially
through independent evaluation of its performance. The IDG and its innovative
training programs also provide a model for other countries.
Training in health, safety and wellbeing
10.51
Training for health, safety and wellbeing is also an important part of
the IDG's pre-deployment preparation. This training is based on and exceeds the
requirements set by the UN and includes safety and first aid training and AIDS
and HIV awareness. Participants are also provided with literature on these
matters.[69]
10.52
A medical examination is part of the international recruitment process.
Its purpose is to identify 'any medical condition for which a further risk
assessment or advice may be required' and to ensure that all medical procedures
(examinations, laboratory and vaccinations) are carried out in a timely manner.[70]
Tests are also run to determine the suitability of an officer for overseas
deployment. Assistant Commissioner Walters acknowledged that an AFP
officer about to be deployed is making a significant commitment. He said:
[I]t is a big decision for officers to make and to say, 'If I'm
going to do a 100-week deployment in the IDG, for a fair amount of time, what
would be nearly a two-year period, I’m going to be away from my family'.[71]
10.53
The AFP conducts psychological testing and a range of 'other
predeployment processes' to make sure that people, before they deploy, are
medically and psychologically capable of undertaking the deployment.[72]
Concerns relating to training and
preparedness
10.54
While submitters were positive about AFP preparedness, several issues
were raised which go to both the effectiveness of the officer performing his or
her duty on deployment as well as safety issues. They concern unsworn officers
performing the duties of sworn officers and alleged breaches of safeguards with
regard to the use of arms.
Sworn and unsworn officers
10.55
Although the AFP is giving considerable attention to the training
requirements of its members, the committee received a suggestion that unsworn
police officers were performing duties that only sworn officers should
undertake.
10.56
Mr Mark Burgess, CEO, PFA, noted that on a number of occasions, concerns
had been raised about the lack of distinction between the role that a police
officer, a protective service officer and an administration person is to
perform on a deployment.[73]
His concern was about the safety of police officers and protective service
officers in situations where an officer was performing a function for which he
or she was not fully trained. With regard to unsworn officers on deployment, he
explained:
...they do not have the full training of a fully sworn police
officer. We would argue that there is a duty of care, on behalf of not only the
AFP commissioner but all commissioners who provide police officers to these
deployments, to ensure that their officers are working side by side in policing
functions with officers who are fully trained. We do not want to see a
situation where police officers are working side by side with people who are
not fully sworn, not fully trained, but who, for all intents and purposes, from
a visual perspective, look like police officers.[74]
10.57
On the matter of unsworn officers, the AFP advised the committee that:
IDG Peacekeeping missions are structured through analysis of the
roles, tasks and any constraints that have been set by the mounting authority;
for example the United Nations. There is not a reliance on retired or unsworn
personnel; rather IDG contributions are based on mission need and in the case
of RAMSI this is achieved through a combination of sworn, unsworn and former
retired members.[75]
10.58
The AFP also noted that 'Unsworn AFP members are clearly distinguishable
from sworn staff as their uniform incorporates a distinctive coloured shirt
(taupe) which is mandatory dress in mission under Commander’s Orders'.[76]
Committee view
10.59
The committee notes the concerns raised about unsworn officers taking on
the tasks of sworn officers. Apart from the one allegation, it had no other
indication that unsworn officers were performing the duties of sworn officers.
The committee notes the AFP's assurances that there is not a reliance on
retired or unsworn personnel in peacekeeping operations.
Safety and bearing arms
10.60
While the vast majority of members of the AFP perform routine policing
functions, they also face particularly tense situations during peacekeeping operations
and may be called on to use force during their deployment.
10.61
Clearly, training for the safe and appropriate use of firearms—the
degree of force required, when and against whom to use weapons—is an important
consideration for AFP's international deployments. The AFP provided the committee
with details about the weapons competency procedures which indicate that there
is a robust certification system in place.
10.62
Because of the requirement that an officer have at least four years of
policing experience for international deployments, all sworn AFP officers have
weapons competency and are 'certified as use of force qualified under AFP
Commissioner's Order 3'. To obtain weapons competency, police officers need to
pass a written test that 'probes the member's understanding of police powers
and procedures', and practical tests to establish 'proficiency in the use of
firearms, batons, handcuffs and OC [oleoresin capsicum] spray'.[77]
Competency needs to be re-certified every 12 months. If a member fails to
re-certify, he or she is no longer deemed deployable.[78]
10.63
Assistant Commissioner Walters noted that 'officers carry firearms very
much for the protection of the officer, for the protection of life and limb,
effectively'.[79]
He explained that, depending on the mission, the AFP has in place internal
orders that relate to the use of weapons. Commissioner's Order 3 governs the
use of firearms, and there may also 'be other mission-specific orders or
directives...that might dictate when and how weapons might be used'.[80]
10.64
The riots in Timor-Leste in June 2006 highlighted the importance of
sound training in the use of weapons during periods of high level threats. Commander
Lancaster explained in detail the situation in which AFP officers found
themselves:
...it was still high risk right through the six months that we
were there. There were occasions when we would have almost daily incidents of
rock- and dart-throwing. Occasionally there were times where it just went 'off'...for
want of a better word—for two or three days. On those occasions we probably had
two incidents where we discharged firearms. It was the only time and they were
only ever used as warning shots—basically, as a last resort.[81]
10.65
He also noted the important role that the ORG had in this highly
volatile situation where the general duties police were out of their vehicles
and in a very dangerous life-threatening situation until the tactical people,
the ORG and the GNR (Portuguese National Republican Guard), turned up to assist.[82]
10.66
He used AFP experiences in Solomon Islands in 2006 to highlight further the
importance of good judgement based on sound training on the appropriate and
proper use of force:
...being general duties, when we turned up to events where people
were hammering each other with rocks, we had to have the standard operating
procedure of not feeling compelled to go down there and deal with it
straightaway. We learnt to make sure we had the right tools, the people and the
support and to get the tactical people in order to go down and deal with the
situation more efficiently. We found that worked better. Also, we had state
police within our ranks, and these people had been shotgun trained in their
home state. We brought in training from BLP and AFP shotgun training and gave
them the capability to use the beanbag rounds, which are less lethal, within
their general duties. This was not used so they would get themselves into
trouble; it was used so they would get themselves out of trouble, and that
proved to be very effective as well.[83]
10.67
Despite sound training and Commissioner's Orders in place, World Vision Australia
referred to what it believed were shortcomings in pre-deployment preparations
with regard to the application of force. It raised allegations pertaining to
the use of force in RAMSI, including that some IDG members might be using
weapons without having undertaken either approved training or a validation
program to ensure their competency.[84]
10.68
It also raised concerns about a training presentation on the use of less
than lethal force, in which it understands training was given by a person not
certified to deliver it and unacceptable, possibly illegal, information was
provided.[85]
10.69
The AFP informed the committee that the Professional Standards
investigations had inquired into these allegations and in some instances found
shortcomings, which the AFP have addressed.[86]
Committee view
10.70
The committee notes the AFP requirements for weapons competency. It also
notes the suggestion made to the inquiry that there may have been breaches of
the rules governing the use of firearms. It has taken account of the AFP's
assurances that its officers undergo thorough training and appropriate
certification and that the alleged breaches were investigated and, where
necessary, remedied. Yet, it is concerned that these issues have arisen. The committee
urges the AFP to ensure that all weapons deployed on a peacekeeping operation
have been approved by the Commissioner for use during the operation and all AFP
members on a peacekeeping operation who are permitted to use particular weapons
are fully qualified in their use.
10.71
The committee did not take evidence on the robustness of the
Professional Standards investigations that looked into the allegations of
inappropriate or improper use of weapons. It takes this opportunity to stress
the importance of ensuring that investigations into alleged breaches of safety
rules and regulations are independent and transparent. Furthermore, that there
are appropriate reporting procedures in place that encourage members of the AFP
to report breaches of safety rules or lapses in safety practices.
Conclusion
10.72
The AFP has taken major steps to improve its preparedness for peacekeeping
operations and is continuing to expand to meet future requirements. It is recruiting
to increase the number of IDG staff and looking to improving its logistical
capability by procuring new vehicles. It has developed a pre-deployment
training program that is both comprehensive and innovative. The AFP is also
committed to open and independent evaluation of its performance as
peacekeepers, showing a willingness to embrace change and reform to ensure that
it remains an effective peacekeeping force. The committee considers that the AFP
is well prepared for international deployments and acknowledges that its
performance is of a very high standard.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page