A man who leaked classified military documents that revealed allegations Australian soldiers committed war crimes in Afghanistan will find out his punishment after pleading guilty.
David McBride pleaded guilty to stealing classified material and leaking it to journalists.
The prosecution has pushed for the former military lawyer to spend a minimum of two years behind bars to reflect the severity of his crime but his lawyers argued for leniency, saying what he did was in the public interest.Â
Justice David Mossop will hand down his decision in the ACT Supreme Court today.
The justice also has the option to impose a suspended prison sentence or an order to serve his time in the community.
In sentencing hearings, McBride’s barrister Stephen Odgers SC argued his “impaired emotional wellbeing” due to PTSD and substance abuse issues contributed to his decision to disclose the documents.Â
McBride felt he had a public duty to do so, he contended.Â
But prosecutor Trish McDonald countered this, saying McBride had maintained he did the right thing after getting his mental health under control and recovering from his abuse issues.Â
McBride not only breached defence protocol but his duty as a lawyer to not disclose confidential information, she argued.Â
Further, he was motivated by “personal vindication” to show he knew more than others, the prosecutor told the court.Â
The leaked documents led to reports about Australian special forces soldiers committing alleged war crimes.
An inquiry later found credible information about 23 incidents of potential war crimes, which involved the killing of 39 Afghans between 2005 and 2016.
McBride’s motivation was to highlight that some soldiers were being unduly investigated for incidents that weren’t war crimes as a “PR exercise” for the defence force to show they were doing something, Odgers told the court.
McDonald contended that at no point did McBride single out any specific allegations of criminal activity in multiple complaints despite his accusations top brass were acting illegally.
The former military lawyer had changed his justification multiple times, including that the defence force’s recruitment policies for increasing the representation of women contravened the financial management and governance laws, the prosecutor said.
But all McBride’s allegations came under the umbrella of suspicions of top defence officials engaging in criminal behaviour, which is why he went to an investigative journalist when he thought internal complaints wouldn’t address the issue, Odgers said.Â
Human rights lawyers and advocates have argued the prosecution should be dropped as punishing whistleblowers would have a chilling effect on free speech and scare people away from exposing wrongdoing.
