Whistleblower who exposed war crime allegations loses bid to reduce prison time
Mr McBride said through his lawyers that Australians would be outraged by the Court of Appeal decision.
Mr McBride had argued that he leaked the documents out of a sworn duty to act in the public interest.
'It is my own conscience and the people of Australia that I answer to. I have kept my oath to the Australian people,' Mr McBride said in the lawyers' statement.
Mr McBride's lawyers said they would take their appeal to the High Court (AP/Rod McGuirk)
Mr McBride pleaded guilty last year to three charges, including theft and sharing with journalists documents classified as secret. He faced a potential life sentence.
Rights advocates complain that Mr McBride remains the only person to be imprisoned over allegations of war crimes committed by elite Australian special forces troops in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016.
A military report released in 2020 recommended 19 current and former soldiers face criminal investigations over 39 unlawful killings in Afghanistan.
Former Special Air Service (SAS) Regiment soldier Oliver Schulz was charged in March 2023 with murdering an unarmed Afghan in 2012. Mr Schulz pleaded not guilty to the war crime and has yet to stand trial.
Former SAS Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith, Australia's most decorated living veteran, lost an appeal two weeks ago against a civil court ruling that he unlawfully killed four unarmed Afghans.
Mr Roberts-Smith said he would appeal his loss in the High Court. He has not been criminally charged.
Mr McBride's lawyers also said they would take their appeal to the High Court.
'We believe that only the High Court can properly grapple with the immense public interest and constitutional issues at the heart of this case,' the lawyers' statement said.
'It cannot be a crime to expose a crime. It cannot be illegal to tell the truth,' the statement added.
The lawyers also called on attorney general Michelle Rowland, who was appointed after the Labor Party government was re-elected on May 3, to recommend Mr McBride be pardoned.
'It is now time for the attorney general to show leadership. To show Australians that this Labor government will no longer jail whistleblowers,' the lawyers said.
Ms Rowland did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.
The documents became the source of a series of Australian Broadcasting Corporation reports in 2017 called the Afghan Files.
The reports detailed allegations against Australian soldiers, including the unlawful killing of men and children.
Mr McBride sought to fight the charges, but the court would not allow his defence that he had had a sworn duty as a military officer to act in the public interest.
The Court of Appeal will publish reasons for its decision at a later date.
Mr McBride can be considered for parole after he has served two years and three months, meaning he must remain behind bars until at least August next year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Man charged after death of Shona Stevens more than 30 years ago
Shona Stevens, 31, was discovered badly injured on a path in woodland near her home in Irvine, North Ayrshire, on November 10, 1994. She later died in hospital. READ MORE: 'A privilege': Former Scotland player named manager of Afghan women's refugee team On Friday, Police Scotland announced that a 67-year-old had been arrested – with an update on Saturday revealing the man has now been charged. It comes more than three decades after Ms Stevens was found injured on a footpath near to the rear of Alder Green in the Bourtreehill Park area of Irvine. Senior investigation officer Detective Chief Inspector Stuart Gillies said: 'I would like to thank the members of the local community who assisted us in our inquiries. 'I am grateful for their information and input which greatly contributed to our investigation.' The man is now expected to appear at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court on Monday July 28.
Daily Mirror
4 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
TV star's desperate plea to rescue writers from murder by Taliban
Jimmy Mulville, producer of Have I Got News For You says around 104 "high risk" artists, writers and comedians are in hiding after speaking out against the Taliban Foreign Secretary David Lammy has been urged to meet with campaigners - including the producer of Have I Got News For You - hoping to rescue Afghan writers and comedians at risk of being murdered by the Taliban. Jimmy Mulville, the executive producer of the long-running satirical panel told the Sunday Mirror around 104 "high risk" artists, writers and comedians are in hiding with their families, fearing imprisonment or murder for speaking out against the Taliban. "They recently found a comedian in hiding, who had made jokes about the Taliban before they returned to power," Mr Mulville said. "They found him, made him tell the joke and killed him." He said he'd also been told an actor who had discovered the Taliban had found out where she lived, "threw herself out of a window." Mr Mulville, along with film director Mohsen Makhmalbaf, are calling on the government to help around 294 creative professionals and their families to escape Afghanistan via Pakistan. After meeting with a number of politicians and giving evidence to a Parliamentary select committee last year, they feel the next step is to discuss the matter with Mr Lammy. Mr Mulville said: "I think it's a real opportunity for David Lammy, who is showing himself as quite a player on the international stage, to do the right thing and get these people out of Afghanistan as soon as possible." He went on: "This is 294 people who would be completely assimilated. They aren't going to take anyone's job, they have a job. 'As creative people, they just need not to be killed. It needs someone like Keir Starmer to step in and say it's not about immigration, it's a rescue. 'As we're speaking, there could be people being hunted down by the Taliban."
Spectator
9 hours ago
- Spectator
Lawfare is the SAS's most dangerous enemy
It might at first glance appear odd that this deeply unpopular government is determined to repeal the Northern Ireland Legacy and Reconciliation Act. Britain's armed forces are one of the last institutions of which the nation is overwhelmingly proud. Why pursue its veterans at the risk of making itself even more unpopular? 'We want to be recruiting into the Armed Forces and we have a government who are about to reopen lawfare against our veterans,' remarked shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge. 'It is crazy.' The government say that they will repeal the Act, which was passed by the Tories in 2023, because it is incompatible with human rights legislation. Their other reasoning is that it is opposed by some of Northern Ireland's political parties as well as relatives of IRA terrorists. One of those relatives is the sister of an IRA terrorist who was killed by the SAS at Loughgall in 1987 along with seven other members of a cell that was en route to attack a remote police station. She and other relatives of the dead terrorists met Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn earlier this year and received a 'reassurance' that a legacy inquest will proceed. The Loughgall ambush was referenced by David Davis during last week's parliamentary debate about the intention to repeal the Legacy Act. The Conservative MP (a former SAS reservist) said that Sinn Féin were trying to portray themselves as victims and the British army as villains. 'That is why battles such as Coagh, Clonoe and, very likely soon, Loughgall feature so large in the demands for inquiries and the prosecution of long-retired, innocent British soldiers,' said David. 'All three of those actions were humiliating defeats for the IRA.' All three battles involved the SAS and, according to another Tory, Mark Francois, the possibility of future prosecutions is 'having an adverse effect on morale in the special forces community'. It is unlikely that will much bother the left. In May this year, Richard Williams, who commanded 22 SAS from 2005 to 2008, wrote a piece for this magazine entitled 'The BBC's War on the SAS'. It was a defence of the regiment against allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan. But the 'war' on the SAS isn't just being waged by elements within the BBC; it is part of a wider attack from a British left that has long loathed the regiment. This animosity stretches back to July 1945. Winston Churchill could in many ways be regarded as the founding father of Britain's special forces. It was his idea to raise the commandos in 1940, and he was an enthusiastic supporter of the SAS when they were formed the following year. His son, Randolph, served for a brief spell in the SAS in 1942 and was a friend of David Stirling, the founder of the regiment. When Churchill lost the 1945 general election, the SAS lost their principal backer. Within weeks they were disbanded, despite the best efforts of Stirling and other senior officers to persuade Clement Attlee's government that the SAS had a role to play in the post-war period. There were several reasons for the regiment's abolition: Attlee's naive belief that the future would be largely peaceful, the government's disapproval of the SAS's irregular nature and the fact that many of its senior officers were upper-class conservatives. Three of them, Lord George Jellicoe, Carol Mather and Stephen Hastings, would have distinguished post-war careers in the Tory party. Although the SAS were reformed as a regular regiment in 1952 – the year after Churchill had returned to power – David Stirling never forgave the Labour government for what he regarded as an act of betrayal. His grievance returned when Harold Wilson was elected PM in 1964, and by the time of his second administration in 1974 Stirling was convinced that Socialism was a clear and present danger to Britain. That year he formed an organisation called GB75, what he told the Times was a core of 'apprehensive patriots' ready to defend Britain against the 'chaos' of hard-left trade unionists and other activists. There was uproar among the Labour party and its media supporters. Stirling was accused of raising a 'private army', described by Defence Secretary Roy Mason as 'near-fascist'. Stirling retorted: Our motivation is to reinforce parliamentary authority in the country whereas Mr Mason is associated with a political party, the left-wing of which can be genuinely stated to be thoroughly undemocratic. GB75 was disbanded but the left-wing press had Stirling and the SAS in their sights. The smear campaign against them reached its height in 1978 and 1979, a time when the regiment was fighting a bloody war with the IRA. Time Out magazine, then a radical left publication, described the SAS as 'Pedigree Dogs of War' and accused them of being guns for hire. In March 1979 Major General Peter de la Billiere, Director of the SAS, took the unprecedented step of writing to the Daily Telegraph to defend the regiment. He was 'disturbed' at their media portrayal, 'as if it were some secret undercover organisation'. This is how the SAS is still regarded by some on the British left, whether politicians, journalists or lawyers. As Richard Williams wrote in these pages, 'the SAS is under fire' but not from terrorists or insurgents. Their adversary is 'lawfare' and it might be their most dangerous enemy yet.
