In a significant ruling, Australia's most-decorated soldier Ben Roberts-Smith has had his appeal rejected in a case that found him responsible for war crimes during his military service in Afghanistan.
Ben Roberts-Smith's War Crimes Defamation Case Appeal Denied
Ben Roberts-Smith's War Crimes Defamation Case Appeal Denied
A landmark decision has upheld earlier findings against the decorated soldier for alleged war crimes.
On Friday, a three-judge panel of the Federal Court of Australia determined that the original verdict from 2023, which deemed reports of Roberts-Smith's alleged murder of four unarmed Afghan individuals as true, would stand. Despite Roberts-Smith's assertions of innocence and legal errors in the judge’s ruling, the court reaffirmed that he had committed acts of serious misconduct during his deployment from 2009 to 2012.
Roberts-Smith, who is renowned for receiving the Victoria Cross for exceptional bravery, aimed to counter claims published by major Australian newspapers, which described his actions as murderous. Upon publication in 2018, these allegations had a devastating impact on his reputation as a national hero.
His civil defamation trial, characterized by extensive witness testimonies over 120 days and estimated to cost up to A$35 million, marked a groundbreaking moment in Australian legal history, being the first instance where war crimes accusations against Australian forces were formally adjudicated.
Before the initial ruling, Justice Antony Besanko of the Federal Court found substantial evidence that Roberts-Smith had engaged in grievous misconduct, including the killing of Afghan prisoners and acts of intimidation against fellow soldiers. Despite additional allegations against Roberts-Smith, such as physical assault and more murders, these were not established sufficiently under civil law's "balance of probabilities" standard.
In making the argument for appeal, Roberts-Smith's barrister asserted that the presumption of innocence hadn't been properly weighed during the trial. However, the Federal Court maintained that the evidence presented was credible enough to uphold the original findings.
This high-profile case continues to resonate across the country, sparking intense discussions about military accountability and the integrity of Australian defense forces.
Stay tuned as we provide ongoing updates, and follow the development of this historic legal battle.
Roberts-Smith, who is renowned for receiving the Victoria Cross for exceptional bravery, aimed to counter claims published by major Australian newspapers, which described his actions as murderous. Upon publication in 2018, these allegations had a devastating impact on his reputation as a national hero.
His civil defamation trial, characterized by extensive witness testimonies over 120 days and estimated to cost up to A$35 million, marked a groundbreaking moment in Australian legal history, being the first instance where war crimes accusations against Australian forces were formally adjudicated.
Before the initial ruling, Justice Antony Besanko of the Federal Court found substantial evidence that Roberts-Smith had engaged in grievous misconduct, including the killing of Afghan prisoners and acts of intimidation against fellow soldiers. Despite additional allegations against Roberts-Smith, such as physical assault and more murders, these were not established sufficiently under civil law's "balance of probabilities" standard.
In making the argument for appeal, Roberts-Smith's barrister asserted that the presumption of innocence hadn't been properly weighed during the trial. However, the Federal Court maintained that the evidence presented was credible enough to uphold the original findings.
This high-profile case continues to resonate across the country, sparking intense discussions about military accountability and the integrity of Australian defense forces.
Stay tuned as we provide ongoing updates, and follow the development of this historic legal battle.
