MIL OSI

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

Source: Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA)

PSNA says the shift of the Israeli embassy into the Fisher Funds building in Wellington has concerned other tenants in the office high rise.

The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa is citing the Wellington Post front-page article which reported only some occupants of the 13-storey site had been told that Israel was moving in.

PSNA spokesperson Rinad Tamimi says the building’s owner was obviously trying to keep the arrival of the embassy a secret until it was too late to object.

“It’s pretty obvious why.  The Fisher Funds building is owned by Prime Property Group, which is controlled by rich-lister and former Israeli Defence Force major, Eyal Aharoni.”

“He’s looking after his own.”

Tamimi says the solution to the embassy location concern was the New Zealand government could expel the ambassador and his staff.

“We broke off diplomatic relations when it was discovered Israel’s Mossad spy agency had been getting fake New Zealand passports.  So, there is a precedent.”

“It all comes down to the fact that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.  It’s the world’s worst atrocity of this century and shamefully its ongoing perpetrators are flying their flag over our capital city,” Tamimi says.

“At this very moment, Israel is firing on the Sumud Flotilla trying to bring aid to Gaza and kidnapping and assaulting New Zealand citizens on that convoy.”

“Our ministers are shaking hands with the people who represent this illegal violence in international waters.”

Tamimi says though Fisher Funds does not own the building it operates out of, it must have powers as the holder of naming rights.

“If Fisher Funds’ CEO was to represent its KiwiSaver stakeholder interests, then he would tell Aharoni to find somewhere else for the Israelis to go to.”

“But since the CEO is an ex-minister of the National Party – Simon Power – then the head of Fisher Fund appears to part of the problem and not the solution.”

Rinad Tamimi

National Spokesperson

PSNA

MIL OSI

• Military-connected social media accounts target activists with disinformation
• Online slurs precede intimidation and violent attacks against dissidents
• Meta, TikTok, X and YouTube allow harmful content to spread rapidly.

Coordinated disinformation campaigns portraying government critics as “foreign agents” are silencing dissent and fueling intimidation and violence under Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto, Amnesty International said in a new report published today.

‘Building up Imaginary Enemies’ reveals a growing pattern in which Indonesian authorities – including the military – deploy online disinformation to target journalists, activists, academics and protesters in retaliation for their legitimate activism and expression.  Meanwhile, tech giants Meta, TikTok, X and YouTube have allowed harmful disinformation to remain online.

“Authoritarian practices have accelerated in Indonesia under President Prabowo Subianto’s government. Amnesty’s research shows that in the 18 months since Prabowo took power, online disinformation has emerged as a key tactic to systematically discredit government critics, shut down public debate and justify repression – all while social media companies sit back and let it happen,” Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnès Callamard said.

“This disinformation is a political weapon, deployed to consolidate the government’s power when public criticism intensifies, while demonizing and weakening those who dare to speak out. By branding protesters, journalists and human rights defenders as ‘foreign agents’, Indonesia’s authorities and their supporters are deliberately shifting attention away from people’s legitimate grievances.”

Intent to deceive

Since President Prabowo took office in October 2024, there have been multiple waves of demonstrations in Indonesia, including against corruption, budget cuts, environmental degradation and expanded powers handed to the military. Prabowo and senior officials have responded by repeatedly and publicly accusing critics of being paid, manipulated and controlled by foreign interests, and framing dissent as orchestrated rather than legitimate.

This has been followed by a proliferation of “foreign agent” slurs against civil society actors online, often based on unsubstantiated claims that they want to “undermine” or “divide” Indonesia due to the fact they receive foreign funding or other support from overseas actors.

Under international law, civil society organizations and media outlets have the right to access international funding, which is often essential for exercising the right to freedom of association.

Amnesty International’s research found that campaigns disseminating false “foreign agent” allegations against civil society have in most instances involved hundreds of accounts acting in sync to post identical videos, graphics or messages in quick succession. This false information is then amplified across Instagram, Facebook, X, TikTok and YouTube. Amnesty was able to infer from the coordinated nature of the campaigns that these accounts were spreading falsehoods with the intention to deceive, a key element of disinformation.

The implications for those branded as “foreign agents” are severe, with victims telling Amnesty it undermined their work and credibility, increased their risk of criminalization and exposed them to physical harm.

‘Your head will fall to the ground’

Digital disinformation campaigns have frequently spilled over into physical violence. In March 2026, Andrie Yunus, deputy coordinator of the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS), was the victim of an acid attack in Jakarta, suffering severe chemical burns.

MIL OSI

A National Party policy to prevent judges discounting sexual offenders’ sentences due to good character is a solution for a non-existent problem, a defence lawyer says.

But a victims’ advocate said it would be a huge relief for survivors who currently have to listen to “completely irrelevant” testimony about their perpetrator being a good person.

National revealed yesterday that if elected, it would scrap good character assessments for sexual offending sentences, so judges can no longer consider it when handing down a punishment.

“The result will be tougher sentences,” said justice spokesperson – and current Justice Minister – Paul Goldsmith.

“It’s just not fair to the victim to sit there in a courtroom and see their offender get a lighter sentence because of the words of a former coach or a boss. That’s not right,” Prime Minister Christopher Luxon added on Morning Report on Monday.

“We’re on the side of victims. We’re not on the side of offenders. And I’ll be really simple – no sex offender is a person of good character, period. I think all New Zealanders would agree with that.”

But Defence Lawyers’ Association co-founder Elizabeth Hall disagreed. She said judges considered a wide range of factors when they determined a sentence.

“Judges must take them into account, but that does not mean that a judge must afford a discount,” she said.

“Particularly in sexual offending cases, judges often don’t apply a good character discount, so I’m not sure that it’s going to make much difference at all in terms of either the type of sentencing or the length of sentence that will be imposed.”

The ability for judges to consider good character was important so people who had lived “blameless lives” and then made one mistake could be recognised for the contribution they had made to society, if the judge felt that was appropriate, she said.

Criminal lawyers were used to the justice system being “fodder for politicians to debate” in an election year, said Hall.

“It’s really pretending that there’s a problem and then offering what looks like might be a solution, that actually isn’t.”

But the government’s chief victims’ advisor Ruth Money said soon after National’s announcement she began receiving messages from sexual violence survivors “overwhelmed with joy”.

The current system was offensive for victims, she said.

“You’ve been sexually violated by someone, they’ve either been found guilty or they’ve plead guilty, and yet you have to hear at sentencing – quite irrelevant at times – letters and submissions about what a wonderful person they may be, which is not at all linked to the offending, let alone the fact that they have sexually violated you.”

Money had advised the government to scrap good character discounts for sexual offending, but said that should not apply across all crimes.

“You could accidentally drive, for example, and kill someone [but] you can’t accidentally sexually violate someone, so it is very different,” she said.

“That’s why the judge ultimately has the decision in their hands around sentencing for other crimes, because there may be that small number of cases where a good character reference is relevant, but it certainly isn’t for sexual violence.”

Money hoped the proposal would have bipartisan support.

Luxon was asked if the idea could be applied to other types of offending.

“We’re going to start with all sexual offending. I think there are legitimate instances where good character is appropriate if you think about a young person who makes a stupid decision with poor judgment,” he replied.

“But look, we’d be open to extending it and looking at it for other criminal offences as well.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Original source: https://nz.mil-osi.com/2026/05/18/huge-relief-or-pretending-theres-a-problem-nationals-sexual-offenders-sentencing-policy/

Modern, high-quality new homes have been delivered for military families ahead of schedule and under budget, Defence Minister Chris Penk says. 

The first homes built through the Homes for Families programme were officially opened with a ribbon-cutting at Linton Military Camp in Manawatū today. 

“Just seven months after shovels hit the ground, I am delighted to join in celebrating the opening of 23 new homes for military families, including eight at Linton Military Camp, five at Royal New Zealand Air Force Base Ohakea and 10 at Burnham Military Camp,” Mr Penk says. 

“Thanks to the professionalism and drive of our Defence Estate and Infrastructure team, our partners at Penny Homes and other key stakeholders, these builds have been delivered ahead of schedule and under budget, allowing us to add more projects to the construction pipeline. 
 
“This work will continue. More homes will be ready for military families in the coming months and, alongside new builds, additional homes are planned through long-term leases in Devonport, Trentham, and Whenuapai. 

“This $7.8 million development opened today is part of an ambitious programme across New Zealand Defence Force camps and bases to deliver the warm, modern, high-quality homes our personnel and their families deserve.

“Decades of underinvestment have meant many military families were residing in homes that were no longer fit for modern family life. Some dated back to the 1930s and were run-down, poorly laid-out, and insufficiently insulated. 

“The Homes for Families programme recognises that providing personnel and their whānau with a warm, safe, dry home is central to their wellbeing. It will also help ease housing affordability pressures by providing options in high-cost areas. 

“In addition to giving Defence personnel and their families modern places to thrive, the construction of these homes supports jobs in the communities which surround our military camps and bases, boosting economic activity in the regions. 

“Today’s ribbon-cutting represents an important construction milestone and reflects our commitment to improving living conditions for our sailors, soldiers and aviators, so they can give their best while serving and protecting New Zealand. 

“I look forward to these houses becoming much-loved homes for our hardworking New Zealand Defence Force personnel and their families for many years to come.”  

Notes to editors:  

• The Government intends to invest up to $600 million into the Homes for Families programme through the 2025 Defence Capability Plan (DCP). 
• Mr Penk, along with New Zealand Defence Force representatives, had turned the sod at the Linton site on 23 September 2025.  

MIL OSI

High Court jurors have been told they need to be sure the man who killed a Nelson police officer had murderous intent when he drove at her to find him guilty of murder.

Senior Sergeant Lyn Fleming and Senior Sergeant Adam Ramsay were on foot patrol in Buxton Square in the early hours of New Year’s Day last year when they were hit by a car driven by Hayden Tasker.

Tasker, 33, was on trial in Christchurch for murdering Fleming and seriously injuring Ramsay. The jury retired to consider its verdict shortly before 12.30pm on Monday.

Tasker’s defence argued he was drunk and depressed and crashed into the officers in a failed attempt to take his own life.

The Crown argued Tasker was motivated by anger towards the police and intentionally used his car as a weapon to mow them down.

In summing up, Justice Cameron Mander told the jury to put emotion aside in reaching a verdict.

“Feelings of sympathy for the deceased and her family are inevitably aroused but you must simply put such feelings to one side,” he said.

“Similarly you need to put aside feelings of prejudice or shock that may have been engendered in you from in some respects being eyewitnesses to Senior Sergeant Fleming’s death as a result of viewing the CCTV and other video footage.

“Any negative feelings or for that matter sympathetic feelings you may have for Mr Tasker’s living situation or the way he was living his life at the time similarly need to be put to one side.”

Over two weeks the jury heard from more than 40 witnesses including members of the public and police officers who were in the central Nelson car park at the time of the crash.

Mander told jurors they needed to be sure Tasker had murderous intent when he hit Fleming with his car.

“It is not disputed that Senior Sergeant Fleming’s death resulted from Mr Tasker driving his vehicle in a dangerous manner,” he said.

The Crown and the defence gave their closing arguments on Friday.

A ‘grandiose fantasy’

Crown prosecutor Jackson Webber told the jury Fleming was “senselessly and needlessly” killed when Tasker deliberately used his Honda Odyssey as a weapon, accelerating as hard as he could towards the officers at an estimated speed of 45km/h, shortly after 2am.

“Hayden Tasker sitting in his car, drinking wine saw the two police officers. He watched them. He was angry at the police and he made a series of conscious decisions. To start his car, to leave his headlights off, to pull out of that parking space and manoeuvre his car around to the south, then to the west to accelerate, to drive straight into Lynn Fleming and Adam Ramsay,” he said.

Webber said the pair had done nothing to provoke or antagonise Tasker, apart from the fact that they were police officers in uniform.

“They were on duty, doing their job, keeping others safe and ironically, one of the risks that they had been considering that night was the risk of a vehicle intrusion attack,” he said.

Webber said Tasker’s actions did not fit the claim that he did not intend to hurt or kill the officers but wanted to take his own life.

“[He] didn’t stop, he didn’t jump out to see what had happened or to check on the people he had just hit,” he said.

Tasker’s behaviour during and after the collisions was inconsistent with a suicide attempt, he said.

“It was going to be glorious, like a movie. It was a rather grandiose fantasy that he might talk about, but had no real intention of ever carrying out,” he said.

‘Despicable’ behaviour doesn’t make Tasker a murderer – Defence

Defence lawyer Marcus Zintl said the crash was a “terrible, terrible, terrible tragedy” that “should not have happened”.

Tasker had already admitted three charges of dangerous driving.

Zintil said Tasker was driven by a desire to end his own life in a police chase rather than intending to kill or hurt police.

“He was suicidal, he was on medication for depression, he was living in his car,” Zintl told the jury.

“He was alone, he had no close family support and virtually no actual friends.”

Zintl said Tasker’s father died when he was 16. His long-time girlfriend had recently dumped him, he was unemployed, on a benefit and had nothing going for him.

“He wanted to end the painful, pointlessness and pitifulness of his life that he was experiencing at that time, which is why he wanted to end up himself in a police chase,” he said.

Zintl said Tasker “drank himself silly” with a bottle-and-a-half of red wine, he was three-and-a-half times over the breath alcohol limit and filled his car with petrol before arriving in the car park that night.

The first collision, when Tasker drove into Fleming and Ramsay, happened six seconds after he started his car.

The second collision, when he rammed the white police patrol car, was around 26 seconds later in what Zintl said was a moment of madness, desperation, stupidity and empty-headedness.

The court was earlier played footage of Tasker’s first police interview around 11 hours after the crash.

Zintl said Tasker’s state of mind could be ascertained from his admission to police in that interview.

“I didn’t think of the consequences. I was in a bad headspace but that doesn’t give me an excuse,” Tasker said.

The jury saw how he broke down in tears and vomited during that interview after learning Fleming had died.

Tasker said it “should have been me that died that day”.

“I never thought I’d kill anyone… didn’t really think it through,” he said in the interview.

Zintl told the jury Tasker’s actions were “despicable, deplorable and dreadful” but that did not make him guilty of murder.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

This story discusses suicide.

Loaded weapons and a Nazi uniform were found by police at the home of a man who died following a police stand-off in Christchurch, an inquest has heard.

Artemiy Dubovskiy, who was known as Troy, is suspected of killing himself early on March 27, 2019.

His death came less than two weeks after the mosque terror attack that killed 51 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques, and at a time when the country was on high alert for the possibility of further attacks.

Coroner Heather McKenzie was examining the circumstances of Dubovskiy’s death during an inquest in Christchurch.

On Monday. counsel assisting the Coroner, Josh Shaw said police searched Dubovskiy’s home on March 26 after receiving information he was supportive of the mosque shootings.

Officers found a loaded semi-automatic rifle and pistol, a substantial quantity of ammunition and items carrying Nazi symbolism, including a SS uniform.

Shaw said there were fears of a wider terror network and the possibility of copycat attacks after people were shot at Al Noor Mosque and Linwood Islamic Centre on March 15, 2019.

“The terror alert was increased to high for the first time in our nation’s history, the first time it had been above low in our nation’s history,” he said.

“It was in that climate of heightened alert and risk that Mr Dubovskiy became a person of interest.

“Police received information that he had said to a family member that he was not going to prison, he would not be taken in and he may take his own life.”

A senior sergeant spotted a car linked to Dubovskiy late on March 26, 2019.

“This wasn’t a pursuit, I should say, but rather a following. It came to the point that the driver, who was Mr Dubovskiy, knew he was being followed,” Shaw said.

Dubovskiy pulled his Mitsubishi Pajero into a no-exit street in the Shirley/Burwood area.

More officers were called to the area and a stand-off ensued.

Shaw said Dubovskiy remained in his car and spoke to a police negotiator by phone.

“The immediate response from Mr Dubovskiy when he learns he was speaking to a police officer is he says it would be best for the police to kill him or take him out because he wasn’t going to jail,” he said.

“The response was that no-one had to get hurt, there was a way out.”

During the almost two-hour long phone call Dubovskiy and the negotiator discussed family, politics and the state of New Zealand.

Dubovskiy was also communicating with his family using a second phone.

The negotiator’s call to Dubovskiy cut out, possibly because Dubovskiy’s phone battery ran low.

Three further calls of a short duration were made but by 3am the calls were not connecting, Shaw said.

A Defence Force light vehicle moved near Dubovskiy’s Pajero.

He was seen to slump backwards and then forwards with tactical police officers then moving in.

“Tear gas is deployed into his vehicle, he is extracted from his vehicle by officers with the assistance of a police dog who has Mr Dubovskiy by the leg,” Shaw said.

Once he was removed from the car it was clear he was critically injured and his breathing was light and shallow.

A paramedic gave him medical attention and a second medic arrived by helicopter.

“Those efforts persist for as long as they can but it is apparent they are not successful and Mr Dubovskiy is declared dead at the scene sometime after 4am,” Shaw said.

The police response to information about Dubovskiy and the events that followed had to be taken in the context of the Christchurch terror attack, Shaw said.

But it also raised questions by the family about whether police took a heavy-handed approach culminating in Dubovskiy’s death and possibly leading to delays in his receiving medical treatment, he said.

Lawyer for police Pip Currie said Dubovskiy’s death “is not the outcome police wanted”.

A Dubovskiy family member, whose name was suppressed, said they were not aware of his terrorist sympathies and he was a helpful person who was always there for his family and friends.

“I never heard any plans from him about any terrorism or anything like that,” they said.

“I think he had a good chance to surrender that night. I feel like the family could have convinced him. We were shocked by the mosque shooting and as a family we donated money to them at the time.”

Police witnesses would be called at the inquest.

Where to get help:

• Need to Talk? Free call or text 1737 any time to speak to a trained counsellor, for any reason
• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 or text HELP to 4357
• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 / 0508 TAUTOKO. This is a service for people who may be thinking about suicide, or those who are concerned about family or friends
• Depression Helpline: 0800 111 757 or text 4202
• Samaritans: 0800 726 666
• Youthline: 0800 376 633 or text 234 or email talk@youthline.co.nz
• What’s Up: 0800 WHATSUP / 0800 9428 787. This is free counselling for 5 to 19-year-olds
• Asian Family Services: 0800 862 342 or text 832. Languages spoken: Mandarin, Cantonese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Japanese, Hindi, and English.
• Rural Support Trust Helpline: 0800 787 254
• Healthline: 0800 611 116
• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155
• OUTLine: 0800 688 5463
• Aoake te Rā bereaved by suicide service: or call 0800 000 053

If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A Decade of Milestones | Live Hackathon Showdown | Comprehensively Promoting Computational Thinking Education

– Published and distributed with permission of Media-Outreach.com.

One of the country’s few specialist sexual violence prevention organisations says it will be forced to close in August, unless the government steps in.

RespectEd has worked with local schools, workplaces, prisons, and other communities for the past10 years.

But after ACC’s sexual violence prevention initiative the Hikitia! programme was paused in 2025, funding that the Wellington-based organisation had been relying on was cut off.

Its programme for wāhine Māori on remand in prisons was also cut by Corrections in 2025.

RespectEd said it had exhausted all financial options and needed government funding to stay afloat.

Chair Jan Logie said not supporting sexual violence prevention education was irresponsible.

“We’re seeing increasingly violent sexual assaults, we’re seeing the conditions and attitudes that enable sexual violence increasing.

“Now is the time to be putting more resources into prevention, not allowing one of the few specialist sexual violence agencies in the entire country to close due to lack of funding.”

She expected that incidents of sexual violence would increase if prevention initiatives were not prioritised.

On Sunday, National’s justice spokesperson Paul Goldsmith announced if elected, the party would abolish good character testimonies, which allow judges to shorten sexual offenders’ sentences.

But Logie said that because very few incidents of sexual assault were reported to police – less than 10 percent – and even fewer get to the point of sentencing, the policy would not make much difference in reducing sexual harm.

“To be focusing their efforts on that end when they see the only specialist agency in the capital city close for lack of funding is a complete disservice.

“It just feels a bit like window dressing.”

Public Service Association national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said RespectEd’s work had informed critical policy, including the NZ Defence Force’s Operation Respect programme.

“They’ve done ground-breaking work with our defence force, in our prisons, in our schools, teaching about consent, and how we can create a culture free of sexual violence.

“RespectEd has given a clear message to the government that it needs more funding.”

She called National’s campaign focus on good character testimonies a “populist move”.

“If they were serious about stopping the next generation of sex offenders, they would make sure RespectEd stayed open and that it was funded properly.”

According to RespectEd, in 2025, it directly reached 788 people, including 240 young people, across 61 programmes.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A National Party policy to prevent judges discounting sexual offenders’ sentences due to good character is a solution for a non-existent problem, a defence lawyer says.

But a victims’ advocate said it would be a huge relief for survivors who currently have to listen to “completely irrelevant” testimony about their perpetrator being a good person.

National revealed yesterday that if elected, it would scrap good character assessments for sexual offending sentences, so judges can no longer consider it when handing down a punishment.

“The result will be tougher sentences,” said justice spokesperson – and current Justice Minister – Paul Goldsmith.

But Defence Lawyers’ Association co-founder Elizabeth Hall disagreed.

She said judges considered a wide range of factors when they determined a sentence.

“Judges must take them into account, but that does not mean that a judge must afford a discount,” she said.

“Particularly in sexual offending cases, judges often don’t apply a good character discount, so I’m not sure that it’s going to make much difference at all in terms of either the type of sentencing or the length of sentence that will be imposed.”

The ability for judges to consider good character was important so people who had lived “blameless lives” and then made one mistake could be recognised for the contribution they had made to society, if the judge felt that was appropriate, she said.

Criminal lawyers were used to the justice system being “fodder for politicians to debate” in an election year, said Hall.

“It’s really pretending that there’s a problem and then offering what looks like might be a solution, that actually isn’t.”

But the government’s chief victims’ advisor Ruth Money said soon after National’s announcement she began receiving messages from sexual violence survivors “overwhelmed with joy”.

The current system was offensive for victims, she said.

“You’ve been sexually violated by someone, they’ve either been found guilty or they’ve plead guilty, and yet you have to hear at sentencing – quite irrelevant at times – letters and submissions about what a wonderful person they may be, which is not at all linked to the offending, let alone the fact that they have sexually violated you.”

Money had advised the government to scrap good character discounts for sexual offending, but said that should not apply across all crimes.

“You could accidentally drive, for example, and kill someone [but] you can’t accidentally sexually violate someone, so it is very different,” she said.

“That’s why the judge ultimately has the decision in their hands around sentencing for other crimes, because there may be that small number of cases where a good character reference is relevant, but it certainly isn’t for sexual violence.”

Money hoped the proposal would have bipartisan support.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Ukraine has approached New Zealand about a deal to build military drones, in a new push to sell its Russian-killing technology around the world.

Ukraine has 20 countries interested and four signed agreements on drones, including Germany, Canada, Norway and Japan.

Ukraine’s ambassador to New Zealand and Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko said his country could offer unique drone innovation and he had raised it several times with the government.

“They have the proposal on the table,” Myroshnychenko said on Friday.

The government said no decision had been made to an approach on drones in December, but officials were considering it.

Ukrainian President Zelensky has recently made statements that have been seen as a key step in defence diplomacy by Kyiv, leveraging the fact that the world had witnessed uncrewed systems rewriting the rules of warfare in both the Russia and Iran conflicts.

Many countries around the world have ramped up demand for drones this year – including both Australia and the US, which last months revealed a new $NZ90 billion plan to build a Defense Autonomous Warfare Group (DAWG).

Myroshnychenko said he did not need to raise the issue again in New Zealand.

“It’s up to New Zealand government” to consider either before or after the November elections, he told RNZ.

“That’s what we are now doing with a number of international partners and certainly would be open to discuss it with the New Zealand government.

“Certainly we would be open for it and we do believe that we could assist and we have some of the innovation which is only available in Ukraine, and we would be happy to work jointly on this investment together.”

Ukraine-US drone deal – ‘We are ready to deliver’

CBS reported last week that the US and Ukraine had drafted a deal to allow tech exports for the manufacture of drones in joint ventures with American companies.

Ukraine has been sending drone interceptors to the Middle East to combat Iran’s Shahed drones – which Russia has used against Kyiv.

“We are ready to deliver,” Zelensky said last month on X after doing deals with Middle East governments. “We want to help them defend themselves.”

“First, our expertise. Second, training missions and software to integrate different military equipment into one system. And cheap drones and co-production lines to make them … I think all of this needs to be shared with the US as well … We wanted to sign a big drone production deal with the United States, but we needed the approval from the White House.”

Myroshnychenko said a starting point was a bilateral security agreement – 28 countries had signed one with Ukraine.

“New Zealand is not one of those, but certainly we’d be keen to discuss it if they’re interested,” he said.

“Those countries who signed those agreements are now also signing drone agreements, or drone deals, as we call them. A drone deal is a starting point for creating those joint ventures in a way, because at the moment there is a ban on the export of any weapons or any defence technology out of Ukraine.

“But we’re trying to figure out a way how to release that technology. And for that, we need both governments to be on board.”

He said he had raised a drone deal with senior officials and former Defence Minister Judith Collins, and with her successor Chris Penk in December.

Penk at the weekend confirmed the approach.

“Those matters remain under consideration by defence officials and no decisions have been made at this stage,” Penk said in a statement.

“I look forward to receiving further advice in due course on potential next steps.”

Penk told RNZ last month that drone spending was at the right level, although the country had to make sure it did not fall behind.

Put a billion in – analyst

Myroshnychenko said Australia was expected to sign a bilateral security deal with Ukraine later this year.

“So certainly Australian, New Zealand government knows that there is a proposal to sign this long-term bilateral security agreement that could be a foundation for a drone deal.”

Geopolitical analyst Dr Del Carlini of Wellington said there was no time to waste with signs of a new world war approaching.

“We should be putting a billion dollars of our defence spending into a joint venture with Ukraine to learn how to produce drones to manufacture them here and then to have them used – in Ukraine at the moment, could be in the Middle East,” said Carlini.

“But most importantly we know how to manufacture them and whatever the type of drone we need at some point in the future we know how to manufacture it, not purchase it … when warfare actually kicks off.”

Spending billions on frigates – as was intended in the Defence Capability Plan in the decade ahead – would be a waste when the Iran war had shown how quickly Tehran’s navy could be taken out of play, Carlini said.

Sovereign domestic production featured in Australia’s new plan to invest $14-18 billion on drone and counter-drone technologies over the next decade.

Thai geopolitical analyst Professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak in Wellington last week also warned of signs of war spreading.

‘The money would be better invested in New Zealand and Australia’ – NZ drone maker

Myroshnychenko said New Zealand firms stood to benefit from a drones deal.

“Any joint ventures, you need a local producer and you have one of those companies in New Zealand …. catering to your needs, but also catering to some of the needs of … region, of the like-minded countries, including Australia.”

Mt Maunganui firm Syos makes drones that have been used in Ukraine and by UK armed forces.

But Philip Solaris – who has made drones for more than a decade at Obsidian Systems – said while he backed anything that helped Ukraine, a drone joint venture was not the way to go.

“The money would be better invested in New Zealand and Australia,” he said.

Not only was Ukraine a different operating environment, but he drew a different lesson from autonomous warfare there.

“There’s a lot of small companies throughout New Zealand that have really key parts to play in such a situation. Ukraine has been forced into doing that, and you’ll find that actually their defence industry is largely made-up from a lot of small players, not just a few big primes.”

Solaris said he had talked to Penk about his belief that getting the industry’s logistics right was the prime lesson from Ukraine. On that score, Budget 2026 needed to deliver not necessarily more money for drones, but a better, faster system for spending it.

“New Zealand and Australia already have the technological capability and the innovation and the know-how of how to do what is being done there,” said Solaris.

“So I don’t think the issue is around technology. I think that in many ways you may be talking about more of a political issue.

“The capability is there. It’s how it is developed and how it is employed. And we need to be building our own infrastructure.”

How does AUKUS fit?

Drones fit under the military emerging technology banner, and a key deal for sharing that type of tech for New Zealand’s main security partners is AUKUS.

Under its Pillar Two, the three nuclear-sharing AUKUS Pillar One members – the US, Australia and the UK – have recently lowered barriers to sharing or trading in arms technology. But the NZ Defence Force has had far fewer meetings about the option of joining Pillar Two in recent months than previously.

Myroshnychenko said he had not been briefed on AUKUS, and the issue of whether it was a barrier to drone deals was a matter for the Australian government.

The question was how to restore the international rules-based system and build deterrence together, he said.

Russia was belligerent and training North Korea, he said.

“So it’s all happening here in the region … The impact of this war and the implications of this war on the Indo-Pacific are pretty clear.

“You know, if New Zealand government is interested, we’d be very keen to follow up on this and work on this together.”

Penk said drones was one area of potential areas of cooperation and New Zealand remained steadfast in support for Ukraine.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A partnership to get green hydrogen trucks up and running in New Zealand says there is renewed interest in the technology as diesel prices remain high.

Hydrogen fuel company Hiringa and heavy vehicle leasing business TR Group have faced delays getting their model up and running, but say they are now close to getting a dozen hydrogen fuel cell trucks on the road.

They, and other advocates for sustainable transport, say they offer a helpful alternative to battery electric vehicles for heavy freight.

However, not everyone sees hydrogen as a viable way to decarbonise heavy vehicles, with some critics saying New Zealand should focus on building out battery technology instead.

Transport is New Zealand’s second-largest source of greenhouse gases after the dairy industry, accounting for 18 percent of total emissions in 2024.

Uptake of electric passenger vehicles slowed after the government ended the Clean Car Discount, although spiked again recently after the conflict in Iran sparked an ongoing fuel crisis.

Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) delivery and partnerships manager Richard Briggs said the heavy vehicle fleet had proved even tougher to decarbonise.

“There’s been a lot of tyre-kicking, literally, and early adopters are looking at both battery electric and hydrogen, but really only those with relatively deep pockets who are prepared to take a risk and invest are looking at this.”

Five years ago, TR Group and Hiringa signed an agreement to establish an initial network of both hydrogen trucks and refuelling stops.

The government contributed $6 million for the purchase of 20 trucks, through the Covid Response Fund, and loaned Hiringa $16m to build four refuelling stations in Auckland, Tauranga, Hamilton and Palmerston North.

Hiringa’s compressed gas is made and stored onsite at the refuelling stations, by using electrolysis to split water back into its components of hydrogen and oxygen.

The company uses off-peak renewable energy for the process, to make it as cheap as possible -TR Group said it was currently paying less for it per kilometre than diesel.

A battery fuel cell onboard each truck then converted the gas back into energy with water and heat as the by-products, with no tailpipe emissions.

Renewed interest after slow uptake

A handful of hydrogen heavy vehicles have been making use of the refuelling stations, including a New Zealand Post truck that has clocked a quarter of a million kilometres.

However, difficulties in procuring trucks after TR Group’s initial US supplier went bust had delayed getting the additional 20 trucks.

TR Group’s project manager Grant Doull said Rolleston-based company GVB had instead completed conversions of nine diesel trucks to hydrogen, with the final 11 due to start arriving at TR’s depot in Auckland from July.

The company had been training drivers and extensively testing routes since the first trucks arrived.

The delivery delays, combined with a post-Covid recession and cost-of-living crisis had “slowed progress” in securing commercial leases, Doull said.

“But we’ve definitely seen a massive uplift these days with the current fuel situation.”

The company was now in final contract negotiations to get 12 of the trucks out on the road.

Hiringa chief executive Andrew Clennett – whose business relied on having a fleet of vehicles to supply fuel to – said uptake had been slower than Hiringa would have liked.

“Obviously, sitting there with a network that’s been underutilised has put some pressure on,” he said.

That was changing now, he said.

“The market is definitely showing a lot more interest now. I think the penny’s dropped a little bit, that with the Ukraine war, we had a fuel crisis, we’ve got another one which is bigger and worse and longer, and it would be a brave director of a company that would bank on not having this again.”

Battery electric or hydrogen?

Doull said TR Group was already leasing out battery electric trucks and vans, which were a good zero-emissions choice in many cases.

“Let’s say if they operate the truck, four or five hours, maybe – it could be 500, 600 kilometres a day – say they have a depot where they’re loading and unloading and they’ve got good charging infrastructure at that depot, then it’s probably something that’s going to get solved with a battery electric truck quite easily.”

However, the battery on an electric truck could weigh several tonnes, limiting the rest of the payload, and long-haul trucks that operated round the clock could not easily be charged, he said.

The other advantage hydrogen offered at the moment was that the infrastructure was already available.

“The reality is there’s no heavy vehicle fast charging for trucks in the country at the moment,” Doull said.

“There are, however, four high-speed heavy commercial vehicle hydrogen refuelling sites.”

University of Canterbury Sustainable Energy Research Group co-leader Rebecca Peer said the previous hype of green hydrogen as a “Swiss Army knife” for decarbonisation had passed.

However, heavy transport was a “niche” that still had potential in New Zealand.

“The advantages I see for the hydrogen vehicles are particularly acute when you have very long distance or highly variable routes with unpredictable fuelling times,” she said.

From her perspective, it was not an either-or argument.

“My answer, as a researcher who looks at energy transitions, is yes to both.”

Briggs said because hydrogen had to be created, stored, and then converted back into energy, it was three to five times less efficient than battery electric.

Battery electric vehicles were also cheaper – with some good-quality models now achieving parity with their diesel equivalents, once EECA subsidies were included.

“On the surface of it, you say, it’s a no-brainer – why on earth would you consider hydrogen?”

There were other aspects to consider, though, including the “huge investment” needed for charging infrastructure, especially as megawatt batteries become available, Briggs said.

Like Peers, he believed there were still some good use-cases for hydrogen.

“There’s going to be more and more battery technology emerging in the next 10 years… but certainly from what we’re seeing I don’t think it’s yet game over for hydrogen,” he said.

“That long distance heavy haulage where you’re carrying maximum payload weights, where you’re needing to double-shift a vehicle – so refuelling time is needed in minutes, not hours – is still a use application for hydrogen.”

However, the time had passed where it was seen as a good answer to decarbonising passenger cars.

“Hydrogen doesn’t really make sense, largely because every car can be charged at home, and also the car battery then can be an integral part of the home energy system,” Briggs said.

“That’s just not a thing that hydrogen vehicles can replicate.”

EECA said the data collected from Hiringa and TR Group, once trucks were on the road carrying full pay-loads, would be shared with other operators considering purchasing or leasing a hydrogen vehicle – together with its existing data on battery electric heavy vehicles.

There is still $24m remaining in its low-emissions heavy vehicle fund, which provides companies with a subsidy of up to 25 percent of the cost of a hydrogen or battery electric heavy vehicle.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

MIL OSI

The Palestine Forum of New Zealand expresses deep concern regarding reports that the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) will participate in the upcoming Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) military exercises alongside Israel and the United States.

At a time when the world is witnessing the ongoing devastation in Gaza and growing international condemnation of Israel’s actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, New Zealand must not be seen aligning itself militarily with a state facing serious allegations of war crimes and genocide before international legal institutions.

New Zealand has long claimed to uphold international law, human rights, and an independent foreign policy. Participating in joint military exercises alongside Israel fundamentally contradicts those values and risks damaging New Zealand’s international reputation.

There should be no military cooperation with states engaged in ongoing conflicts and facing credible allegations of violations of international humanitarian law.

The Palestine Forum of New Zealand calls on the Government of New Zealand to immediately review New Zealand’s participation in these exercises and ensure the country does not become complicit directly or indirectly in legitimising violence, occupation, or collective punishment.

New Zealanders expect their country to stand on the side of justice, peace, and international accountability, not military cooperation with governments accused of grave human rights abuses.

Palestine Forum of New Zealand

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

Attorney-General Hon Chris Bishop has announced the appointment of Kerryn Beaton KC as a District Court Judge.  

Ms Beaton was admitted to the bar in 1995. She commenced her legal career at Eagles, Eagles & Redpath and then Preston Russell Law in Invercargill, before spending almost ten years as a Crown prosecutor at Raymond Donnelly in Christchurch including secondments to Crown Law as Crown Counsel. In 2012 she was appointed Public Defender when the Public Defence Service opened its office in Christchurch. Since 2016 she has practised as a barrister sole and in 2018 co-founded Walker Street Chambers.

Her practice has focused on serious crime and public inquiries. She has been appointed as counsel assisting the Pike River Royal Commission (2011-12), as legal officer and investigator in the United Nations Khmer Rouge trials in Cambodia (2014-16) and as senior counsel assisting New Zealand’s Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care (2019-24).  

Ms Beaton was appointed a Queen’s Counsel in 2021.

Judge Beaton will be based at the Dunedin District Court and is due to be sworn in on 2 July 2026, in Christchurch.

MIL OSI

MIL OSI

By; Chris McGavin*, Dr Andrew Lensen* and Dr Cassandra Mudgway*

Opinion: Nearly a year has passed since the Government released their so-called AI Strategy.

Nine months since we, along with other New Zealand AI Experts, penned an open letter to the Government calling for AI regulation and the establishment of some sort of responsible AI entity.

In that time, both a lot, and nothing has changed.

The world is still being bludgeoned by a maelstrom polycrisis. Youth unemployment, serious concerns about large scale job displacement, a global economy on a knife’s edge, and schools being mistakenly bombed are all top of mind.

These issues are increasingly linked to artificial intelligence (AI) and, whether we like it or not, it is here to stay.

For us to prosper in this ‘AI age’ we will have to, at some point, disregard the hype-cycle and engage with AI’s many unpleasantries.

In the last year alone we’ve seen instances of teenagers being encouraged to commit suicide, umpteen examples of chatbot related delusion and psychosis, chatbots assisting researchers to plan mass killings, and an almost incomprehensible increase in the amount of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) and non-consensual sexualised images.

In fact, there is so much AI harm, that there are several resources devoted to attempting to track it.

These are human rights issues, engaging rights to privacy, freedom from discrimination and sexual exploitation, equality and dignity, and without confronting them we risk sleep-walking into a crisis of our own making.

Despite the thundering of the outside world, New Zealand’s response to these issues is largely non-existent.

The Government’s leadership on AI is lacklustre, and ignores anything that doesn’t include the words ‘productivity’ or ‘efficiency’.

The latest missed opportunity was the decision to not send an observer to this year’s Responsible AI in the Military Domain Summit.

We’ve had a presence there previously, and doing so again would have helped to maintain our reputation as a strong moral leader internationally.

It is not just the Coalition who seem flummoxed.

The majority of political parties do not appear to have any appetite for leadership when it comes to AI. In fact, of all the political parties we contacted, only The Green Party signed the letter and signaled their willingness to take part in cross-party work on responsible AI and AI regulation.

Yet, many of the parties are using AI.

Adorning their campaigns with a variety of AI generated slop to varying degrees of controversy.

Or, in their individual capacities for research which seems an odd task for a tool that hallucinates a significant amount of the time, and reduces your inclination to critically evaluate

its outputs.

The lack of engagement on AI harm is surprising.

Especially given it is an election year. The public is very clearly anxious about AI, and there is good data to back this up.

For instance, only 44 percent of New Zealanders believe the benefits of AI outweigh the risks. Only 34 percent are willing to trust AI. 52 percent are very concerned about AIs impact on society, and a whopping 81 percent of New Zealanders believe AI regulation is required.

As a nation, we are already failing to address the near-term impacts of AI.

Worse still, we have yet to even consider how we might tackle its long term impacts, such as worker displacement (both entry level and later-career) and other AI safety risks.

It goes without saying that in the absence of any political will or impetus none of this will change.

The unfortunate truth is large technology companies do not care about New Zealand. They will not, of their own volition, do anything to ensure that New Zealanders remain safe from AI harms.

It is not their prerogative; their sole goal is wealth extraction. They will bend over backwards to distance themselves from any potential wrongdoings, as they have always done.

In place of accountability, they will promise us the world: for example, a $102 billion dollar boon for our economy if we use their tools. This promise, of course, ignores the fact that their AI tools have failed to live up to the hype.

The vast majority of organisations are not seeing any return on investment from AI. Our public sector reports much the same: they are not getting a return from AI, and most of their proofs of concepts are not working.

We cannot expect technology companies to provide safer AI which uphold human rights.

We have seen other countries like Australia succeed in pushing back. We can and should expect our leaders to do the same.

This election year, we sincerely hope they do. It is vital that you, the voters, consider their policies on AI when casting your ballot. They will listen if you demand it.

*Chris McGavinis director at LensenMcGavin AI

*Dr Andrew Lensen, Victoria University of Wellington, LensenMcGavinAI

*Dr Cassandra Mudgway, University of Canterbury

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Proposed changes to climate legislation are an attack on the rule of law, the Environmental Defence Society says.

The government announced on Tuesday it would amend climate law to prevent companies from being sued over damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

But Environmental Defence Society chief executive Gary Taylor told RNZ that the fact it was about climate law was incidental.

“It’s actually an attack on the rule of law,” he said.

In 2024, iwi leader and activist Mike Smith was granted permission by the Supreme Court to sue Fonterra and other major dairy and fossil fuel companies.

He argued the companies, which collectively contributed about a third of New Zealand’s emissions, had a legal duty to him and others in communities that are being damaged by the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.

The hearing, which was sent back to the High Court, was due to start in April next year.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the change would apply to current and future cases.

Taylor said there were two things wrong with the proposal.

“The first is that the government is proposing to limit New Zealanders’ rights to sue in civil proceedings, and the second is that it’s doing it when there’s an active case, Mr Smith’s case, before the courts that the Supreme Court has ruled should be heard.”

Taylor said Goldsmith should be ashamed of himself “for bringing a bill of this kind to Parliament”.

“I think his colleague, the Attorney General, should be investigating it for lack of consistency with the Bill of Rights Act.

“It’s pretty outrageous, and it raises issues that go far beyond climate change into the so-called comity between the different arms of government – the executive, the Parliament, and the courts – and here we’ve got a prime example of executive overreach, where they’re wanting to intervene in a judicial process and take someone’s legitimate rights away from them.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A Navy officer accused of threatening to kill an Afghan interpreter in 2013 has denied making any threat.

A court martial continued on Tuesday at the Devonport Naval Base in Auckland.

The court heard evidence from the complainant on Monday, who alleged the officer had threatened to have him blacklisted and killed if he attempted to contact the Minister of Defence over an immigration issue.

The accused officer was working as a delegate to help the roughly 30 interpreters through the immigration process as the New Zealand Defence Force dismantled its base in Afghanistan.

A formal statement written by the accused in 2024 was read for the court on Tuesday denying the allegation.

“I did not threaten him. I had frequent conversations with him; I do not recall and did not have any conversations with him in a threatening manner,” it read.

The complainant, who was working as an interpreter at Kiwi Base in Banyam, Afghanistan in 2013, had been offered permanent residency because the NZDF was pulling out of the conflict.

He had applied for residency as a single man but had an arranged marriage shortly afterwards and was trying to bring his new wife to New Zealand with him.

During the complainant’s evidence, he said he had received verbal acknowledgement that his marriage “should be fine”.

However, the accused’s statement indicated the complainant’s marriage came as a surprise.

“Initially [he] wasn’t married when he applied and there was no intent from him to get married during the process,” the accused’s 2024 statement said.

“To my understanding [he] came back and said he was married, however he didn’t provide any proof to myself, and he did this close to the departure time.”

The accused had said the complainant’s behaviour changed after his wife was denied residency.

“[He] was emotionally upset by the decision and over time became adjusted and agitated, and also unusable [in his role as an interpreter] as his only focus was on trying to change the decision,” the statement continued.

The complainant on Monday testified that he became aware the Minister of Defence was planning to visit the base and had written a letter to appeal for his wife to be granted residency.

The accused’s statement noted the complainant was asked not to come into work during the visit.

“[He] was asked not to come into work the day before the delegates arrived, I know [he] wanted to communicate with the Minister of Defence and also the Minister of Immigration,” the accused said.

“I do remember speaking to [him] and telling him he can’t speak to MoD, after I told him ‘no’ he was upset.”

The accused said he did not speak in a threatening way, and on Monday pleaded not guilty.

Another officer who was at Kiwi Base in 2013 and worked with interpreters, Warrant Officer Tyrone Howard, gave further evidence about the stresses involved in handling the immigration concerns.

He said the process was “frustrating, confusing, time consuming, but necessary”.

“In my mind we had to provide that opportunity, because it is a lot changing for them and they did serve our country very well over 10 years,” he said.

“But it did sometimes become frustrating with repetitive questions.”

Howard said the rules from Immigration were clear that residency would only be offered to interpreters and their immediate family members at the time the policy was enacted.

“There were a lot of back-and-forth requests and lot of denials because we couldn’t change what Immigration had given us to work with,” Howard recalled.

Though he didn’t remember the complainant specifically, he recalled that one of the interpreters had gotten married after applying for residency.

“There was a request to get married, and I remember the party line was ‘no he can’t’. We didn’t want other people to run away and get married and bring other people over.”

The complainant’s wife, whose identity is also suppressed, was the last witness to be called by the prosecution.

Via an interpreter, she told the court that she had been allowed to come to New Zealand in May of 2014 on a visitor’s visa and was eventually able to stay permanently.

She said the year-long delay between her husband’s move to New Zealand and her own had put a strain on their relationship.

“We reached the point we were going to, in fact, separate because it took a long time for him to take me to New Zealand,” she said.

Some years later, she recalled asking her husband to help her family move to New Zealand, too.

“I told [him] I would like to request to bring my family members here as well … But he said he was not certain he could do this for us,” she said.

“He said he had tried very hard to include me [when he first migrated] but in the end, he was threatened. That was the first time I heard [about the threat].”

“I saw the fact he was too scared, I could see it on his face, and he told me to keep this conversation very secret.”

The accused officer was the first witness to be called by the defence.

He said the complaint, made more than a decade after the alleged incident, had wounded him.

“I put an incredible amount of energy in supporting the repatriation of these personnel, more than I have for anything else in my life. When we arrived at Whenuapai Air Base I got home and collapsed,” he said.

“To have this allegation tabled against me, it cut very deep. Especially because I helped him more so than any of the other interpreters.”

The accused said the complainant was “very persistent” and would approach him at every opportunity, despite the accused repeating that he had no influence on the decision.

“I explained to him again, ‘you’re thinking way too highly of me… There’s a pyramid of hierarchy and I am at the bottom’,” he said.

“There’s the bottom of the pyramid, and then there was me. I was a naval [officer] on a land mission.”

He denied ever making the threat.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

A Navy officer accused of threatening to kill an Afghani interpreter in 2013 has denied making any threat.

A court martial continued on Tuesday at the Devonport Naval Base in Auckland.

The court heard evidence from the complainant on Monday, who alleged the officer had threatened to have him blacklisted and killed if he attempted to contact the Minister of Defence over an immigration issue.

The accused officer was working as a delegate to help the roughly 30 interpreters through the immigration process as the New Zealand Defence Force dismantled its base in Afghanistan.

A formal statement written by the accused in 2024 was read for the court on Tuesday denying the allegation.

“I did not threaten him. I had frequent conversations with him; I do not recall and did not have any conversations with him in a threatening manner,” it read.

The complainant, who was working as an interpreter at Kiwi Base in Banyam, Afghanistan in 2013, had been offered permanent residency because the NZDF was pulling out of the conflict.

He had applied for residency as a single man but had an arranged marriage shortly afterwards and was trying to bring his new wife to New Zealand with him.

During the complainant’s evidence, he said he had received verbal acknowledgement that his marriage “should be fine”.

However, the accused’s statement indicated the complainant’s marriage came as a surprise.

“Initially [he] wasn’t married when he applied and there was no intent from him to get married during the process,” the accused’s 2024 statement said.

“To my understanding [he] came back and said he was married, however he didn’t provide any proof to myself, and he did this close to the departure time.”

The accused had said the complainant’s behaviour changed after his wife was denied residency.

“[He] was emotionally upset by the decision and over time became adjusted and agitated, and also unusable [in his role as an interpreter] as his only focus was on trying to change the decision,” the statement continued.

The complainant on Monday testified that he became aware the Minister of Defence was planning to visit the base and had written a letter to appeal for his wife to be granted residency.

The accused’s statement noted the complainant was asked not to come into work during the visit.

“[He] was asked not to come into work the day before the delegates arrived, I know [he] wanted to communicate with the Minister of Defence and also the Minister of Immigration,” the accused said.

“I do remember speaking to [him] and telling him he can’t speak to MoD, after I told him ‘no’ he was upset.”

The accused said he did not speak in a threatening way, and on Monday pleaded not guilty.

Another officer who was at Kiwi Base in 2013 and worked with interpreters, Warrant Officer Tyrone Howard, gave further evidence about the stresses involved in handling the immigration concerns.

He said the process was “frustrating, confusing, time consuming, but necessary”.

“In my mind we had to provide that opportunity, because it is a lot changing for them and they did serve our country very well over 10 years,” he said.

“But it did sometimes become frustrating with repetitive questions.”

Howard said the rules from Immigration were clear that residency would only be offered to interpreters and their immediate family members at the time the policy was enacted.

“There were a lot of back-and-forth requests and lot of denials because we couldn’t change what Immigration had given us to work with,” Howard recalled.

Though he didn’t remember the complainant specifically, he recalled that one of the interpreters had gotten married after applying for residency.

“There was a request to get married, and I remember the party line was ‘no he can’t’. We didn’t want other people to run away and get married and bring other people over.”

The complainant’s wife, whose identity is also suppressed, was the last witness to be called by the prosecution.

Via an interpreter, she told the court that she had been allowed to come to New Zealand in May of 2014 on a visitor’s visa and was eventually able to stay permanently.

She said the year-long delay between her husband’s move to New Zealand and her own had put a strain on their relationship.

“We reached the point we were going to, in fact, separate because it took a long time for him to take me to New Zealand,” she said.

Some years later, she recalled asking her husband to help her family move to New Zealand, too.

“I told [him] I would like to request to bring my family members here as well … But he said he was not certain he could do this for us,” she said.

“He said he had tried very hard to include me [when he first migrated] but in the end, he was threatened. That was the first time I heard [about the threat].”

“I saw the fact he was too scared, I could see it on his face, and he told me to keep this conversation very secret.”

The court martial continues with evidence from the defence.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand