"Doing nothing is not an option."
That was the view of former sex discrimination commissioner Elizabeth Broderick in her advice to the then Abbott government on what should be done to put to rest questions about the "very high level of sexual abuse of women" at the Australian Defence Force Academy.
More System Videos
No justice for abused military members
Those responsible for raping and sexually abusing ADF personnel won't be charged, as Defence correspondent David Wroe explains.
And yet we have decided to do nothing.
No doubt it is a complicated challenge. The passage of time, the scarcity of evidence and the reluctance of victims to relive their experiences through the justice system only to see the accused possibly acquitted, mean holding individuals to account is difficult.
![Revelations about sexual and physical abuse inside the military prompted a national outrage.](/web/20161117102335im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/p/q/1/d/j/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gsl6sh.png/1478855774824.jpg)
Of the 133 cases across Defence that the taskforce referred to police, just one saw the inside of a courtroom and no conviction was recorded. Of the 157 that were referred to the Chief of the Defence Force – including 33 relating to ADFA – none has resulted in formal action. Defence has to meet the same burden of proof as a criminal or a civil court depending on the seriousness of the charge. Again in many cases victims have not wanted to take action.
A royal commission does not change that. Royal commission sceptics argue no final reckoning is possible without punishing individuals and if that can't be done, there is little point in a further probe.
On the flipside, there has never been a proper accounting for the fact that on a tight-knit campus, at least 20 women allege to have been raped, in some cases gang-raped, and at least 19 more indecently assaulted or sexually abused between 1991 and 1998. Those are only the ones who lodged reports. Their reports were "grossly mismanaged" according to Ms Broderick's advice.
By whom? How? How was it allowed to go on? How far up the chain of command did the conspiracy, complicity or tolerance go?
Remember, evidence is scant today because the cases were not properly managed at the time. Time has passed because this was not confronted back when it should have been. No doubt some victims don't want to put themselves on the line now because they lost faith in the system then.
In announcing the government will not go ahead with either a royal commission or an Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission-Australian Federal Police probe, Defence Minister Marise Payne relies heavily on the fact that many victims told Ms Broderick they did not favour a royal commission and the principle of "doing no further harm" to victims was paramount.
That ignores Ms Broderick's advice that victims "want action to be taken" and "if a royal commission is not established, a strong alternative response is required".
It was not up to the victims to figure out how to solve this difficult challenge of finding a way to put this to rest.
Certainly, ADFA today is much improved. The current and recent crop of Defence leaders have been rightly credited for significant reforms across the organisation.
But as Ms Broderick wrote in her advice: "The question does arise as to whether these reforms, together with the remedies offered to [taskforce] complainants, are enough to make up for the fact that many alleged perpetrators and those who mismanaged complaints, including through the concealment of documents, have never been brought to account."
Yes, it's a challenge. But what is beyond dispute is that we've gone from seriously considering a royal commission when defence abuse was dominating headlines to doing nothing.