Inquiry into Operation Burnham
In April 2018 the New Zealand Government announced that an inquiry into Operation Burnham and related matters would be held.
Operation Burnham was undertaken in Afghanistan by NZSAS troops and other nations’ forces operating as part of the International Security Assistance Force in 2010.
In 2017 the book Hit & Run was published which contained a number of serious allegations against New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) personnel.
The Inquiry has sought to establish the facts in connection with the allegations, examine the treatment by NZDF of reports of civilian casualties following the operation, and assess the conduct of NZDF forces.
In common with all inquiries established under the Inquiries Act 2013, this Inquiry has no power to determine the civil, criminal, or disciplinary liability of any person, or award reparations. However it may, if justified, make findings of fault and recommend further steps be taken to determine liability.
The Inquiry reported back to the Attorney-General on 17 July 2020. The Government has authorised the release of the report which is now published on the Inquiry website.
RNZ: Operation Burnham: Child killed, but death was justified, inquiry finds
A civilian child was killed during Operation Burnham in 2010, but an inquiry has found their death was justified under international law.
Four others were killed, but the government inquiry could not determine if they were civilians or insurgents.
The Burnham Inquiry, led by Sir Terence Arnold and Sir Geoffrey Palmer, has also found New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) officials did not plot to cover-up the casualties, as claimed in the book Hit and Run by investigative journalists Nicky Hager and Jon Stephenson.
It did, however, find the Defence Force never corrected claims made to the public and ministers by its personnel that allegations of civilian casualties were “unfounded”, despite knowing it was possible.
The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has also released its report, which found New Zealand’s intelligence agencies could have done more to help set the record straight.
Read the summary of the findings and recommendations from chapter 1. [PDF, 332 KB]
Read PDF chapters of the report through the following links:
- Foreword [PDF, 127 KB]
- Contents [PDF, 25 KB]
- Chapter 1 – Overview of Inquiry and findings [PDF, 410 KB]
- Chapter 2 – The deployment of the NZSAS to Afghanistan: political and constitutional dimensions [PDF, 488 KB]
- Chapter 3 – Operations Burnham and Nova: origin and planning [PDF, 4.9 MB]
- Chapter 4 – What happened on Operations Burnham and Nova? [PDF, 3.3 MB]
- Figure 4 – Key locations in Tirgiran Valley (Map) (external link)
- Chapter 5 – Operations Burnham and Nova: casualties and property damage [PDF, 456 KB]
- Chapter 6 – Assessment of conduct during Operation Burnham [PDF, 444 KB]
- Chapter 7 – Predetermined and offensive use of lethal force [PDF, 320 KB]
- Chapter 8 – A cover-up? An account of what happened [PDF, 446 KB]
- Chapter 9 – A cover-up? Our assessment [PDF, 475 KB]
- Chapter 10 – Operation Yamaha: detention policy and the law [PDF, 377 KB]
- Chapter 11 – Operation Yamaha: description and assessment [PDF, 495 KB]
- Chapter 12 – Looking to the future [PDF, 421 KB]
- Appendix 1 – Terms of Reference: Government Inquiry into Operation Burnham and related matters [PDF, 201 KB]
- Appendix 2 – List of common acronyms [PDF, 30 KB]
- Contributors [PDF, 30 KB]
Your NZ 
Duker
/ 31st July 2020“”no organised institutional strategy to cover up civilian casualties” but NZDF made several incorrect and misleading statements in briefings to Ministers and to the public.
What a whitewash…claim some sort ‘organised institutional strategy’ didnt exist and all the BS stories just happened to be put out there including making false stories about the accuracy of the book.
Cover ups are never ‘institutional’ in the sense they expect , its always a few top people that decide on their own bat and being the army , orders from the TOP have to be followed
What historically is known is that any “independent inquiry” report is heavily vetted before its released to remove or rewrite conclusions or phrases that dont suit those being inquired into into.
I wouldnt say I particularly cared about this issue at the time but we cant just keep on having these whitewashes of official actions.
Will be much the same for the Inquiry into the Christchurch terrorist attack
NOEL
/ 31st July 2020So it wasn’t a revenge raid afterall.
Duker
/ 31st July 2020Yes it was . Why does did SAS pick this village at this time…was it even within its mandate at the time
NOEL
/ 31st July 2020https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/nz-defence-force-chief-deeply-sorry-after-damning-report-into-deadly-afghan-raid/ar-BB17oof7?li=BBqdg4K&ocid=mailsignout
NOEL
/ 31st July 2020“I wouldnt say I particularly cared about this issue at the time “
NOEL
/ 31st July 2020“The inquiry has found, however, the operations were not “revenge” raids, nor were they “ill-conceived”.
There were “legitimate reasons” for the operations, the report said, as Defence Officials had “reliable intelligence” insurgents who had been conducting attacks in the Bamyan province were located in the villages and had plans for further attacks targeted at New Zealand troops and Afghan security forces.
“The operations aimed to disrupt the insurgent network and improve security in Bamyan province,” the report said.
Operation Burnham was not an attack on innocent people as claimed in the book But and Run”
Alan Wilkinson
/ 31st July 2020Hager specialises in attributing or implying malign motives – standard Lefty modus operandi.
Blazer
/ 31st July 2020Dirty politics..rumour and innuendo=standard Righty M.O.
Duker
/ 1st August 2020Malign motives …. you arent any snow white either
Just yesterday you claimed some imaginary link between whaleoil and Peters was the reason he ended up with Henry as his lawyer for the Colin Craig case. Most often the reason is they are availabe to take the case for the money offered
Typical malign comments of yours
Ignores the main outcome from enquiry, that Hager and Stepheson were right (mostly) while NZDF were deliberately misleading
Alan Wilkinson
/ 2nd August 2020Usual utter tosh delivered with usual rude arrogance. Henry’s assignment to the stranded whale coincided with a spectacular Damascus revelation that caused the BFD to start boosting Winston First. Suspect any money offered to Henry did not come from the whaling industry.