R v McBride

David William McBride is charged with five offences, including communicating information not in the course of his official duty and disclosing information which he had a duty not to disclose. The court heard argument in relation to what directions should be given to the jury about the meaning of the terms "official duty" in s 73A of the Defence Act and "duty not to disclose" in s 70 of the Crimes Act. The main issues before the court were whether "general orders" within the meaning of the Defence Force Discipline Act could define the scope of the accused's duty and whether there was a duty to act in the "Australian public interest" that allowed him to act contrary to a lawful order. The court held that the third proposition, that Defence Instructions and Regulations could not define the scope of the accused's duty, could not be accepted. The court also rejected the fourth proposition that there was a duty to act in the public interest that allowed him to act contrary to a lawful order. The court held that the fifth and sixth propositions were not appropriate for any determination at this stage. The court rejected the oral application to refer a question or a case to the Court of Appeal. It was not appropriate to refer a question or state a case at this stage as the proceedings had been on foot since 2019 and it would delay any final determination for months, if not years. The accused retains his rights of appeal.