What does the IGD do?

About

What does the IGD do?

The Inspector-General of Defence is an independent statutory officer responsible for the oversight of the activities of the New Zealand Defence Force. The Inspector-General can investigate matters or disclosures in relation to the activities of the NZDF.

The Inspector-General must act independently, fairly, impartially, and in the public interest. The IGD must also have regard to the military context in which the NZDF operates.

The purpose of the IGD is to:

  • provide the Minister with dedicated independent oversight of the NZDF;
  • support the Minister in their responsibility to the House of Representatives for the activities of the NZDF; and
  • assure the public that the activities of the NZDF are subject to independent scrutiny, including in relation to the NZDF’s compliance with New Zealand’s obligations under international law.

The IGD’s work involves:

  • investigating incidents that have occurred in the course of activities of the Defence Force; and any subsequent acts or omissions of the Defence Force in relation to those incidents;
  • assessing, and identifying potential improvements or additions to, policies and procedures governing activities of the Defence Force;
  • receiving protected disclosures relating to the New Zealand Defence Force; and
  • any other function conferred on the Inspector-General by the IGD Act or any other legislation or rule of law.

The IGD can look into any Defence Force matter either on the Inspector-General’s own initiative (including information obtained under section 10 or Part 4 of the IGD Act or disclosed under the Protected Disclosures (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act 2022(external link)(external link)), or at the request of the Minister of Defence, the Secretary of Defence, or the Chief of Defence Force.

What the IGD does not do

The IGD does not look into the activities of Veterans’ Affairs New Zealand, which is a semi-autonomous unit within the NZDF. Veterans’ Affairs is accountable to the Minster for Veterans’ Affairs, and operates under the Veterans’ Support Act 2014.

How does the IGD work?

The Inspector-General has regard to the functions of the other oversight bodies listed at s 10(2) of the IGD Act. As the IGD is a small office, the IGD looks at matters not under the jurisdiction of other oversight bodies, such as systemic issues within the NZDF.

The Inspector-General may consult with other oversight bodies about any matter relating to the IGD’s functions, including co-operation to avoid duplication of effort and taking a coordinated approach to examining issues of common concern (s 10(1)).

The Inspector-General may conduct an investigation if a matter requires an in-depth review, such as interviewing witnesses. Investigations are conducted in private, however, the Inspector-General must notify the Secretary of Defence, the Chief of Defence Force, and the Minister of Defence.

An assessment will generally involve the IGD selecting an area of the NZDF’s work for examination and assessment. These are aimed at developing an understanding of the Defence Force’s operations and identifying potential improvements or additions to policies and procedures.

A report is produced at the end of an investigation or assessment and provided to the Secretary of Defence, the Chief of Defence Force, and the Minister of Defence. The report may include findings and recommendations about actions that the IGD considers the Defence Force should take. A public report, or a summary of the report, will also be published on the IGD website.

The Inspector-General may publish information about the Defence Force’s progress in implementing a recommendation.

The IGD has extensive powers to obtain information and documents. This includes direct access to NZDF databases, and a right of entry to defence premises, including a naval ship, aircraft, or vehicle used by the NZDF. The Inspector-General can, with the permission of the Chief of Defence Force, also visit an operational theatre.

The IGD publishes a work programme before July each year, which sets out the investigations and assessments that are planned for the year ahead. The work programme is published on the IGD website. The results of the work programme are discussed in the IGD annual reports.

Raising matters with the Inspector-General

Any person, including an employee of the NZDF, can bring a matter to the attention of the Inspector-General. The matter must relate to the Inspector-General’s functions.

The Inspector-General may decline to undertake an investigation or assessment. If the Inspector-General decides not to investigate the matter raised, you will be told in writing of the reasons for that. If you disagree you may provide your reasons for the Inspector-General’s further consideration.

In some cases the Inspector-General may decide not to investigate, for example if:

  • you have a right of appeal or there is another avenue for resolution and it is reasonable in the circumstances for you to take it (eg you have an employment grievance for which the normal employment law processes are more appropriate);
  • there is another oversight body that is better placed to investigate the matter;
  • the matter has been referred to a court of inquiry assembled under the Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971(external link), unless the inquiry has concluded;
  • the subject matter of your complaint is trivial or the complaint is frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith.

The IGD may decide to investigate or assess a matter, if:

  • for currently serving members of the NZDF, internal processes have been exhausted;
  • any person, including currently serving members of the NZDF, considers there has been undue delay or other reasonable concern regarding the integrity of internal processes;
  • the IGD considers the matter would not be more appropriately dealt with by another authority (as listed at s 10(2) of the IGD Act);
  • the matter raises one or more significant systemic issues;
  • NZDF processes alone are unlikely, in the view of the IGD, to be perceived by the public as being sufficiently robust;
  • the matter involves death or serious injury caused, or appearing to be caused, by NZDF actions;
  • the matter involves, or appears to involve deliberate wrongdoing or other serious misconduct that would significantly impact on public trust and confidence in the NZDF; or
  • it is a protected disclosure.