More than 20 interpreters took the opportunity to relocate with their wives and children.
At the beginning of the week, the interpreter told a court martial in Devonport, Auckland, that when he met with Immigration NZ about relocating, he was single.
His relationship status changed, however, when he met and quickly married a woman from a neighbouring province.
He was “destroyed” when Immigration said he could not bring his new bride to NZ and told the accused he was going to ask the Minister of Defence to grant his wife’s relocation.
This is when he said the accused threatened his life.
“He said if you try to speak to the Minister of Defence, we will talk to your Government to blacklist you and have you killed,” the interpreter claimed.
“And you and your family can’t do anything about it.”
The accused
The defence’s case began yesterday with its first witness, the accused.
He told the court martial he had initially tried to help the interpreter persuade Immigration to let his wife relocate.
He said that once the interpreter returned from his wedding it was his “sole objective” to change Immigration’s “mind”.
“Every opportunity he saw me, he would be very persistent about an update,” he reported.
“And when I say every opportunity … it was non-stop.”
As the base’s closing event drew closer, which the Minister of Defence and other officials were set to attend, he said the interpreter’s questions became more “concerning”.
The interpreter asked for the minister’s contact details and said he planned to approach him at the event to again plead for his wife’s amnesty, the accused reported.
“You’re thinking way too highly of me,” the accused claimed to have replied.
“I’m at the bottom [of the chain of command].”
In a meeting of the base’s managers, the accused reported the interpreter’s concerning behaviour.
A decision was made by the base’s intelligence officer and commanding officer to have the interpreter and other discontented local contractors suspended from the base while the minister visited.
When the accused told the interpreter he would be removed from base, he said the interpreter became upset.
“He felt like it was a punishment even though it wasn’t.”
This was when the interpreter claimed he was threatened, an allegation the accused “categorically” denied.
The interpreter claimed the accused got angry with him and had him removed from the base.
“I could not remove him from base, I had zero authority,” he explained.
‘Emotive’ behaviour a ‘security’ concern
The court then heard from Lieutenant Colonel Rory McGregor, who was an intelligence officer for the base.
His role included looking after the security of the base as well as that of the Afghan civilians.
He said that in the lead-up to the minister’s visit, he had been told by the accused, and witnessed himself, that the interpreter’s behaviour had become “quite emotive”.
McGregor was “quite concerned” about the interpreter’s behaviour and advised the commanding officer that he, and other contractors, should be suspended temporarily from the base.
“Some of these stakeholders [citizens] may have become less than friendly,” he explained.
“It’s not that uncommon that relationships break down once a force decides to leave.”
‘Absurd’ allegations
In defence lawyer Matthew Hague’s opening argument, he said the charge his client was defending, of threatening to kill the interpreter, was an “allegation”.
He also spoke about the interpreter’s view that the accused and other NZDF members had conspired together to have him booted off the base.
“This, as is the allegation, is absurd.”
He returned to his point, that the interpreter had come up with the accusation in 2017 when his wife, who was later able to immigrate, was hassling him to help to bring her family to NZ.
“That was a misguided, foolish, but maybe human attempt to deflect from himself,” the lawyer detailed.
“… And that lie snowballed … [and] it became increasingly difficult for [the interpreter] to tell the truth.”
Final arguments
In his closing statement, Crown lawyer Henry Steele said the accused was under an immense amount of pressure and uncharacteristically “snapped”, threatening the complainant.
The interpreter was not a real “security threat”, Steele argued, as the man was able to walk back on to the base four days after being removed.
The threat the interpreter posed was one of “embarrassing” the accused and other NZDF members in front of the minister.
Steele said the accused made the type of threat that could be “realised” in Afghanistan and the interpreter believed him.
Hague, on the other hand, said other allegations made in the trial by the interpreter had been disproven – either by witnesses or official documents.
Some allegations, like the threat to kill, could not be so cleanly debunked, Hague said.
This was why proving the charge beyond reasonable doubt to a high standard was essential, he said.
Judge Kevin Riordan went away to prepare his summing up before the three-person panel of military members, similar to a jury, decides whether the NZDF member is guilty of threatening to kill the interpreter.
Ella Scott-Fleming has been a journalist for three years and previously worked at the Otago Daily Times, Gore Ensign and Metro magazine. She has an interest in court and general reporting. She’s currently based in Auckland, covering justice-related stories.