Statement regarding Federal Court decision in Gaynor v Chief of Defence Force

On Friday I won my legal challenge against the former Chief of Defence Force (CDF), David Hurley, overturning his decision to terminate my appointment as an officer in the Army Reserve.

A brief background to this decision can be found here.

At the outset, I would like to thank my wife for her support throughout this three year battle. She has suffered more than anyone during this process and has endured stress, financial hardship and insults to her family without complaint. Her bravery inspires me every day and our seven children are fortunate indeed to have such a wonderful woman as their mother.

I would also like to thank my parents and wider family for their support and encouragement. My father is retiring from the Australian Army after 40 years of service in January. This victory is the best present one could provide for a man who has dedicated his life to serving Australia. It is a just reward for the great difficulties and unjust treatment he has faced silently since 2013.

I must thank the many thousands of Australians who have been watching this legal challenge with keen interest, particularly current and ex-serving members of the Australian Defence Force. Without their assistance and generosity, I simply could not have continued this challenge. This victory truly has been a team effort. I have received great joy to hear of the celebrations that have occurred across Australia following the Federal Court’s decision.

Great thanks go to my legal team, led by Robert Balzola. They have worked very hard and argued this case very well. I also thank the Defence legal officers who helped me respond at the outset to the initial notice to show cause, issued by the former Chief of Army, David Morrison.

I thank the Federal Court for its unemotional deliberation and consideration of this case.

Most importantly, I must thank God. Truly this victory is His. The words on the hat badge of the Australian Army chaplains best sum up this victory: In this sign conquer.

The legal effect of the Federal Court’s decision is that my service as an Army Reserve was officer was never terminated.

The Federal Court ruled that the termination decision was unlawful because it violated the implied constitutional right to express private political opinions.

This decision is an important win for freedom in Australia and one that all Australians will benefit from, regardless of their political views. It preserves the right for all Australians to express their political opinions as citizens of Australia.

I must make this point: politicised militaries and democracies do not mix well.

The truth is that my personal political beliefs only became a matter of interest to the hierarchy of the Australian Defence Force because it embarked on a program that supports certain politically correct views. It should come as no surprise that shortly after the former Chief of Defence Force allowed uniformed participation in a political event for the first time (the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras) that Defence also began a process of punishing officers who lawfully expressed private political views that were deemed ‘non-compliant’.

It should be of the greatest concern in our Western democratic society that the hierarchy of the Australian Defence Force attempted to curtail the right to individual freedom of speech. It remains greatly concerning that elements within the Australian Defence Force continues to use this institution for partisan and uniformed political activity in Australia.

I hope that the leadership of the Australian Defence Force will use this Federal Court decision to return to its pre-2013 policies. These policies prohibited Defence members from political activity or attendance at political events in their official capacities, but allowed all Defence members to express private views, join political parties and even run for office. These policies are still in force today, but they are ignored. I have only ever sought to uphold these policies.

I am now in the process of working with the Australian Army to ensure that administrative arrangements are taken to put the Federal Court’s decision into effect without delay. I am satisfied that this decision is being taken seriously and I do not intend to comment further on this process.

However, the Australian Defence Force now has 28 days to appeal this decision.

I hope it does not. The Australian Defence Force has protected freedom in this nation. It would be disappointing to see it mount a legal attack on the very freedoms that service men and women have died to protect.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

9 Comments

  1. Bernard Gaynor Your name will go down in Australian history as a true blue, courageous, decent, fearless Aussie on whom the cringing, ignorant establishment
    could not pin any shame or ignominy that stuck. Good on you – deep shame on them. Hooray!

    Post a Reply
  2. We must support Bernard Gaynore as I like Bernard am a victim of this man Garry Burns who abuses the law to shut people up. He is the main cause of me loosing my job as a taxi operator/driver as well as he wrote to Clover Moore the Sydney Lord Mayor and independent member of the NSW parliament to lobby for me to loose my taxi authority.

    I give priase to God that Bernard could access this win as it shows democracy is still around in these days of a coming homosexual dictatorship on a totaliarian basis. God is the ulrimate course of our lifes, not the world or those who want to take away our freedoms of beleif.

    Yours

    John C.Sunol

    Post a Reply
  3. I have just read this news, from overseas. Bernard Gaynor and his lawyer Robert Balzola have had a heroic victory, judging from this personal summary by Bernard.

    Both Australians have suffered the most staggering, despicable, personal attacks by the homosexual lobby.

    These attacks have, in the main, been led by an unemployed male mental disability pensioner (who shall remain nameless) but who many believe is acting as a de-facto ex-officio officer of the Anti Discrimination Board of New South Wales.

    These attacks have educated us about the vexatiousness of that lobby. These attacks have educated us about the dark underbelly of the homosexual lobby, filled with perverted sexual innuendo. Because they aim to “normalise” homosexual behaviour and acts, and because they have no convincing arguments, they rely on mockery, by suggesting that their target must be a “covert homosexual” or his supporters “kiddie fiddlers”. It is quite pathetic and designed to incite hatred and contempt, but instead it can shine a light on where their mind is at. They do all these public attacks on Bernard with a false sense of impunity, courtesy the NSW Anti-Discrimination (Homosexual Vilification) Amendment Bill 1993.

    That piece of Orwellian legislation was pushed through the NSW Parliament with the narrowest of margins by the then Member for Bligh and now Mayor of Sydney, Ms Clover Moore. It is a classic, text-book example of anti free-speech legislation pushed through by a sophisticated and clever homosexual lobby group that has no concept of the Christian teachings about love of one’s neighbour.

    This teaching can be summed up in the line “love the sinner, hate the sin”. This in turn stems from the belief that every person has a soul.

    Under this piece of legislation a person has no soul. Public statements on a blog that expose or condemn human behaviour or actions, from a child-protection point of view (such as lewd homosexual behaviour) are deemed no different to vilifying the person or group itself. Hence it is deemed “hate speech” and unlawful.

    This legislation is “too clever by half”. It was passed in parliament using deception and propaganda by the homosexual lobby groups who know that the Christian philosophy, that is able to separate homosexual acts from the homosexual person, is very dangerous to their cause.

    The worst crime in their book is to publicly articulate your Christian beliefs about homosexual acts, homosexual behaviour, and the homosexual political agenda. That is becoming dangerous, as Bernard has learnt by bitter experience.

    This positive decision by the Federal Court has been bought about by the sheer human courage, patience, persistence and endurance shown by Bernard, and his lawyer. For those of us who understand what marriage and family is about, such bitter, twisted and evil attacks against the husband do hurt the wife equally, and this can turn a marriage into a struggle of choice for the wife, a struggle between truth and peace. That is why those of us who have followed Bernard’s plight at the hands of the homosexual aristocracy in New South Wales empathise with Bernard’s wife and mother of his children. This fight, when it all boils down, is about two important values: freedom of speech and protection of family created by husband and wife. These are two fundamental bedrocks upon which our society is built. The homosexual political lobby groups are out destroy those two traditional values, through deception and propaganda about “equal love”, “diversity” and “marriage equality”.

    Good folk are cowed into silence by the “homophobia” lie that they cannot see through.

    Thank you Bernard – and your lawyer Robert Balzola – for making this legal precedent and contribution, that will help to protect us all.

    Post a Reply
    • Just to emphasize your comment. My Mother passed away in May this year and wished to have her service held at the local Uniting Church – the Uniting Church is anything but uniting! – where my younger brother(62)and I, (64) each presented a eulogy to an outstanding, loyal and loving Mother.

      On the day, I watched the arrival of the organist and the preacher, both who came in the one vehicle – it was pretty obvious to me from observation that the organist was an overt homosexual and that the preacher and the organist were in a ‘relationship’. The preacher of course donned what is now a mandatory requirement within the ‘Uniting Church’ a white smock with a rainbow colored sash place around the neck to fall down both sides of the front – which is of course a representation of ‘inclusion’.

      I knew from past experience at other Uniting Church funerals what the go was – so my eulogy deliberately emphasized the importance of Motherhood and Family as one of the bedrocks of our culture, society and civilization, and that no amount of wishful thinking for other variants would ever replace those true like values. In short, I condemned ‘poofta marriage’ and I could see that my words had caused some effect on the person doing the service.

      Later, walking away from the graveside service I made a point of shaking the preacher’s hand and to thank him for a nice service – which it was. He uttered absolutely nothing in reply to me, but I could sense in his demeanour that he wished to say something, but he just simply couldn’t find the words, which is most unusual for a preacher!

      Post a Reply
  4. Bernie, what would have been your position if the Federal Court had ruled against you?

    What happened to you would have been inconceivable just 20 years ago.

    That the fighting ability of the ADF could have been put into jeopardy by a political agenda that was put in place to solely undermine the integrity of that ability is nothing less than act of treachery.

    Remember the Skype affair at the Australian Defence Force Academy and what the then Defence Minister did to the Commandant?

    The former Defence Minister, Stephen Smith, has a lot to answer for in this undermining of the very system that was put in place to protect this country and all Australians from our enemies, and simply for his own personal/political ambitions.

    I sincerely hope his name is never forgotten in what has happened to you and to what he has done to the ADF.

    Post a Reply
  5. 1. Homosexuality and transgender are HARMFUL to participants and society. I pity the victims who have been deceived by the lie that they are not. This is NOT a ‘diversity’ issue, unless the ADF is planning to include drug addicts to ensure ‘diversity’. We need to defend our neighbours from homosexuality-pushers in the same way that we try to defend people from drug-pushers. Politicians and ADF should be ashamed for CAUSING HARM to my fellow Australians by promoting and supporting homosexuality and transgender practice. ADF leaders and medical practictioners should be guilty of a CRIME for spending tax-payer dollars on trans-gender operations which are HARMFUL to the victims; i.e. in the order of severe assault.
    2. If ADF intends to PERSECUTE Christians whilst actively supporting homosexuals, then Christians should quit the ADF and boycott the Australian political process. The Australian CDF can then do a REAL assessment of whether that would improve ‘morale’ and ‘increase capacity’, instead of the ignorant rhetoric which was reported in this case. I grieve for my country :(…

    Post a Reply
  6. As another one of those ex servicemen (Vietnam) I give you and your family full marks for courage and integrity.

    Post a Reply
    • Congratulations Bernard on your win for free speech which should never come too the point where you had to defend yourself at considerable personal & financial expense & hardship. I congratulate the Judge also for upholding free speech. Sad to see the Military so politisised it undermines it’s role. I wholly agree with what your statement. (Ex Navy CPONPD of 28yrs)

      Post a Reply
    • May God give Bernard and his supporters-and we are many- the strength to keep on fighting the good fight.

      Post a Reply

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Merry Christmas! - Bernard Gaynor - […] freedom of speech in the Federal Court, with a decision ruling that the Chief of Defence Force unlawfully terminated…
  2. Chief of Defence Force to appeal Federal Court win - Bernard Gaynor - […] early December, I won an important case in the Federal Court against the Chief of Defence Force. In a…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares

Share This

Share this post with your friends!