Background.

On 20 January of this year I was arrested on my way home from work on a naval warrant from Auckland. My arrest was a surprise to say the least. I had left HMS Llandaff some two and a half years earlier and was just beginning to relax.

It is coincidental that a flat I had been visiting a week or so earlier was busted. No arrests were made, but names were taken as a matter of routine.

It has been a matter of some conjecture, therefore, whether the drug squad, working on the assumption that there is a natural association between suspected drug users and criminal types cross referred the names at the Police station. I was assured that there was no connection and I believe the squad later went to great lengths to assure others.

After spending a night in Wellington Central during which I contacted a friend, who in turn contacted the VUW Students Association and started the ball rolling at that end, I was handed over to the NZ Naval Authorities and sent to Auckland and HMS Philomel.

At first, my treatment in Auckland was very liberal. No doubt I was something of a novelty. A navy 'deserter' (such an emotive word) with shoulder length hair, beads, and sandals was an object of some interest.

However, after a few days with numerous people trying to get in touch with me. Press queries, radio broadcasts, and student consultations with British High Commission, the NZ Navy became a little more restrictive. I no longer took my meals in the dining room, writing materials were only issued for writing a letter, and all outside information concerning me was kept shrouded by mystery. Only 3 of the people who tried to visit me, were able to do so: a lawyer and 2 friends during my stay.

On 29 January a friend visited. He was optimistic about the chances of my staying in the country (despite a threat by a senior officer of the vice squad to lodge objections to my staying made privately at Wellington Central) but wanted to know when I was scheduled to be flown out.

I had heard earlier it was to be either the 7th or the 9th or the 10th of Feb. on a service aircraft. The Senior rating present confirmed this, in the presence of a friend. At 9a.m. on 1 Feb. at 2½ hours notice I was quietly flown out under escort to Singapore. So much for trusting the spoken word of the NZ Navy.

In Singapore I was handed over to the British Navy and held in the navy base.

My material treatment in the navy base was considerate and respectful. Personal sympathy was with me but, it was explained, justice would have to be done.

It was 10 days before I was finally sentenced. The deliberation over my case was considerably longer than the usual cut and dried offences. I was finally sentenced to 42 days detention and to be discharged from the navy, and charged the airfare from NZ to Singapore ($325).

My sentence was backdated for reasons which were not explained, by 12 days. With 14 [unclear: fif] days remission it ended on 2 March.

I believe the efforts of concerned students and others both inside and outside the university, and the general controversy that was created was instrumental in such leniency.

Military authorities are invariably sensitive to adverse publicity, and this issue was fast becoming political. The recruiting figures must be protected. During a conversation with an officer I was actually told there was no chance of my losing my remission.

Tanglin - Military Corrective Training Centre.

The purpose of a military corrective training centre is, as the title suggests, for corrective rehabilitation training in the form of strict discipline. It is a reminder that this is how you are expected to behave, a bringing back into line of offenders by direct, sustained assertion of authority. Introduction to this discipline is immediate. On entering you are issued with more gear, then, staggering under the load, you are marched away at 140 paces a minute which is the established marching pace. Talking is prohibited, except at meals, singing and whistling are not allowed, you must be respectful to staff, etc., etc., the list is endless.

The main cell block was a large two storied building with 20 rooms on each storey. The silent tenseness is enhanced by an almost clinical cleanliness which is strangely discordant in such an old building.

This is called Stage one. For long term prisoners, Stage 2 and possible Stage 3, where the facilities are more luxurious, 6 cigarettes a day are allowed as opposed to 2, as positive incentives for good behaviour. (In this atmosphere of military precision, not saying 'yes Sir' quick enough or daring to smile is a serious offence punishable by rationing of your food.)

Everything in the rooms had an allocated place. Bed layout, and the kit folded in the trunk provided, had to be meticulously sized in position. Boots and shoes were never polished highly enough, and there was a continuous striving for perfection. I had to polish my brown sandals black. Perfection was expected, anything less upbraided.

The daily routine was based upon the same regimentation and methodical precision, the very movements of fetch person designed for uniformity and automation.

From 6 a.m. until finally allowed an hour's reading at 8 p.m. before lights out you are systematically hounded, ridiculed, screamed at and generally pushed about; deliberately, and they maintain, objectively.

The objective claim is, of course highly debatable. There are 2 shifts of 4 sergeants, or equivalent ranks from the other services, with a sergeant-major in charge of each. All of these were military 'policemen'.

A job of that nature is bound to attract people who take a more personal interest in discipline than is actually required. It is a job where a person's own failings can be very successfully projected onto hapless victims with little means of defence. There were a couple of people on the staff who had definite leanings in this direction, and who made life barely tolerable for the offenders undergoing the sentence. The question that immediately arises is, what safeguards are there to insure that such positions are not filled by people with personality deviations of a sadistic or power-oriented nature?

Military Discipline.

The psychology behind these disciplinary processes is not hard to fathom. The aim is for men to obey orders unquestioningly, and accept unreservedly the authority of the powers-that-be. That this is the general policy is without doubt. That such a policy is morally valid can be answered in terms of the war crimes tribunals, and the present case of Lt. William Calley.

Treatment of offenders is for the most part a straight-forward process. If found guilty of committing a particular overt act. punishment follows. Consideration of motives and underlying reasons is only in mitigation.

In such a system there is room only for black and white, for the immediately identifiable shades are not allowed. By this I mean you are only assessed in naval terms. You are either "navy minded' in that you conform to the set pattern, or you are not. This is where the disciplinary structure is blind, insensitive and unthinking.

The non navy minded are square pegs in round holes, continually being hammered home in an attempt to fit.

The same rigid attitude is present in the process by which you can 'air your grievances'. At one stage during my detention I complained of not being allowed enough time to eat. The reasons for my complaint were more curiosity about the reaction and the process than the nature of the complaint.

We were paraded before a visiting officer, and had to rattle off our name, number, length of sentence, and whether we had a complaint; standing rigidly at attention, eyes straight ahead, and begining and ending with "Sir". I was the last in line and half a minute's tense silence followed my statement that I had a complaint - shades of Oliver Twist! then I was marched briskly off to the Commandant's office, stamped to attention and delivered my complaint in the required formal militarised terms. After a rigorous grilling my complaint was found groundless.

He was right, there was no specified length of time for meals, you stayed until you finished. But, of course, you were simply made to feel very uncomfortable if you weren't finished by the time everyone else was, with the staff standing over you, arms folded, glaring and inspecting their watch every minute. All implicit but you got the message.

However, it was the manner in which complaints were aired I was interested in. The rigorous formality and cultivated sternness are very clever methods of deterring would-be complainants. The ordinary man in the street, from whom, without denigrating them, these men are largely drawn, has a marked aversion to the physical manifestations of the bureaucratic machine. They shrink from officialdom and will sacrifice a great deal to avoid it.

Many men who 1 spoke to - 'Military policemen' are themselves sceptical of the 'old fashioned' discipline. They talk of detention in terms of necessitating discontinuity of service, the relative inefficiency of it, because it only creates cynicism, bitterness or indifference or all three. They talk of the disruption of family life for married men. This more or less comes down to one thing - economics. The financial upkeep of detention centres must be phenomenal. There were never more than'10 of us at any given time, and not many more for the past 18 months. For these men a full time staff of 30 odd is required, the average wage of whom would be about $60 per week. If a system of fines was imposed it would serve the dual purpose, I believe, of acting as a greater and certainly more humane deterrent, and would allow for the recirculation of money already allocated. It would also reduce tremendous administration costs.

Pay earned is directly related to social life. The lives of most navy personnel fall distinctly into 2 categories, work and social life. If their pay is reduced by fines their social life is consequently curtailed. For the single man, this means much more than simply being broke. It means he must stay aboard ship.

That the present system makes for efficiency, I do not dispute but at what cost to the men?

In this system there is an inconsistency between the projected role i.e. as men, and the disciplinary methods. Such things as extra work, stoppage of leave, attention focussed on standard of dress and military formality,' are childish in their application and create conflict between role and status.

It is this discrepancy between the way they are treated and the way they are supposed to act that leads to gross irresponsibility in these men Irresponsibility to themselves, and to their surroundings. Although manifested as a carefree easy-going attitude, it is, beneath the surface ignorance of themselves, and of their relation to society. There exists alarming unawareness of wide social issues; of political situations that directly affect their lives, of moral issues inherent in Armed forces.

It is not for nothing that interest in current affairs outside the narrow confines of naval life is discouraged, however subtly - even hobbies am handicrafts are rare.

Their lives, feelings and relationships are simple They are well used to imposed authority and externa discipline.

This makes these men particularly vulnerable as group to manipulation and exploitation. They accept the values thrust upon them by an institution. It is this exploitation and sacrificing of human dignity to Military and political function, that is deplorable, and that should be thoroughly investigated.