A "Commission" means a Commission of Inquiry appointed under subsection 8(1) (regulation 7). A "COI member" is a person appointed as a member of the Commission, including a President. A "COI assistant" is a person appointed under section 9 or 13(2) as an assistant. A "COI official" encompasses COI members, COI assistants, and legal practitioners appointed to assist the Commission. "COI records" comprise the transcript or other record of oral evidence given to a COI assistant or at a hearing; documents produced to a COI official or at a hearing; and documents prepared by a COI official that relate to the inquiry. "COI report" is the report prepared under section 24. The "appointing authority" for a Commission depends on who appointed it: if the Chief of the Defence Force and the Secretary acted jointly, then both jointly; otherwise the person who made the appointment (regulation 7). For inquiry officers, an "inquiry officer" is a person appointed under subsection 44(1) or 48(1). An "IO assistant" is a person appointed under section 45 or 48(1). "Inquiry official" means an inquiry officer or an IO assistant. "IO records" are analogous to COI records but for inquiry officers: transcripts, produced documents, and documents prepared by the inquiry official. "IO report" is the report under section 57. The instrument distinguishes between the two tiers primarily on the basis of the appointing authority, the scope of coercive powers, the requirement for oath or affirmation, and the public nature of hearings. Commissions can compel any person to give evidence or produce documents, and may hold public hearings if directed. Inquiry officers can only compel Defence members, cannot use oaths, and must always conduct inquiries in private. Another key concept is the "purpose of inquiries" under regulation 6: to facilitate decision-making about the Defence Force. This is narrower than a general inquisitorial function; the inquiry is instrumental to administrative or disciplinary decisions. Self-incrimination is abrogated for witnesses in both Commission and inquiry officer settings (sections 38 and 67), but a statement or disclosure is not admissible against the witness other than in proceedings for false testimony, by operation of subsection 124(2C) of the Defence Act. However, a person is excused if answering would tend to incriminate them in respect of a charged offence not yet finally dealt with (sections 38(2) and 67(2)). The regulations also define "engage in conduct" to include omitting to perform an act (regulation 7).

The regulations affect a wide range of persons connected with the Defence Force. Primary subjects are members of the Defence Force, who may be ordered to appear as witnesses before an inquiry officer (regulation 53) and who may be compelled to answer questions (regulation 62). Commonwealth employees also bear duties: they must not disclose or copy COI records or COI reports except as permitted or authorised (section 37) and similarly for IO records and reports (section 66). However, they are permitted to use, disclose and copy such records in the performance of their duties (sections 26 and 58). Witnesses are directly affected by notices to produce documents or things under section 18 and notices to attend as a witness under section 19. These notices can be given to any person whom the President of a Commission reasonably believes holds relevant information or documents. Failure to comply is an offence. Witnesses who are not Defence members are entitled to a reasonable allowance for expenses (section 19(4)). Persons who are likely to be materially adversely affected by a Commission's inquiry have a right to appear at hearings, and to examine witnesses who give evidence likely to affect them (section 23). This includes representatives of deceased persons whose record or reputation may be affected (section 23(3)-(4)). Legal officers provided by the Director of Defence Counsel Services must be made available at Commonwealth expense if a representative is a legal officer (section 23(6)). COI officials and inquiry officials are protected from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in good faith in the performance of their functions (sections 39 and 68). They are also not compellable to provide information or produce documents in court or service tribunal proceedings unless the court or tribunal requires it in the interests of justice (sections 39(2) and 68(2)). The Minister, the Chief of the Defence Force, and the Secretary have powers to appoint Commissions, amend terms, terminate appointments, and authorise disclosure of records. They may delegate these powers to senior officers: for Part 2, delegates must hold rank of Commodore, Brigadier or Air Commodore or above; for Part 3, the CDF may delegate to Lieutenant, Captain or Flight Lieutenant and above, while the Minister may delegate to Commodore, Brigadier or Air Commodore and above (sections 43 and 72). The regulations also affect any person who might take reprisals against another for participating in an inquiry: sections 35 and 65 create offences for preventing or dissuading a person from giving information, producing documents, or answering questions, and for victimising a person for doing so. The offence applies even if the other person did not actually participate (subsection 35(3) and 65(3)).

The regulations impose several key duties. A person given a notice under section 18 (to produce documents or things relevant to a Commission's inquiry) must comply within the specified period, which must be at least 14 days after the notice is given (section 18(2)-(3)). Failure or refusal is an offence (section 29), subject to defences of reasonable belief that compliance would damage defence, security or international relations, or that compliance would be unduly onerous (section 29(2)). Similar duties arise under section 19 for attendance as a witness and giving evidence, with an offence for non-compliance (section 30) and a defence of undue onerousness. Witnesses must be sworn or make an affirmation when called upon (section 20); refusing to do so is an offence (section 31). Witnesses must answer questions put by COI members, legal practitioners assisting, or persons permitted to examine them, when the President requires an answer (section 32). A similar duty applies before inquiry officers for Defence members (section 62). The duty to answer is not excused by self-incrimination (sections 38(1) and 67(1)), but a person is not required to answer if the answer might tend to incriminate them in respect of a charged offence not yet finally dealt with (sections 38(2) and 67(2)). There is a defence if the person reasonably believes the answer would damage defence, security or international relations (sections 32(3) and 62(2)). A duty not to disclose information or documents in contravention of a direction given by a Commission President under section 25 is imposed: such disclosure is an offence (section 36). Commonwealth employees and Defence members must not disclose or copy COI records or COI reports unless permitted under sections 26 or authorised under section 27 (section 37). Similar prohibitions apply to IO records and reports (section 66). Rights of affected persons are significant. A person likely to be materially adversely affected by a Commission's inquiry has the right to appear at public hearings that deal with matters likely to affect them, and may examine witnesses giving evidence likely to affect them (section 23(1)-(2)). The President must permit this. For private hearings, the President may permit appearance (section 23(1)(a)). Deceased persons' representatives have similar rights (section 23(3)-(4)). Witnesses have a right to an allowance for expenses (section 19(4)). All persons subject to an inquiry have the right to procedural fairness: both Commissions and inquiry officers must comply with the rules of procedural fairness (sections 16(2)(b) and 51(2)(b)). COI officials and inquiry officials have the right to be protected from civil or criminal proceedings for acts done in good faith (sections 39(1) and 68(1)). Witnesses and persons producing documents are protected from civil proceedings for loss, damage or injury caused by their good faith participation (sections 40 and 69). Publication of fair and accurate accounts of public hearings, and of Commission reports disclosed in accordance with Division 4, is protected from civil or criminal proceedings (section 41). Similarly, publication of IO reports disclosed under Division 4 of Part 3 is protected (section 70). The Minister has a right to use, disclose and copy COI records and reports for purposes relating to the Defence Force (section 28), and similarly for IO records and reports (section 60).

The regulations create a suite of criminal offences, each carrying a maximum penalty of 20 penalty units. At the time ofmaking the regulations, 20 penalty units equated to approximately AUD 4,200 (currently around AUD 4,440 under section 4AA of the Crimes Act 1914, though the regulations themselves do not specify the dollar amount). Offences apply to both Commission and inquiry officer contexts. For Commissions, it is an offence to fail or refuse to comply with a notice to produce documents or things (section 29), to fail or refuse to comply with a notice to attend as a witness (section 30), to refuse to be sworn or make an affirmation (section 31), to fail or refuse to answer a relevant question when required (section 32), to give false evidence (section 33), to engage in conduct that insults a COI official, disturbs or interrupts a hearing, or would constitute contempt of a court of record (section 34), to take reprisals against a person for participating in an inquiry (section 35), to disclose information or documents in breach of a direction under section 25 (section 36), and for Commonwealth employees or Defence members to disclose or copy COI records or COI reports without permission or authorisation (section 37). The same pattern applies to inquiry officers: offences for failing to comply with an order to attend as a witness or produce documents (section 61), failing to answer a question (section 62), giving false evidence (section 63), contempt-like conduct (section 64), taking reprisals (section 65), and unlawfully disclosing or copying IO records or reports (section 66). Defences are provided in several instances. For failure to produce documents or attend as a witness, it is a defence that compliance would be unduly onerous (sections 29(2)(b), 30(2) and 61(2),(4)(b)). For failure to produce documents and for failure to answer questions, it is also a defence that the person reasonably believed compliance or answering would cause damage to the defence, security or international relations of the Commonwealth (sections 29(2)(a), 32(3)(c) and 62(2)). In each case the defendant bears an evidential burden. Enforcement is through the ordinary criminal process; the regulations do not establish a special enforcement body. The penalties are relatively modest (20 penalty units), but the offences are strict liability only to the extent that the person must have engaged in the conduct; no fault element is specified beyond the conduct elements. The regulations also provide for removal of persons from hearings: the President of a Commission may order removal of a person who insults a COI official, disturbs a hearing, or engages in conduct that would be contempt of a court of record (section 22). The President may authorise reasonable action to give effect to such an order (section 22(2)). Similar powers exist for inquiry officers (section 56).

The regulations are made under the Defence Act 1903 (specifically paragraph 124(1)(gc) - see regulation 3). Subsection 124(2C) of the Act is expressly cross-referenced in the self-incrimination provisions (notes to sections 38 and 67), providing that a statement or disclosure made by a witness in the course of giving evidence before an inquiry under the regulations is not admissible in evidence against the witness other than in proceedings relating to the giving of false testimony. This creates a form of derivative use immunity. The regulations interact with the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) in a significant way. Sections 42 and 71 provide that section 38 of the FOI Act applies to COI records, COI reports, IO records and IO reports and the information contained in them. Section 38 of the FOI Act generally exempts documents from public access if their disclosure would be contrary to public interest in the conduct of certain investigations. This effectively renders all such records and reports exempt from FOI access. The regulations also interact with the Criminal Code. The notes to several offence provisions (sections 29, 30, 32, 36, 37, 61, 62, 66) refer to section 13.3 of the Criminal Code, which concerns evidential burdens on defendants. This means that where a defence is provided (e.g. reasonable belief of damage to security, or undue onerousness), the defendant bears the evidential burden of raising that matter. The regulations also contain a delegation framework that interacts with the Acts Interpretation Act 1901. Section 43 and 72 permit delegation by the Minister, Chief of the Defence Force, and Secretary to specified ranks of officers. The note to sections 27 and 59 (Ministerial authorisation to use, disclose and copy information) references subsection 33(3A) of the Acts Interpretation Act, confirming that such authorisation may be given to a person or a class of persons. The regulations replace the Defence (Inquiry) Regulations 1985, which are repealed by Schedule 1. However, Part 5 contains extensive transitional, application and saving provisions that preserve the operation of the old regulations for certain inquiries that commenced before the commencement date (26 March 2018). For example, incomplete old inquiries continue under the old regulations (section 75). Certain protections, immunities, and prohibitions on disclosure from the old regulations continue to apply to completed inquiries (sections 76-79). The old regulations also continue to apply to IGADF inquiries (Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force inquiries) under section 84. The last annual report under the old regulations is saved by section 83.

No amendment history is provided in the source text. The instrument was made on 15 March 2018 and commenced on 26 March 2018 (regulation 2). The commencement table in regulation 2 indicates that the whole instrument commenced at the same time as Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Defence Legislation Amendment (Instrument Making) Act 2017. No subsequent amendments to the regulations are recorded in the source. As the source is the instrument as originally made, readers should check the Federal Register of Legislation for any later amendments.

No litigation history is provided in the source text. The regulations themselves do not reference any court proceedings, and the source does not include any case citations or judicial consideration. It is possible that cases have arisen under the regulations or their predecessor, but the instrument as published does not mention them. Therefore, no litigation history can be derived from the source.

Several provisions contain traps for the unwary. First, the 14-day minimum notice period for Commission notices to produce documents (section 18(2)) and to attend as a witness (section 19(2)) applies only to the initial notice; there is no explicit prohibition on requiring compliance within a shorter period if the person agrees, but the offence provisions (sections 29 and 30) do not apply if the notice did not comply with the 14-day requirement - the notice itself would be invalid. However, for inquiry officer orders under section 53, there is no minimum notice period specified; an order could theoretically be made effective immediately. Second, the self-incrimination provisions are limited. While a person must answer even if it might incriminate them (sections 38(1) and 67(1)), the derivative use immunity under the Defence Act (s124(2C)) only protects the statement in other proceedings except for false testimony. But the regulations include an exception for pending charges: if the answer would tend to incriminate in respect of an offence with which the person has been charged and not finally dealt with, the person is not required to answer (sections 38(2) and 67(2)). The practical trap is that a person who answers about uncharged conduct may still face use of the answer in subsequent proceedings for that conduct? The note suggests not, but the regulation does not explicitly say that; it relies on the Act. Third, the offence of disclosing COI records or COI reports (section 37) applies only if the information came to the person's knowledge in the course of performing duties as a Commonwealth employee or Defence member. But the offence in section 36 (disclosure in breach of a President's direction) applies to any person, not just employees or members. So a private individual who receives a direction from the President under section 25 cannot disclose the specified information or documents, even if they are not a Commonwealth employee. Fourth, the protection for fair and accurate accounts of public hearings (section 41(1)) does not apply if the account discloses information in breach of a direction under section 25. And the protection for publication of a COI report (section 41(2)) only applies if the report was disclosed in accordance with Division 4 of Part 2. If a report is leaked without authority, publication could attract liability. Fifth, inquiry officer proceedings are entirely private (section 55). There is no provision for the CDF to direct a public hearing, unlike for Commissions. Any person who attends an inquiry officer proceeding is likely bound by confidentiality, and the offence of disclosure under section 66 applies broadly to anyone who is a Commonwealth employee or Defence member and who comes into possession of IO records or reports through their duties. Sixth, the "unduly onerous" defence for failing to comply with a notice or order (sections 29(2)(b), 30(2), 61(2),(4)(b)) is not defined. A person relying on it bears an evidential burden. The term "unduly onerous" may be interpreted strictly. Seventh, the reprisal offences in sections 35 and 65 do not require that the other person actually gave information, produced documents, or answered questions; it is enough that the accused prevented or dissuaded, or victimised for having done those things, even if the other person did not actually do them (subsections 35(3) and 65(3)). Finally, transitional provisions can catch practitioners unaware. An old inquiry that started before 26 March 2018 continues under the old regulations (section 75). A person subject to an old inquiry must look to the Defence (Inquiry) Regulations 1985, not the 2018 regulations.

Compliance requires different actions depending on the person's role. For a person who receives a written notice from a Commission President under section 18 or 19, the first step is to check the specified period - it must be at least 14 days from the date of notice. The person should comply by the due date or, if compliance is impossible (e.g. the document does not exist), seek legal advice. If the person believes compliance would damage the defence, security or international relations of the Commonwealth, or would be unduly onerous, they may need to raise that defence if prosecuted, but it is safer to apply to the President for a variation or to seek legal advice before refusing. A person attending as a witness must be prepared to give evidence on oath or affirmation and answer all relevant questions, unless the answer would tend to incriminate them in respect of a charged offence not yet finally dealt with. A person likely to be materially adversely affected by a Commission's inquiry should apply to the President for permission to appear and examine witnesses. The President must permit appearance at public hearings dealing with matters likely to affect them (section 23(1)(b)). For private hearings, the President may permit it. The person should engage legal representation if possible; if they use a legal officer provided by the Director of Defence Counsel Services, it will be at Commonwealth expense (section 23(6)). Commonwealth employees and Defence members who have access to COI records or COI reports should only use, disclose or copy them in the performance of their duties (section 26) or with Ministerial authorisation (section 27). They must not disclose or copy them outside those permissions, as doing so is an offence (section 37). If a President has given a direction under section 25 prohibiting disclosure of certain evidence, all persons who become aware of it must comply with that direction. COI officials and inquiry officials must act in good faith to obtain the benefit of immunity from civil or criminal proceedings (sections 39 and 68). They should also ensure they comply with procedural fairness obligations (sections 16(2)(b) and 51(2)(b)). The Chief of the Defence Force has an annual reporting obligation: as soon as practicable after the end of each financial year, the CDF must prepare a report on the operation of the regulations and include it in the Department's annual report (section 73). The first reporting period ended on 30 June 2019 (section 73(2)). Transitional compliance is crucial. If an inquiry commenced before 26 March 2018 and was not completed, it continues under the old Defence (Inquiry) Regulations 1985 (section 75). Practitioners must locate the old regulations and apply them. Any directions, authorisations or instruments made under the old regulations that were in force immediately before commencement continue in force (sections 75(2)(c), 77, 80). The prohibition against disclosure of records or reports of Courts of Inquiry and Inquiry Officers under the old regulations continues to apply even after the new regulations commence (sections 78 and 79). Organisations should review any ongoing inquiries and identify which regulatory framework applies. Finally, any person who holds documents or information that are IO records or IO reports should treat them as exempt documents under the FOI Act (section 71) and should not disclose or copy them except as permitted under sections 58, 59 or 60.