Gay Soldier Takes His Life in Afghanistan

DIED IN AFGHANISTAN: Corporal Douglas Hughes. 

A  distressed New Zealand soldier took his life in Afghanistan just hours after confessing his feelings for a male colleague of junior rank, a Sunday Star-Times investigation has found.

The soldier died despite being in the care of his sergeant, who at one point frisked him for a weapon.

Corporal Douglas Hughes, 26, was on his second tour of duty to Afghanistan. Hughes' family believe the death was preventable and are critical of the actions of the sergeant.

They believe he was bullied because he was gay and that his death, in the early hours of April 3 at the forward patrol base Romero in Bamiyan province, raises questions about frontline attitudes to gay soldiers.

The New Zealand Defence Force likes to promote its acceptance of homosexual lifestyles. Much was made of the NZDF contingent that marched in the Auckland Pride parade last month.

But a Court of Inquiry report into Hughes' suicide, makes it clear he did not feel comfortable coming out to his fellow soldiers, was frequently trying to find out what others were thinking of him and displayed "heightened sensitivity" to the rumours during the Afghanistan deployment.

His family are more blunt, saying he was mocked and bullied about his sexuality, with his superiors doing nothing to help him. Other sources agree with the family, saying he was relentlessly bullied.

While the Star-Times understands this is a sensitive subject, the family wanted their son's story to be told.

A number of questions surrounding his death will likely remain unanswered after coroner Gordon Matenga declined to open an inquest into the death, a move which has upset Hughes' family, who say the defence force inquiry raised more questions than it answered. The NZDF refused to answer a list of questions about Hughes' death, and the actions of his colleagues, claiming publication of the evidence from the Court of Inquiry was prohibited.

The concerns held by the family and raised by our investigation include:

The lack of action by Hughes' superiors after he told fellow non-commissioned officers that he was considering killing himself because of continual speculation by other soldiers about his sexuality. Senior commanders were aware of this.

How, despite concerns for Hughes' state of mind and emotional outbursts, he was allowed access to weapons.

Whether the defence force has adequate processes for dealing with gay soldiers who have an unreciprocated attraction to colleagues, as was the case with Hughes.

The night before he died, Hughes was confronted by a sergeant about his actions towards a soldier described as Trooper A in the report. Hughes broke down, admitted he was gay and that he had feelings for Trooper A.

The sergeant then called a meeting between himself, Hughes and Trooper A; the trio spending several hours together as Hughes repeatedly apologised to the irate trooper.

At one point Hughes went to his room and the sergeant asked him what he was doing. The sergeant frisked him as he left his room, but found nothing.

Later, the trooper said he could no longer work with Hughes, who stormed off, followed by the sergeant, and was moments later found fatally wounded inside a sangar, or fortified sentry post.

It is understood an NZDF inquiry found that, although the sergeant had concerns about Hughes' state of mind, there was no indication he was going to kill himself and the death could not have been prevented.

A close relative of Hughes, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the family believed the defence force had relied on the family to not publicly raise concerns over his death because they would be too embarrassed to talk about his sexuality - especially as they didn't know he was gay until they received the report into his death.

Recommendations made to the NZDF after Hughes' death suggest there were major gaps in the way his situation was handled. They included NZDF review its policy around homosexual personnel to ensure they received "maximum support".

WHAT WE ASKED THE DEFENCE FORCE

The Sunday Star-Times asked the New Zealand Defence Force the following questions last week, but received no answer:

Is the NZDF satisfied the sergeant who was with Hughes before he died did enough to prevent the death?

Was it appropriate for the sergeant to call a meeting between Hughes and the trooper he had confessed gay feelings for?

Was enough done to support Hughes as he struggled with his sexuality in Afghanistan?

Is the NZDF satisfied that enough is done generally to support gay personnel?

As per the inquiry recommendation, has the NZDF reviewed its policies for providing support to homosexual personnel? What came out of that?

The paper has also previously asked the NZDF under the Official Information Act whether there was evidence that Hughes had been bullied.

The NZ Defence Force refused to answer on privacy grounds.

- © Fairfax NZ News