Petition to the Minister for Defence Personnel Requesting that the Minister use Ministerial discretion and Set Aside DHAAT Decision Jensen and the Department of Defence [2026] DHAAT 3 (27 January 2026) and Order an Independent Ministerial Review of that Report.

Date: 15 February 2026 Petitioner: A. (Tony) H. Jensen MG Position at Coral: 2IC, 1 RAR Mortar Platoon Action Date: 13 May 1968

Petition Summary 

We, the undersigned, request that the Hon Matt Keogh MP exercise his Ministerial discretion and set aside the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal decision Jensen and the Department of Defence [2026] DHAAT 3 (27 January 2026) and order an Independent Ministerial Review of the Tribunal’s findings concerning the award for actions at Fire Support Patrol Base Coral on 13 May 1968. The purpose of the review is to determine whether the 2020 award for Hazardous Circumstances should be upgraded to recognise most conspicuous self‑sacrifice in extremely perilous circumstances and accordingly upgrade the Medal for Gallantry.

Key Facts of the Action at The Battle for Coral

Time and place: 0230–0630, 13 May 1968, FSPB Coral.
Position: Four 81mm mortars; minimal defensive works; arrived one hour before last light.
Casualties: 5 KIA and 8 WIA from the mortar position and 38 NVA KIA in our position, THE SIZE OF AN OLYMPIC POOL. 
nearby 2 gunners KIA and 4 WIA as well as 14 NVA KIA.
Actions taken: Called artillery from 161 NZ Battery and 3 RAR mortar fire onto my position to prevent annihilation and secure the Artillery guns’ flank and then requested 5 rounds of Splintex from No. 5 gun 102 Battery to be fired at my position. 
Contemporaneous support: Draft citation by Captains Bindley and Davies recommending VC or MC; contemporaneous witnesses statements from my diggers and Colonel Ian Ahearn.
Grounds for Ministerial Review

I question some logic and facts in this Report but do NOT intend to appeal to the Federal Court. 

The Tribunal acknowledged extreme peril but then rejected an award upgrade. Key concerns that warrant review:

Training does not diminish valour — DHAAT treated my performance under extremely perilous threat as less conspicuous because I was trained for it. Training cannot negate the courage required to apply that training when lives are at stake in that situation. 

·         Deliberate self‑sacrifice minimised — Battlefield Options do not diminish gallantry. The Tribunal accepted that I risked death from my own fire to save my men yet concluded that, as this was my only option, which it wasn’t, then this was not pre‑eminent valour. The Report concentrates on negatives: actions that I had ruled out and did not do, rather than the decisions I made which is what you do when under fire—decisions that killed the enemy, held our ground, saved lives and secured the Artillery guns’ flank. My deliberate acceptance of lethal risk to save comrades is central to the highest awards. 

Contemporaneous evidence undervalued — A draft citation by senior Captains and corroborating evidence from multiple eyewitness’s were given little weight despite their immediacy. This seems to show a systematic bias against primary eyewitness testimony, preferring a "sanitized" official history written years after the event.

Documented acceptance of risk overlooked — Colonel Ahearn’s contemporaneous statement records my CO’s reticence to accept my potentially lethal request and my explicit willingness to accept casualties and the subsequent firing of Splintex at our position.

·         Precedent. If the Tribunal’s logic is accepted, no serviceman or woman in a desperate "last stand" can ever qualify for the VC, as their heroism would be dismissed as a "mandated" survival instinct (they had no choice/they were trained for it). This contradicts the very essence of the Letters Patent for the award.

Requested Ministerial Actions

Please, use your Ministerial discretion and

Set aside DHAAT Report: Jensen and the Department of Defence [2026] DHAAT 3 (27 January 2026).
Order an Independent Ministerial Review of the Tribunal’s findings with access to: the June 1968 draft citation, contemporaneous witness statements (Bindley, Davies, Ahearn), and all relevant evidence.
If the review supports an upgrade, recommend appropriate higher recognition that accurately reflects most conspicuous self‑sacrifice in extremely perilous circumstances.
Petition Statement for Signatories

By signing this petition I support Tony Jensen’s request for the Minister to SET ASIDE the DHAAT decision and order an Independent Ministerial Review to determine whether the award for his actions at Coral on 13 May 1968 should be upgraded to reflect most conspicuous self‑sacrifice in extremely perilous circumstances. 

Alternatively, email your comments directly to the Minister:  matt.keogh.mp@aph.gov.au

Thank you

Tony Jensen

(A.H. Jensen MG)

Enclosures: 

  Covering Letter outlining apparent flaws in this Report.

  DHAAT Report: Jensen and the Department of Defence [2026] DHAAT 3 (27 January 2026);