HENNIG, Ian Reece

Family Name:

Hennig

Given Names:

Ian Reece

Gender:

Male

Birth-Date:

Unknown, possibly 1934

Death-Date:

Unknown

Marital Status:

Unknown, probably single

Age:

18 years old

Location:

SA, Wongulla

Occupation:

Unknown

Primary Motivation:

Conscientious Objector, religious

Reason for Court Appearance:

[1] Application for total exemption from military duties as a conscientious objector

[2] Appeal about granted exemption for combatant military duties only

Court Name and Location:

[1] Magistrates Court, Swan Reach

[2] Supreme Court, South Australia

Court Hearing Date:

[1] 22 July 1953

[2] 28 September 195

Court Outcome:

[1] Granted exemption from combatant military duties

[2] Appeal decision as reserved and then upheld

Military Event:

National Service 1951-1959

Further Information:

Ian Hennig was an eighteen -year-old from Wongulla in South Australia. He Was a member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. He applied for total exemption from military duties as a conscientious objector under the National Service Act 1951 (NSA). The hearing was at the magistrates’ court at Swan Reach on 25 July 1953 before Magistrate Williams. The magistrate dismissed his application. Ian appealed the decision, and his appeal was heard by Judge Mayo. The judge reserved his decision. On 28 September 1953 Ian attended the Supreme Court of South Australia to hear the court’s decision on his appeal. Ian informed the court that he was a Seventh Day Adventist, and had a belief about taking up arms, but had no conscientious beliefs against non-combatant military duties This was the common stance of all Seventh Day Adventists. At the court hearing Ian said he did not think the use of force would be justified to prevent an enemy from exploding an atomic bomb at Wongulla, his home town. Presumably this was a question asked of him. Justice Majo also asked Ian, If you were assaulted by someone with a weapon, would you defend yourself? -No-You would allow yourself to be killed? Ian responded he believed there were no circumstances that would justify killing another. Justice Mayo said during the hearing, A conscientious belief was not necessarily based on logical conclusions…A person might put forward arguments that others found entirely unconvincing, but that did not necessarily mean that he was not honest in his claims. Judge Mayo observed that Ian’s attempt to place his religious scruples on a biblical basis was derived, to some extent, from special tuition for the purpose of the application, but it did not demonstrate he was an imposter. The judge added that he rejected any notion that Ian had resorted to subterfuge. Accordingly, he upheld the appeal and Ian was exempted from combatant military duties.

Confirmatory Sources:

Bobbie Oliver, Hell No! We Won’t Go! Resistance to Conscription in Post War Australia, Interventions, Melbourne, p.31 and p.222.

Peacemaker, October 1953, p.2; August/ September 1956, p.4.