Investigators into Ben Roberts-Smith have hidden the identities of 723 people named in the evidence against him with pseudonyms, likely stretching from military officers to Afghan villagers, suggesting they intend to take a no-compromise approach to securing the conviction of the Victoria Cross awardee and seeking a life sentence.

A Local Court in Sydney heard on Tuesday prosecutors provided Mr Roberts-Smith’s legal team with what they said was a “substantial proportion” of the non-classified version of the evidence against him the day before today’s hearing, comprising about 4000 documents and 234 witness statements.

Mr Roberts-Smith’s lawyer, Karen Espiner, complained to Judge Susan Horan about the use of numbered pseudonyms by the Office of the Special Investigator, a decision that will make it harder for her team to prepare a defence against five charges of the war crime of murder. She asked the judge to order the government agency to disclose which of the names have to be kept secret under the National Security Information Act.

“Their names are redacted in every document,” Ms Espiner said. “I am concerned that the vast number of additional pseudonyms has been applied for no reason.”

Of the 723 anonymous people listed in the evidence, 149 are from Mr Roberts-Smith’s unsuccessful defamation case against Nine newspapers and three journalists, 95 have “protected identity status” covering SAS soldiers, commandos and other members of the special forces, and another 11 cannot be identified because of legal suppression orders.

That potentially leaves 468 people who could be identified to Mr Roberts-Smith’s lawyers without breaching national security, according to Ms Espiner’s submissions in court. They could include expert witnesses, police officers, lawyers, journalists and dead Afghans.

The wholesale use of pseudonyms is a significant development that suggests the Office of the Special Investigator is determined to shield the identities of people involved in the case, even in a minor way, even though there are no rules prohibiting publication of the names of ex-SAS soldiers unless they could return to service.

Pseudonyms were used in Mr Roberts-Smith’s defamation lawsuit, a system that protected the names of men who provided the media with information or were accused of executing prisoners themselves.

Judge Horan refused Ms Espiner’s request, stating that she was “reluctant” to issue mandatory instructions to the government on a busy day for the court and both sides could seek another hearing if they failed to sort out the problem.

“I don’t want to do anything inadvertent to compromise sensitive material or identities,” she said.

Prosecution barrister Chelsea Brain suggested that a compromise could be reached between prosecutors, investigators and the defence lawyers.

“The prosecution is aware there is an issue of the extent of redactions that have been applied to the brief,” she said. “We have been in communication with Ms Espiner about the issue as have the Investigator.

“I just don’t know how long it is going to take to iron out. I suggest the parties attempt to iron it out between themselves and if that can’t be done we can we return.”

The complete evidence, a confidential document known as the sensitive brief of evidence, will not be available to Mr Roberts-Smith and his lawyers until the middle of November, Ms Brain told the court.

The Office of the Special Investigator has been investigating the former SAS corporal and other veterans of the Afghanistan War for five-and-a-half years at a cost of around $300 million.

Despite the long history of the case, which was first investigated in 2016 by NSW judge Paul Brereton, there have been considerable delays assembling the evidence, in part because there are no bodies and investigators do not have access to what they say were the crime scenes.

After Mr Roberts-Smith was arrested in front of his teenage daughters at Sydney Airport on April 7, a prosecutor told a judge he should not grant the veteran bail and promised the evidence would be “substantially served” by July.

In June, Ms Brain said the evidence would “be substantially complete and ready to serve by the 1st of September”.

The charges cannot leave the Local Court until the defence has access to all the evidence. When that happens, and prosecutors confirm they intend to continue, Mr Roberts-Smith will be required to enter a plea. The case will shift to the New South Wales Supreme Court for a trial if he pleads not guilty or sentencing, if he pleads guilty.

After being arrested he said “he always acted within his values, training, and the rules of engagement” during the war.

Prosecutors allege the war hero executed one prisoner himself and ordered other soldiers under his command to execute four others. Four other SAS veterans have been granted immunity from prosecution for murder to testify against him. Their identities are protected by court orders.

The case is scheduled to return to court in October. Mr Roberts-Smith did not attend today’s hearing.