MoD: Identities of Troops Accused of Afghan War Crimes Should Be Anonymous

Undated file photo of the sign for the Ministry of Defence in London. Tim Ireland/PA Media

An inquiry into allegations of unlawful activity of the UK’s special forces in Afghanistan has heard that the identities of the accused should be kept anonymous.

The inquiry was commissioned by Defence Secretary Ben Wallace in December last year. The probe is looking into matters arising from the deployment of British armed forces to Afghanistan from mid-2010, including extrajudicial killings by special forces.

This week the inquiry, chaired by Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, has reached the stage of substantive hearings.

Mr. Wallace has confirmed that the allegations put forward relate to the conduct of UK special forces.

However, in a short statement, Mr. Wallace added that he remained “steadfast” in the longstanding position of the government to not comment on the deployment or activities of the UK special forces.

The inquiry is probing two Royal Military Police (RMP) investigations, codenamed Operation Northmoor and Operation Cestro.

Operation Northmoor was launched in 2014 and examined the alleged offences by British forces in Afghanistan, including some killings by the SAS squadron, between 2005 and 2013. The investigation has not led to any prosecutions.

Under Operation Cestro, three soldiers had been referred to the Service Prosecuting Authority but none faced prosecution.

Brian Altman, KC, a lawyer representing the Ministry of Defence (MoD), told the inquiry that revealing the identities of any special forces involved would damage the capabilities and operations and risk their safety.

The MoD seeks a restriction order to “withhold from disclosure or publication the names and any other identifying details of personnel” of UK special forces, Mr. Altman said.

Identifying the special forces involved “would place the lives of the relevant individuals and/or their families at serious risk, as well as expose them to a serious risk of harm,” Mr. Altman told the hearing. He added that it would end the individuals’ current careers, limit their future career opportunities and “indeed render recruitment more difficult.”

Mr. Altman said that the ministry wants to enable the use of a cypher or pseudonym in respect of 17 individuals.

Conflict of Interest

Leigh Day, a law firm representing the families of the victims, said this week that up to 80 Afghans may have been killed by the UK’s most elite troops between 2010 and 2013.

RMP investigations of the deaths of Saifullah and Noorzai family members, represented by Leigh Day, are to be reviewed by the inquiry.

The law firm said that as a result it should be revealed whether these individuals were killed unlawfully and whether that was part of a pattern of unlawful killings.

At the launch of the inquiry in December 2022, Leigh Day lawyer Tessa Gregory said that it should not have taken years of litigation to get this far.

“The allegations of extrajudicial killings and cover-up are of such gravity, and the concerns expressed contemporaneously within the British and Afghan army and by a reputable international organisation working on the ground in Afghanistan were so serious and so widespread, that an inquiry should have been instituted by the Government years ago,” Ms. Gregory said.

Leigh Day has argued that there is an “obvious conflict of interest” because the MoD sought to restrict some information, while seeking to defend serious allegations of misconduct.

Mr. Altman told the inquiry that this suggestion was “totally misconceived.”

“The important issue here is that the MoD’s damage arguments are not tainted by the fact that it is also defending the allegations which are the subject of this inquiry,” he added.

Chair Haddon-Cave said that while it was necessary to take into account national security considerations, the point of any inquiry is to hear “as much as possible” in public.