Left behind in Afghanistan: Tales from behind Taliban lines
These are the words of an Afghan who worked for the UK in the country before the Taliban swept back to power in August 2021.
Following the chaotic evacuations from Kabul in the same month, many Afghans who had worked for the UK government were left behind.
The government set up the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) to try and evacuate those deemed at serious risk from the Taliban due to their association with the UK.
However, a dataset that contained the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied to Arap was released "in error" in February 2022 by a defence official.
The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the breach after excerpts of the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023.
A superinjunction was then granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.
The super-injunction was lifted on Tuesday, following a review, and the people involved were contacted by email, warning them of the potential danger.
ITV News has been speaking to people, both inside Afghanistan and in the UK, about the "life or death" risk this has caused them, their relatives and friends.
Part of a voicenote sent to ITV News from inside Afghanistan.
ITV News has been in contact with an individual who is still inside Afghanistan, on the run from the Taliban.
For security reasons, we are unable to say exactly what their role was, but they worked for the UK in Afghanistan.
They told us, via voicenote, that despite the precautions they have taken since 2021, this leak may have put them in direct danger.
They said: "Yesterday I received an email that our data was leaked in 2022, mistakenly.
"We have been extremely cautious about our safety over the past four years. Despite our efforts, my family and I have received multiple threats through social media and direct calls," they explained.
They added: "I cannot confirm certainly that the Taliban used the data leaked from the UK side, but I strongly believe that the leak has made it significantly easier for them to identify and locate us."
"Despite receiving approval from the UK for relocation, the process is moving slowly and we are still under threat," they finished as the voicenote crackled and went silent.
Siblings disunited
Tamanna has now safely relocated to the north of England.
But her brother is now in graver danger in Afghanistan.
He worked in the country as a military officer alongside the UK government.
Tamanna says they are in constant contact because of the serious nature of the danger now posed to him because of the data leak.
She said: "We're talking about these things a little bit every minute or every second because it's a serious thing."
She described that he was feeling "frustrated and anxious".
"It was really a shock for him because he already had his concerns and tensions about the safety and security of my family and threats he is facing for the last four years", she said.
Tamanna said her brother had already requested support and help to remain safe, but delays in the system and now this data leak have left her feeling even more concerned.
"I am here, I cannot do anything and they are in a bad situation."
She bemoaned the lack of government help, saying: "I don't know from which source I should get help? I should talk with who? And how can I get support?"
Questions for the government
ITV News also spoke to Khadija - not her real name - who was working with the UK government in Afghanistan before being evacuated under the Arap scheme.
"This issue is the most awful time in my life," she said.
She explained that because of the leak "right now, me, my husband, my children, my mom, my sisters, my brother, they are all in direct danger because everyone has their data".
She still has a large number of family members in Afghanistan, including parents-in-law, aunts, uncles and cousins, who were all implicated in the data leak.
The two cousins are still teenagers and moving about rural areas to stay safe. They can't stay with family for fear of being identified.
The personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released "in error" in 2022, ITV News' Political Correspondent Carl Dinnen reports
Khadija said she didn't dare tell them about the data leak in case it put them in more trouble.
"The only thing I mentioned to them was please, please change your phone number if you can. Change your house again and don't go out alone."
Khadija also says she regrets trusting the UK government.
"Right now, every day, I mean every minute from yesterday to right now, I regret and just blame myself for trusting the government."
She concluded: "If you have a law, you need to follow the law. If the law says that there is a data breach, you need to inform the person. Why didn't you inform everyone at the beginning?"
These are questions that will continue to be asked of politicians in Westminster.
Talk of a public inquiry has begun, but that will bring little comfort to those in Afghanistan living at the mercy of the Taliban.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Spies and SAS personnel among 100-plus Britons included in Afghan data leak
Details of members of the SAS are among more than 100 Britons named in the database of 18,700 Afghans, the accidental leak of which by a defence official led to thousands being secretly relocated to the UK. Defence sources said the highly sensitive document contained names and email addresses belonging to people sponsoring or linked to some individual cases. Personal information about MI6 officers was also included. The identities of members of the SAS and MI6 are a closely guarded secret, and the possibility that such information could have ended up in the public domain was a source of significant official concern. SAS and other special forces officers were involved in assessing whether Afghans who said they were members of the elite 333 and 444 units, known as the Triples, were allowed to come to the UK. Defence sources said the dataset also referred to a 'secret route' that Afghans could use to come to the UK. This week it emerged that the Ministry of Defence had obtained a superinjunction preventing the disclosure of the leak and that a £2bn-plus scheme had been created to relocate some Afghans affected by the breach to the UK to protect them from the Taliban. That superinjunction lapsed on Tuesday, when a high court judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, concluded after a government review that the threat to the 18,700 Afghans was no longer very significant. Some of the remaining restrictions were relaxed on Thursday after another court hearing. The MoD said it would be possible to publish additional descriptions about contents of the database. In a statement on Tuesday, after the unprecedented superinjunction was lifted, the defence secretary, John Healey, offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the government for the data breach. He later told the Commons that the spreadsheet contained 'names and contact details of applicants and, in some instances, information relating to applicants' family members, and in a small number of cases the names of members of parliament, senior military officers and government officials were noted as supporting the application'. 'This was a serious departmental error,' he added. Parliament's intelligence and security committee (ISC), which monitors the UK spy agencies, said it would scrutinise the affair, following on from an inquiry announced by the Commons defence select committee. The ISC asked that all intelligence assessments that had been shared with high court in secret now be shared with the committee. Its chair, Lord Beamish, asked why 'material relating to the data loss' could not be shared with the committee early given that it routinely reviews classified material. The MoD welcomed the proposed review. 'Defence intelligence and the wider department have been instructed by the defence secretary to give their full support to the ISC and all parliamentary committees,' a spokesperson said. The decision to seek an injunction preventing the disclosure of the data breach was first taken by Ben Wallace, then the Conservative defence secretary, in August 2023, when the MoD first became aware that the personal information had leaked to a Facebook group. A judge then ordered that the injunction remain secret, turning it into a rarely used superinjunction. Wallace's immediate successor, Grant Shapps, sought to maintain the gagging order until the general election in July 2024 while developing a secret relocation scheme for about 15,000 Afghans affected. The day-to-day task for developing the scheme was handed to one of Shapps's deputies, James Heappey, the then minister for the armed forces. On Thursday, in a social media posting, Heappey said the scheme was discussed in the cabinet's domestic an economic affairs committee. He said the committee 'tried to extend entitlements by smallest number possible', as led by legal advice, with little resistance from other members of the government. 'I don't recall fierce opposition. There was frustrated resignation that it was necessary,' he said. It can now be reported that the leaked data included the names, email addresses and phone numbers for thousands of Afghans who had applied to come to the UK under an existing relocation scheme designed for those who had helped the British military. In some instances the data contained further written information about their case and status of their application – focused on whether they had in fact helped the UK or British forces in Afghanistan – but it did not contain addresses or photographs. This week Afghans affected by the breach received a message addressed from the UK government, sent in English, Pashto and Dari, that warned the recipient's email address had been used to make a resettlement application and that some personal data may have been compromised. Details of the breach were limited, but recipients of the email – some of whom remain in hiding from the Taliban in Afghanistan – were advised 'not to take phone calls or respond to messages or emails from unknown contacts' and to limit who could see their social media profiles.
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Telegraph
Lawyers seek to use ECHR to force UK into accepting thousands more Afghans
Lawyers are seeking to use human rights laws to force the Government to bring tens of thousands of Afghans to the UK after their names were leaked by a British soldier. Up to 100,000 people could claim against the Government, arguing that their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have been breached because they are in danger of reprisals from the Taliban. A planned judicial review will argue that the Ministry of Defence's argument for closing the resettlement scheme for affected Afghans is false, and that anyone on the list of Afghans who helped British forces is at risk of death. However, MoD insiders say that for every genuine claimant on the list, 15 are bogus. Ministers already face a compensation bill of up to £1bn from those on the list, which the media was gagged from reporting until a super-injunction was lifted on Tuesday. Sean Humber, a partner at the firm Leigh Day, told The Telegraph: 'We are looking at possible legal avenues for judicial challenge for people who have been denied relocation and are now finding themselves on the list. 'They are now at an increased risk. As well as the compensation, it's a case of whether the Government should now take action.' Rejected applicants could be allowed in Lawyers are now set to argue that anyone on the list could be eligible for resettlement in the UK, even if they had no connection to Britain and their claim for resettlement was spurious. If successful, the judicial review could set a precedent to allow Afghans on the list who had been rejected for resettlement to come to Britain anyway. The legal basis for the challenge will be that the Rimmer review, which was commissioned to look at the scandal by Labour last year, wrongly concluded that the risk to Afghans on the list was low. It will argue that people whose names were leaked now face a threat to their human rights under article 2 and article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The articles give claimants a right to life and a right to freedom from degrading treatment or punishment, which lawyers could argue is at risk from the Taliban because of the British Government's mistake. Hermer would be called on to defend Government Any claims against the Government under the ECHR would ultimately be defended by Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, who has been accused of asserting the primacy of human rights law over British government and politics. The Labour peer previously represented Afghan families affected by alleged extrajudicial killings by the British military during the war. He has changed official guidance to instruct government lawyers to treat international law and domestic legislation equally. The spreadsheet, which was leaked by a Royal Marine in 2022, contained the names of 25,000 Afghans who had applied for resettlement in the UK because they had worked with British forces during the war in Afghanistan. Ministers have admitted that when families and other dependents are included, the true number of people affected is likely to be between 80,000 and 100,000. Around 6,900 of the Afghans on the list have either travelled to the UK or are in transit, but most were rejected for resettlement under either the original scheme or a new emergency plan to rescue those in danger because of the leak. Further legal restrictions on the data leak were lifted on Thursday, revealing that the identities of British special forces and MI6 operatives were also on the list. Johnny Mercer, the former defence minister, said it was 'gut-wrenching' to learn that their names 'may have fallen into [Taliban] hands'. However, The Telegraph has been told that the vast majority of claimants on the list were illegitimate. The admission raises fresh questions about whether bogus claimants slipped through the net and came to Britain under the secret scheme. Other officials, including one whistleblower who spoke to this newspaper, said the vetting of people on the scheme was poor. 'We simply cannot accommodate more Afghans' Danny Kruger, a Conservative MP who has raised concerns about the number of Afghans resettled in the UK, said any immigration decisions after the leak should be 'for the Government, not the courts'. 'Our communities simply cannot accommodate more Afghans, especially those who have been refused access to this country already,' he said. 'The result of this blunder by the MoD must not be further mass immigration driven by human rights lawyers.' Allowing tens of thousands more Afghans to enter the UK would frustrate Labour's attempt to end the use of asylum hotels by the end of the decade – a pledge that is already under extreme pressure from small boat crossings. The Telegraph revealed this week that Suella Braverman, the Conservative former home secretary, had been prepared to announce that asylum hotels would no longer be used but was forced to continue using them because of the resettled Afghans. Mrs Braverman was one of several Cabinet ministers who raised objections over the plan to secretly airlift thousands of Afghans to the UK. In a critical statement on Wednesday, she said: 'The state apparatus thinks it can hide its failures behind legal technicalities while ordinary people pay the price'. Despite legal restrictions being lifted, The Telegraph remains banned from reporting extra details around parliamentary statements about the breach, made by ministers and senior opposition frontbenchers alike. Along with other news outlets that challenged the super-injunction, this newspaper also remains prohibited from reporting what the MoD's internal risk assessments about the breach said at various points over the past two years. According to the Rimmer review into the leak, conducted by Paul Rimmer, the former deputy head of Defence Intelligence, the risk to the individuals named is now low enough for news of the leak to be published. Yet the public is not allowed to examine why – or how – Mr Rimmer's conclusion was so different from that of full-time professionals inside the MoD under the Conservatives. One defence official under the previous government said it was unclear how Mr Rimmer had been able to conclude that the Taliban would not seek reprisals against Afghans on the list. 'I haven't seen any shift from the Taliban to become friendly towards people who supported the UK Armed Forces,' they said. 'There was significant rationale for keeping the super-injunction and that was the threat to life.' After news of the leak broke, Taliban officials told The Telegraph they were already in possession of the list, and were in the process of hunting down Afghans on it.
Leader Live
9 hours ago
- Leader Live
More than 100 Britons' details in leaked Afghan dataset, including spies and SAS
Defence sources have said that details of MI6 spies, SAS and special forces personnel were included in the spreadsheet, after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the UK. The dataset, containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) became aware of the breach more than a year later, when excerpts of the spreadsheet were anonymously posted in a Facebook group in August 2023. Other details leaked included the names and contact details of the Arap applicants and names of their family members. In a statement on Tuesday, after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted by a High Court judge, Defence Secretary John Healey offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the British Government for the data breach. He later told the Commons the spreadsheet contained 'names and contact details of applicants and, in some instances, information relating to applicants' family members, and in a small number of cases the names of members of Parliament, senior military officers and Government officials were noted as supporting the application'. 'This was a serious departmental error,' he added. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge also apologised on behalf of the former Conservative government, which was in power when the leak happened and when it was discovered more than a year later. Mr Cartlidge later asked Mr Healey about reports that someone other than the original person who leaked the data had been engaged in blackmail. Arap was responsible for relocating Afghan nationals who had worked for or with the UK Government and were therefore at risk of reprisals once the Taliban returned to power in Kabul in 2021. Between 80,000 and 100,000 people, including the estimated number of family members of the Arap applicants, were affected by the breach and could be at risk of harassment, torture or death if the Taliban obtained their data, judges said in June 2024. However, an independent review, commissioned by the Government in January 2025, concluded last month that the dataset is 'unlikely to significantly shift Taliban understanding of individuals who may be of interest to them'. The breach resulted in the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – by the previous government in April 2024. The scheme is understood to have cost around £400 million so far, with a projected cost once completed of around £850 million. Millions more are expected to be paid in legal costs and compensation. Around 4,500 people, made up of 900 Arap applicants and approximately 3,600 family members, have been brought to the UK or are in transit so far through the Afghanistan Response Route. A further estimated 600 people and their relatives are expected to be relocated before the scheme closes, with a total of around 6,900 people expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. Projected costs of the scheme may include relocation costs, transitional accommodation, legal costs and local authority tariffs. The case returned to the High Court in London on Thursday, sitting in a closed session in the morning where journalists and their lawyers were excluded. While private hearings exclude the public and press but allow the parties in the case to remain, closed hearings require specific lawyers who can deal with sensitive issues, including national security. During the public part of the hearing, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that while he needed to give lawyers for the Ministry of Defence an 'opportunity' to argue why a closed hearing was needed, 'I will be scrutinising very carefully any justification for holding any part of this hearing in private, let alone in closed'. The judge later said he would not be 'kicking the ball down the road'. He added: 'The superinjunction has now been lifted and if there are other matters that are capable of being reported in public, that needs to be able to happen straight away.' Also on Thursday, Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) requested a number of documents used in the superinjunction proceedings be provided to it 'immediately'. This includes intelligence assessments from the MoD and the Joint Intelligence Organisation, as well as the unredacted report of retired civil servant Paul Rimmer. ISC chairman Lord Beamish continued that the committee had also asked for the reasons why barristers for the Government previously told the Court of Appeal that information about the breach could not be shared with the ISC. A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: 'It's longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on Special Forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.'
