
Betrayal after betrayal: Afghan special forces abandoned by Britain had details leaked in MoD data breach
The leak in February 2022 involved the names and contact information of 18,700 Afghans being shared 'in error' by a Ministry of Defence (MoD) official and prompted a top secret operation to scramble thousands to safety in Britain.
Among the names were members of two specialist units, known as the Triples, whose soldiers have faced torture and death by the Taliban because of their role training and fighting side-by-side with British forces, as revealed by this publication.
The Independent spearheaded a campaign urging the government to grant members of the Triples sanctuary in Britain after many were left stranded and in danger, following the fall of Kabul to the Taliban in August 2021.
Now it has emerged that around half of the commandos initially identified for relocation to the UK were affected by the breach, which became the subject of a draconian superinjunction amid fears the dataset could fall into the hands of the Taliban.
The Triples members only knew about the blunder as the legal order was lifted on Tuesday after an extraordinary two-year legal battle gagging the British press.
Hundreds of Triples soldiers, along with their families, have been brought to the UK, but there are fears many have been left behind in Afghanistan, where their lives are still at risk.
Major General Charlie Herbert, who served alongside the Triples in Afghanistan, has urged the government to spell out how many have made it to the UK and how many are still in limbo.
He described the data leak episode as a "dereliction of duty" by the government, and questioned whether a superinjunction should ever have been put in place.
'I can't believe the data breach happened. I'm really worried that nobody was made aware of this. There would have been people in Afghanistan on that list, not aware that that list had been shared and could have been in the hands of the Taliban,' he said.
'What was the purpose of that injunction, because the information had leaked? It was already on social media in Afghanistan, so the only impact it had was on the media's ability to reported,' he added.
Ex-Tory veterans' minister, Johnny Mercer, said: 'The whole thing is appalling, it's time to stop the deceit and do the right thing by these poor folk.
'The MoD need to extract the remaining Triples. There are enough subject matter experts out there to help them identify them, and then consider where we go from there.'
It emerged in court documents submitted in early 2024, as part of the superinjunction case, that around half of those Triples commandos who would be brought to the UK had had their data leaked by the government.
In a witness statement, the head of Afghan resettlement, Natalie Moore, said the MoD would 'retake 2,000 eligibility decisions for applicants claiming a connection to UK special forces, which include applications from former members of the Triples, of which around 50 per cent are affected people'.
As of this month, 300 Afghans with links to specialist units have been brought to the UK or are on the way, and 1,800 are still to come.
Daniel Carey, a partner at legal firm DPG, which has represented Triples, questioned why those at risk were not notified earlier.
He said: 'We already know from many Arap cases that government assessments of Taliban risk are unreliable - my clients have been detained and tortured despite government assessments that the risk to them was low.
'Afghans in the UK are worried about the impact on their families and pending family member applications.'
The units were set up, paid and trained by the British, but soldiers from the two units had been denied relocation through the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap). The scheme promised to relocate Afghans directly employed by, or who worked closely alongside, British forces and who are at risk of reprisals.
The Independent raised the plight of the Triples in November 2023 - three months after officials first became aware of the leak. Following our investigation, the MoD admitted its decision-making was 'not robust' and announced a review of around 2,000 applications to Arap.
The High Court later heard that one UK special forces officer oversaw the blanket rejection of 1,585 cases during the summer of 2023.
Mr Carey said it was 'incredible' that, a year after the data breach, another military official had overseen a sweeping refusal of applications.
Last week, the High Court found that defective decision-making resulted in hundreds of Afghan special forces who served with the British being wrongly rejected for sanctuary and abandoned to the Taliban.
Mr Carey said: 'Our clients have experienced years of delays at risk of Taliban reprisal waiting for lawful decisions.
' The government's refusal to notify those affected of the decisions in their cases (now reversed) led to further delays. Now we know that the whole time they have also been put at risk due to the massive data leak.
'Many Triples are still in Afghanistan, nearly four years after applying, and are seemingly now at greater risk than ever. I hope that the decisions will now follow swiftly.'
On top of the 2,000 initial applications reviewed, up to 2,500 extra cases have been identified for re-examination after the MoD realised the significance of rediscovered payroll data.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as secret identities of SAS troops are leaked online by army association magazine in fresh data blunder that could have put lives at risk
An urgent probe has been launched after the identities of SAS troops from one of its most senior regiments were published online. The fresh data blunder came last year when a Grenadier Guards' in-house publication included a rollcall of the names and deployments of its most senior officers. Ten men were listed next to the codename MAB - which is shorthand for MoD A block - the site of the UK special forces headquarters, The Sunday Times has reported. The codename has been widely publicised online - in turn allowing any terrorist group or enemy state to work out that the troops were part of the SAS. The document containing the information about the soldiers' identities was produced by the Grenadier Guards Regimental Association. The group is a charitable association made up of former service members - with such organisations routinely handed information about active army personnel. Defence secretary John Healey is understood to be furious at the data breach which comes just days after the Afghan superinjunction was exposed. Head of the army General Sir Roly Walker has ordered an investigation into why the details of the SAS soldiers were so widely available. He said according to The Sunday Times: 'The security of our people is of the utmost importance and we take any breach extremely seriously.' 'As a result of this incident, I have directed an immediate review into our data-sharing arrangements with our regimental and corps associations to ensure appropriate guidance and safeguards are in place to best support the vital work they do,' he added. Meanwhile, SAS legend Chris Ryan was also concerned at the leak, and told MailOnline last night: 'There are serious questions to be answered here. 'Why is this data readily available and to who? 'This is an information management issue. Malicious or accidental insider, a breach has consequences. 'What classification is the in-house magazine and who signed it off? 'When these breaches happen, there's needs to be accountability or they will keep happening.' The former military hardman-turned acclaimed author added: 'This is a "MABulous" blunder by the Guards - that's why they have their own squadron.' It comes after the Mail revealed earlier this week that special forces, MI6 spies and government officials were among more than 100 Britons on the lost Afghan dataset. It emerged that a secret operation smuggling migrants to Britain was being run by ministers after a military blunder put 100,000 'at risk of death' from the Taliban. Ministers fought for two years to hush-up the data blunder with an unprecedented super-injunction that silenced this newspaper and other media. The High Court was told the draconian gagging order was necessary to protect 100,000 Afghans the UK had put 'at risk of death'. But after we were able to get access to the database and analyse it, it became clear that dozens of senior British military officers including a brigadier and government officials were also exposed. The Mail's investigation triggered a massive secrecy row yesterday as security-cleared parliamentarians erupted in fury at being kept in the dark. Lord Beamish, chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, said: 'I am astounded at this. 'The idea that members of MI6 are on this get quarterly reports from the security agencies and we have heard nothing at all. Why?' The MOD 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.' A spokesman added: 'The government strongly welcomes the Intelligence and Security Committee's scrutiny of the Afghan data incident. '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. 'If ministers and officials are asked to account and give evidence, they will. 'We have restored proper parliamentary accountability and scrutiny for the decisions that the department takes and the spending that we commit on behalf of the taxpayer.'


BBC News
24 minutes ago
- BBC News
Yvette Cooper pledges new power to stop violent attackers after Southport
The home secretary says a powerful new crime to target suspects who are found to be preparing mass killings will ensure their plotting is taken as seriously as Cooper said the criminal justice system had to be given new tools to respond to violence-fixated individuals who are not motivated by a particular ideology, in the wake of the Southport attack last suspects who take steps towards an attack can be jailed for life, even if their plans are not fully told the BBC that the government will "close the gap" between such offenders and lone, violence-obsessed individuals by giving police the power to apprehend them long before they can act. Axel Rudakubana is serving a life sentence for murdering three girls when he attacked a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport almost a year others girls were seriously injured, along with two adults who tried to stop the police found he had been researching a target prior to the attack, they could not have arrested and charged him with a serious offence because he had no ideological motive linked to the definition of to BBC Radio 4's State of Terror series, which charts the response to violent extremism over the 20 years since the 7/7 bombings, Cooper said the police will get the power to prevent such individuals who do not have a clear ideology, in the same way they can with terror suspects. "There is a gap in the law around the planning of mass attacks that can be just as serious [as terrorism] in their implications for communities, their impact, the devastation that they can cause and the seriousness of the crime," she said."We will tighten legislation so that that is taken as seriously as terrorism."Cooper said the plan - which was briefly announced in March but not fleshed out until now - was for the new law to be similar to the exceptionally serious crime of preparing for acts of legislation, brought in after the 2005 London bombings, is a vital counter-extremism tool that has jailed dozens of allows the police to arrest a terror suspect for the steps they take to prepare for an attack - such as researching a it stipulates that there must also be evidence the preparation is linked to an ideological cause, such as support of a group banned under terrorism laws. The planned non-terror offence would apply to a far wider range of scenarios, including the activity of individuals like Nicholas Prosper. He had been planning a mass school shooting before he was apprehended for murdering his said: "We've seen cases of growing numbers of teenagers potentially radicalising themselves online and seeing all kinds of extremist material online in their bedrooms."They're seeing a really distorted and warped online world."We have to make sure that that the systems can respond while not taking our eye off the ball of the more long-standing ideological threats."State of Terror continues on Monday on BBC Radio 4 and BBC Sounds.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Defence Secretary Healey told in April that news blackout on Afghans was probably unjustified
Defence Secretary John Healey was briefed in April about the likely outcome of the Ministry of Defence's review into the Afghan airlift – three months before the super-injunction was lifted, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. The judge has expressed 'concern' over the MoD's sluggish pace in bringing its review to court. The Mail fought for two years in secret courts to reveal the Government's covert airlift of thousands of Afghans after it put 100,000 'at risk of death' by leaking a database of those who had applied for UK sanctuary. During the news blackout, last October ministers signed off a £7billion plan while parliamentary scrutiny was 'in the deep freeze'. After the draconian court order was finally lifted last Tuesday, Mr Healey told the Commons: 'I have felt deeply concerned about the lack of transparency to Parliament and the public.' He said he had commissioned an internal review by civil servant Paul Rimmer at the beginning of the year, to test whether the threat to Afghans was still as bad. The review was handed to Mr Justice Chamberlain at the end of June. But The Mail on Sunday understands from informed sources that Mr Rimmer was giving the Defence Secretary regular updates and that, by April, Mr Healey was aware of his report's likely conclusions – that the threat assessment had changed meaning there was no longer any justification for keeping everything a secret. After he finally got his copy, Mr Justice Chamberlain told the court: 'There are things which will have to be investigated out of the report. 'Further steps are going to have to be taken to discover why some of the details contained in that report were not made known before now.' In his final ruling at the Royal Courts of Justice on Tuesday, the judge said Mr Rimmer's assessments were 'very different from those on which the super-injunction was sought and granted'. Journalists, including from the Mail, warned in private court hearings that Parliament's summer recess was fast approaching, and the judge brought forward the lifting of the injunction. When he first tried to lift the super-injunction, in May last year, Mr Justice Chamberlain ruled that the 'continued stifling of public debate' was not justified. The MoD – then run by Grant Shapps – responded by hiring one of Britain's most expensive KCs, Sir James Eadie, to overturn the judge's decision. After the scandal was made public, Mr Healey was asked on Sky News why everything was kept secret for so long. He replied: 'The super-injunction was a matter for the court.' Last week, Downing Street defended Mr Healey. No 10 said his statement to the Commons on Tuesday, in which he said that 'to the best of my knowledge' no serving Armed Forces personnel were put at risk by the breach, was 'accurate'. But it was reported days later that MI6 spies and members of the SAS were among those named. The MoD was asked to comment on Mr Healey finding out about the likely conclusions of the report.