Latest news with #Triples
Daily Mail
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Afghan commandos denied asylum over fears they may have witnessed 'war crimes by British troops' - despite the fact they now face retribution from the Taliban for fighting on our side
A Special Forces officer rejected the asylum applications of 1,585 Afghan soldiers who may have witnessed war crimes by British troops. Court documents showed the officer rejected every bid by the Afghan commandos, known as Triples, despite the troops still facing revenge from the Taliban for fighting with the British. Some Triples have been killed since the government was toppled in Kabul in August 2021. Troops' applications were rejected in 2023 – just months before a High Court inquiry into allegations of an SAS shoot-to-kill policy began. The inquiry is looking into claims the three separate SAS units murdered 80 or more Afghan captives on night raids between 2010 and 2013. The units were accompanied by the Triples on these missions. It is feared the unnamed Special Forces officer was trying to ensure Triples could not give evidence. Once in Britain, they could have been summoned to reveal they saw UK troops conduct extrajudicial killings. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer – who campaigned for the Triples to come to this country – said he was 'appalled'. He added: 'When I raised this as happening to the most senior civil servants in UK Government, one in particular from UK Special Forces claimed he was 'offended' that I could make such a suggestion. 'He was either lying to my face... or he was so deeply incompetent he didn't know this was going on. 'I stand ready to assist any legal action against the Government for what is increasingly taking on the appearance or criminal negligence that has seen some of these good men killed.' The documents emerged as part of a judicial review into the Government's handling of the Triples' asylum applications. The case was brought by a Triples officer whose former colleagues have been killed and tortured by the Taliban while waiting for asylum in Britain. The judge-led inquiry into claims of SAS war crimes is due to publish its findings later this year. The MoD had claimed there was no blanket policy banning the Triples. But in an embarrassing U-turn, the department's lawyer was forced to acknowledge during the inquiry that there had been.
Daily Mail
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Special Forces officer 'blocked bid by Afghan troops to come to UK because they may have witnessed war crimes', court hears
A United Kingdom Special Forces officer rejected the asylum applications of 1,585 Afghan soldiers who may have witnessed war crimes committed by British troops. According to court documents, the officer rejected every bid by Afghan commandos, known as Triples, despite these troops facing reprisals by the Taliban for fighting with the British. Some of these Afghan commandos have been killed since the Islamists toppled the Western-supported government in Kabul in August 2021. Their applications were rejected in 2023 just months before a High Court inquiry into allegations of an SAS shoot to kill policy in Afghanistan began hearing evidence. The probe is looking into claims the SAS murdered 80 or more Afghan captives on night raids between 2010 and 2013. The elite British troops were accompanied by the Triples on these secretive missions. It was feared last night the unnamed Special Forces officer was attempting to ensure the Triples could not give evidence at the Royal Courts of Justice. Once in Britain, they could have been summoned to the hearings, possibly to reveal they saw UK troops conduct Extra-Judicial Killings. Last night, the former Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer, who campaigned for the Triples to come to this country, told the Mail he was 'shocked and appalled' by the evidence. He said: 'When I raised this as happening to the most senior civil servants in UK government, one in particular from UK Special Forces claimed he was 'offended' that I could make such a suggestion. 'He was either to lying to my face, as a Cabinet minister, which was serious enough, or he was so deeply incompetent he didn't know this was going on. 'I stand ready to assist any legal action against the government for what is increasingly taking on the appearance or criminal negligence that has seen some of these good men killed. 'That they were Afghan lives may not matter United Kingdom Special Forces (UKSF). I can assure you they matter to me and I will not let this go.' The documents emerged as part of a judicial review into the UK government's handling of the Triples' applications to come to this country. Lawyers for the Triples have argued the blanket refusal of applications breached the UK government's Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP). The case was brought by a Triples officer who has seen former colleagues killed and tortured by the Taliban while they waited for protection under the scheme. In 2010 and 2011, when most of the alleged Extra-Judicial Killings took place, Afghan units expressed their disapproval at SAS tactics by refusing to deploy on night raids. Under guidelines imposed by the Afghan government, British units were forced to take Afghan units with them. So when they went on strike, these missions could not take place. In early 2011, the Afghan commandos also lodged a formal complaint alleging the SAS were ' assassinating innocents' on these operations. The judge-led inquiry into claims of SAS war crimes is due to publish its findings later this year. This could lead to soldiers facing a fresh criminal investigation.
BBC News
23-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
One Special Forces officer blocked 1,585 Afghans from settling in UK
A UK Special Forces officer personally rejected 1,585 resettlement applications from Afghans with credible links to British commandos, newly released documents files, disclosed by the Ministry of Defence in court on Thursday, show the unnamed UKSF officer rejected every application referred to him in the summer of 2023, in what was described as a "sprint".The MoD told the court that the officer may have been connected to the ongoing inquiry into alleged war crimes committed by the admission comes after the BBC revealed last week that the UKSF officer – who previously served in Afghanistan rejected the applications from Afghans who may have witnessed the alleged war crimes. Afghan commandos, known as the Triples, supported the SAS and SBS for years in Afghanistan and were in danger of reprisal after the Taliban seized back the country in thousands of UK resettlement applications containing credible links to the Triples were rejections came at a time when a public inquiry in the UK had begun investigating allegations that British special forces had committed war crimes on operations in Afghanistan where the Triples were the Afghan commandos were in the UK, they could be called as witnesses - but the inquiry has no power to compel testimony from foreign nationals who are officials raised concerns as early as October 2022 about the role of the UKSF in rejecting applications with links to the Triples units, the new documents a witness statement submitted to court, Natalie Moore, the head of the UK's Afghan resettlement team, wrote that she became concerned the UKSF was applying a practice of "automatic rejections" with regard to Triples, giving rise to the "appearance of an unpublished mass rejection policy".In January 2024, following the BBC's revelation of the existence of a UKSF veto over applications, then-Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer warned senior cabinet ministers in writing of a "significant conflict of interest that should be obvious to all".The veto gave the UKSF "decision-making power over... potential witnesses to the inquiry", Mercer said, calling the arrangement "deeply inappropriate".In the same letter, Mercer said that he had seen evidence that five former Triples had been killed by the Taliban after their resettlement applications were rejected. And in a meeting with Ms Moore, he highlighted a case in which an applicant was rejected having "previously confronted UKSF leadership about EJKs [extrajudicial killings] in Afghanistan".Despite concerns first being raised internally in October 2022 - and again between October 2023 and January 2024 - in March 2024 the MoD denied to both the BBC and Parliament that UKSF had had a veto over the former commandos' applications. The Triples - so-called because their designations were CF 333 and ATF 444 - were set up, trained, and paid by the UKSF. When Afghanistan fell to the Taliban, they were judged to be in grave danger of reprisal and were entitled to apply for resettlement to the more than 2,000 applications judged by resettlement caseworkers to have credible evidence were subsequently rejected by the MoD later announced a review of more than 2,000 rejected applications after finding that the decisions were "not robust". Earlier this week, Armed Forces Minster Luke Pollard announced a new phase of the review to take into account up to 2,500 further cases which may have been improperly of the former Triples who were denied visas have since been tortured and killed by the Taliban, according to testimony from former colleagues, family members and documents disclosed in court on Thursday, as part of a judicial review case brought by a former member of the Triples, reveal that the government launched two investigations that examined the actions of the UKSF and the allegations of a conflict of interest at the heart of the Triples rejections.A summary of one of those investigations, known as Operation X, said it "did not obtain any evidence of hidden motives on the part of the UKSF liaison officer" and found "no evidence of automatic/instant/mass rejections" of the Triples by the UKSF - but provided no evidence to back up those instead concluded that the more than 2,000 rejections of Triples were down to "slack and unprofessional verification processes" by the UKSF liaison officer and "lax procedures followed by the officer in not following up on all lines of enquiry before issuing rejections". More than 600 of those rejections have since been Panorama reported recently that the rejection of the Triples applications had been overseen by Gen Jenkins, who was head of the UKSF at the time and was promoted last week to be the head of the Royal the court documents, the MoD said that Gen Jenkins had no involvement with the applications and that he had not appointed the UKSF officer who rejected de la Mare KC, representing the former Triple who brought the case, accused the MoD of breaching its duty of candour in the case by failing to disclose evidence of a blanket practice of rejection of the Triples further accused the MoD of providing misleading responses to requests for information. Cathryn McGahey KC, representing the MoD, told the court she did "not seek to excuse or underplay in any way the provision of inaccurate answers", and she apologised for the fact that the MoD had previously told the court that no veto case is examining whether the review of the rejected Triples applications was conducted in a lawful manner. Ms McGahey told the court that "there might have been a better way of doing it, but that doesn't make it unlawful".Daniel Carey, partner at DPG, the law firm acting on behalf of the former Triples, said: "My client spent years asking the MoD to rectify the blanket refusals of Triples personnel and has seen many killed and harmed by the Taliban in that time."He is pleased that the MoD have agreed to inform everyone of the decisions in their cases and to tell the persons affected whether their cases are under review or not, but it should not have required litigation to achieve basic fairness."
The Independent
21-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
MoD's decision-making on Afghan cases ‘a disaster area' that could be likened to ‘a crime scene', court hears
The process for determining whether former members of Afghan special forces who served alongside British troops in Afghanistan can be resettled to the UK was a 'disaster area' so terrible it could be likened to a 'crime scene', the High Court has heard. Thousands of applications for sanctuary from Afghans with credible links to special forces units CF333 and ATF444, known as the Triples, were rejected by the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Their pleas for help were rebuffed by the government despite these units being paid and trained by the British and the soldiers fighting alongside UK special forces (UKSF) in Afghanistan. The MoD is undertaking a review of some 2,000 applications of Afghans linked to the units, after The Independent, along with Lighthouse Reports, Sky News and the BBC exposed how they were being denied help. The court heard that the review of some 2,000 applications is only looking at cases that were referred by MoD caseworkers to UK special forces for input. The High Court also heard that the MoD rejected the resettlement application of one senior commander from the Triples units, who was in the units at the time of a key incident being examined in the Afghan war inquiry. A former senior member of the Triples, who is now in the UK, is bringing the legal challenge on behalf of commandos still in Afghanistan - challenging how the review has been carried out. The case is an application for judicial review which, if granted, would see the scheme further challenged in the courts. Thomas de la Mare KC, for the claimant, told the court on Wednesday that there had been an effective blanket ban on approvals for these ex-servicemen who fought side-by-side with the British forces. He told the court that decisions on whether to help these Afghans were 'life and death decisions', with Triples members or their families being murdered or tortured because of their support for UK forces. Speaking about the decision-making within the MoD, he said: 'The decision-making process prior to the review is almost a crime scene, it's a disaster area.' He added: 'It's almost as disastrous an area of decision-making as it's possible to conceive.' He argued that information about how the approvals were made should be made public 'to restore public confidence and trust in the decision-making process'. Mr de la Mare continued: 'There is a widespread perception that there is an issue of conflict of interest or bias in this process. Those conflicts of interest were vented very clearly in January 2024, and they were a key part in the decision-making process.' The court also heard that political pressure was put on MoD decision-makers to 'sprint' through resettlement cases. This prompted concerns about the quality of decision-making, which resulted in an internal review where 'a pattern of blanket refusal of Triples claims referred to UKSF became obvious', the court was told. Flaws in the decision-making process included people being 'inappropriately reliant on UKSF personnel', particularly 'during the 'sprints' that took place through the summer of 2023', the court heard. Caseworkers before the review lacked access to relevant records and were insufficiently experienced. The court heard that then-minister for veterans affairs, Johnny Mercer, wrote to Oliver Dowden in January 2024 to raise concerns about how the process was being carried out. He highlighted that the role of UKSF personnel in the decision-making process was 'deeply inappropriate' and represented a 'significant conflict of interest'. Mr de la Mare added that until the Triples review was announced in February 2024, a 'vanishingly small' number of the special forces commandos had been approved for relocation to the UK. He told the court that senior ministers had decided to conduct a review 'on the basis that all credible claims of Triples membership were in scope'. However, Mr de la Mare said this had been narrowed to just re-examine cases where the Afghan applicant's case had been referred to UK special forces. The hearing is due to conclude on Friday, with a decision expected in writing at a later date.
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Top UK Special Forces general oversaw blocking of Afghan 'war-crime' witnesses to Britain
A top general who failed to report evidence of alleged SAS war crimes in Afghanistan later oversaw the rejection of hundreds of UK resettlement applications from Afghan commandos who served with the elite regiment, BBC Panorama can reveal. Gen Sir Gwyn Jenkins led UK Special Forces (UKSF) in Afghanistan at a time when alleged war crimes were committed. He later appointed a UKSF officer under his command, who had also served in Afghanistan, to assess the Afghan commando applications after special forces headquarters was given a controversial veto over them. Thousands of applications from individuals with credible evidence of service with Afghan Special Forces, including the units known as the Triples, were then rejected, leaving many of the former commandos at the mercy of the Taliban. The rejections are controversial because they came at a time when a judge-led public inquiry in the UK had begun investigating the SAS for alleged war crimes on operations on which the Triples were present. If the Afghan commandos were in the UK, they could be called as witnesses - but the inquiry has no power to compel testimony from foreign nationals who are overseas. Some of those denied visas were subsequently tortured and killed by the Taliban, according to former colleagues, family members and lawyers. According to internal emails and testimony from within the Ministry of Defence (MoD), obtained by Panorama, the UK Special Forces officer appointed by Gen Jenkins stood over civil service caseworkers from the resettlement scheme and instructed them to reject the Triples applications, one after another, on what sources described as spurious grounds. A senior government source close to the process told the BBC that the UK Special Forces officer "would never have acted without direction", adding that "everything would have gone through Gwyn Jenkins". At the time, in 2021-22, Gen Jenkins was the head of all UK Special Forces. He is now the chief strategic adviser to the Defence Secretary John Healey and is tipped to take over as First Sea Lord - the head of the Royal Navy. Gen Jenkins was made aware of allegations that the SAS was committing extrajudicial killings in Afghanistan, but he failed to report the allegations to military police - Panorama has previously revealed - despite a legal obligation to do so. The suspected unlawful killings continued. Panorama has now heard eyewitness testimony from veterans who served in UK Special Forces detailing alleged war crimes stretching over more than a decade and involving the SBS as well as the SAS. Gen Jenkins did not respond to the BBC's request for comment on this story. The MoD responded on his behalf. It said in a statement that there is no evidence it has tried to prevent former Afghan troops giving evidence to the Inquiry and that "anyone can provide evidence… no matter where in the world they are". The MoD added that it was "fully committed to delivering on our pledge to relocate and resettle eligible Afghans and their families to the UK". "Each resettlement application is decided on its own merits against the criteria outlined in the ARAP [Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy] and immigration rules," the statement said. The rejections of the Triples applications left caseworkers from the ARAP scheme questioning the validity of the process, given that many of the applications contained compelling evidence of service alongside British special forces. Hundreds of rejections have since been overturned following a government review. A letter obtained by Panorama shows that concerns were raised among cabinet ministers in January 2024 over the existence of the UK Special Forces' veto over the Triples applications. The then Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer wrote to senior Conservatives to say the role of UKSF in denying the applications was "deeply inappropriate" and "a significant conflict of interest, that should be obvious to all". He had been compelled to write, he added, because he had been shown evidence "that 5 members of these units have been killed having been rejected for resettlement". Mr Mercer, who served alongside the SBS in Afghanistan before becoming an MP, went on to warn that the role of UKSF in the process had a "very high chance of being exposed by the Afghan Inquiry", which could "lead to serious questions of all those Ministers involved in the process". The Triples units - so-called because their designations were CF 333 and ATF 444 - were set up, trained, and paid by UK Special Forces and supported the SAS and SBS on operations targeting Taliban leaders in Afghanistan. When the country fell to the Taliban in 2021, they were judged to be in grave danger of reprisal and were entitled to apply for resettlement to the UK. But, according to MoD documents obtained by Panorama, thousands of ARAP applications containing credible evidence of service alongside UK Special Forces were subsequently rejected. BBC Panorama first revealed last year that it had been UK Special Forces - the very force that trained and served with the Triples - that rejected them. "We heard some of our Triples were already killed by the Taliban," said Jumakhan Joya, a former Afghan special forces commanding officer. "Some of them are in jail in a Taliban prison. Some of them have already been disabled by the Taliban. They're breaking their hands, their legs, their head," he said. Mr Joya told the BBC he believed that the existence of the public inquiry was the "only reason" their applications had been vetoed. The rejections and reported reprisals have outraged some former members of British special forces. "What's happened is horrendous. It is a betrayal and it shames us all," one former UK Special Forces officer told Panorama. Asked by Panorama about the government's rejection of Triples' applications, Bruce Houlder KC, who as a former director of service prosecutions was responsible for bringing charges against members of the armed forces, said the government must have known the Triples would have "highly relevant" evidence that would be "much easier to obtain" if they were in the UK. "I can't think of any fair reason why we should exclude people from their right to live in this country, which is extended to others, simply because they might be in possession of information which would embarrass special forces," Mr Houlder said. "If that is the reason, it's disreputable and it can't be supported in any way." Do you have information about this story that you want to share? Get in touch using SecureDrop, a highly anonymous and secure way of whistleblowing to the BBC which uses the TOR network. Or by using the Signal messaging app, an end-to-end encrypted message service designed to protect your data. SecureDrop or Signal: 0044 7714 956 936 Please note that the SecureDrop link will only work in a Tor browser. For information on keeping secure and anonymous, here's some advice on how to use SecureDrop. It's proved a really important way for people to get in touch with us in the past. Ex-UK Special Forces break silence on 'war crimes' by colleagues
