UK Special Forces Face Potential Prosecution Over Afghanistan Operations

UK Special Forces (UKSF) personnel may face prosecution following the referral of evidence suggesting serious offenses were committed in Afghanistan to the military police. The evidence, uncovered during inquiries by the SAS Inquiry, was handed over earlier this year.

This marks the first public acknowledgment by the inquiry that its findings could lead to criminal prosecutions. Under the Armed Forces Act, the UKFS were required to refer the evidence, which pertains to detention operations conducted by British personnel between 2010 and 2013. Schedule 2 offenses, as defined by the act, include murder and manslaughter.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) discovered the evidence earlier this year. Subsequently, the UKFS referred it to the Defence Serious Crime Unit (DSCU), a specialized unit established in 2022 to handle serious criminal matters. Court documents indicate that the DSCU has conducted a scoping exercise of the evidence, but has paused criminal investigations until the SAS Inquiry concludes. The MoD stated that it was deemed inappropriate to initiate criminal investigations while the inquiry was ongoing.

The Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan is examining allegations that the Special Air Service (SAS) unlawfully killed individuals during detention operations in Afghanistan from 2010 to 2013. It is also investigating claims that senior officials attempted to conceal the circumstances of these killings. The public inquiry was established in 2022, following investigations by BBC Panorama into allegations that the SAS executed handcuffed civilians and children.

The DSCU referral surfaced during a High Court hearing initiated by a witness to the inquiry. This witness, a senior British military officer who served in Afghanistan, has obtained permission for a judicial review of the inquiry. The officer's legal team argued that the process was unfair, particularly the exclusion of military witnesses' legal teams from closed-door evidence hearings with whistleblowers. Much of the inquiry's proceedings are being conducted in secret.

Lawyers for the officer contended that he should have the opportunity to question whistleblowers, either directly or through his legal representatives, concerning any allegations made against him. The inquiry's lawyers argued that the process must allow for the procurement of highly sensitive information from individuals who may be hesitant to provide evidence due to fears of "grievous consequences by UKSF" if their identities were revealed.