MoD could face ‘substantial' compensation claims over data breach, lawyer says
It follows an unprecedented superinjunction being lifted on Tuesday, which had prevented the media from reporting that a 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 breach resulted in the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024, which is understood to have cost around £400 million so far and could cost up to £850 million once completed.
The Government originally outlined plans to launch a compensation scheme for those affected by the breach, with an estimated cost of between £120 and £350 million, not including administration expenses.
Hundreds of data protection legal challenges are also expected, with the court previously told that a Manchester-based law firm already had several hundred prospective clients.
Following the superinjunction being lifted, Mr Humber said that those affected could sue the Government over the 'inevitable anxiety, fear and distress' caused by the breach.
He said: 'Given the extreme sensitivity of the information and the numbers affected, plus the vulnerability of those affected due to the dangers they already face from the Taliban, this data breach can only be described as catastrophic.
'Those affected are likely to have strong claims for substantial compensation against the Government for failing to keep the information secure and for inevitable anxiety, fear and distress this has then caused.
'Unfortunately, this is just the latest in a long line of data breaches by the MoD of personal data of Afghan citizens who had previously worked with UK armed forces.
'Frankly, the MoD seems institutionally incapable of keeping information secure.
'There is now an urgent need for a thorough and independent review of the MoD's whole data-processing policies and practices in order to try and prevent yet further breaches.
Several hearings in relation to the superinjunction were held behind closed doors at the Royal Courts of Justice (Andrew Matthews/PA)
'We have already been approached by Afghan citizens who had applied, with their families, for relocation to the UK under the Arap scheme and who are now extremely concerned to find that their personal information may have been disclosed without their knowledge or consent.
'They are particularly concerned at the risks posed by their personal information now being in the hands of the Taliban, who continue to imprison, torture and kill those suspected of previously assisting international forces, as well as the risks of fraud and identity theft.'
The superinjunction prohibited making any reference to the existence of the court proceedings and is thought to have been the longest and widest-ranging of its kind.
Mr Justice Chamberlain said in a ruling on Tuesday that he was lifting the order following a review conducted by a retired civil servant for the Ministry of Defence.
He said that this review concluded that the Taliban 'likely already possess the key information in the dataset' and that it was 'unlikely that individuals would be targeted simply because of their work for the UK'.
He continued that one of the 'many remarkable features' of the case was that there had been no mention of the data breach while the superinjunction was in force, which he said was 'very much to the credit of the media organisations and individual journalists involved'.
Defence Secretary John Healey offered a 'sincere apology' for the breach in the Commons on Tuesday, and said that the MoD has 'installed new software to securely share data'.
Erin Alcock, a human rights lawyer at law firm Leigh Day, who has previously assisted hundreds of Arap applicants and family members, said that there had been 'rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time'.
She said: 'The news today is extremely concerning.
'We have been aware of rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time and have been concerned about any potential risks posed to our clients, particularly those remaining in Afghanistan.
'Sadly, this incident represents a catastrophic failure by the Government to protect the personal information, and therefore the safety, of what is an extremely vulnerable group of individuals.
'We will be urgently seeking clarification as to which of our many clients may have been affected and confirmation that all necessary precautions have and will be taken to mitigate any risk of harm to them.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
CHRIS HUGHES: 'Afghans who helped our troops deserve loyalty - they were betrayed'
Brave Afghan colleagues gave British troops invaluable eyes and ears on the ground over many years of war, saving countless lives - but they were betrayed when Kabul fell to the Taliban British troops who spent years on the Afghan frontline know first-hand many of their Afghan colleagues and friends were invaluable. Of course many of the Afghans allowed to come to the UK because of their UK associations had jobs outside translating or working with the military. There were civilian contractors throughout from Helmand Province to Kabul, employing hundreds of locals for a variety of jobs. Embassies, consular buildings, charities, foreign office schemes all had the opportunity to employ or have links to local Afghans. They felt safe and committed to the coalition project to dispense democracy, education, security, investing in a future vibrant and bustling economy. In 2021 that all fell to dust as the Taliban stormed Kabul, surprising everyone even though they had been bragging this was what they planned to do for a decade. In 2013 in Peshawar, Pakistan veteran Taliban commander Qari Nasrullah met me and gave me an interview and bragged about Taliban plans for Afghanistan. He said openly that the Taliban had shadow governments set up throughout Afghanistan and that soon they would retake the entire country. It took them a little longer but they did just that and Afghanistan's hopes for democracy fell to dust - and our Afghan friends were betrayed. They had gambled on UK promises we were there to stay and could not believe it when the last plane left Kabul in a hurry. On many occasions whilst embedded with UK forces in Helmand Province I witnessed translators intercepting Taliban radio calls and warning of forthcoming ambushes. These brave souls gave UK troops eyes and ears on the ground and save many lives - and they deserved our loyalty. Many made it to the UK but we may never know what sad ends some of them may have come to in mountain and desert villages throughout Afghanistan. I saw how hard the interpreters worked. Often they were at opposite ends of Afghanistan to where their families were yet they took enormous risks. I saw them hunched over radios all night listening to local Taliban chatting and suddenly they would call over an officer. After hours of listening they would learn of an arms cache, a roadside bomb being planted or plans to attack the base. The information - especially in real time during a patrol - was life-saving, especially if an ambush was planned. Without them the troops could not talk to local farmers and pick up crucial information about Taliban movements. Always cheery and affable, these highly educated Afghans were alone, foreigners in their own land and surrounded by troops. And yet they always seemed to be smiling and unconcerned for their own safety. And some were killed or injured too. What has happened to some of them is tragic and clearly a betrayal.
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Finally, the ineptitude I saw first-hand has been exposed
Now the public can see for the first time the true scale of the ineptitude of the British state, through two successive governments, concerning Afghanistan. Even after the loss of 457 British personnel, and the billions of pounds it cost to prosecute, the war in Afghanistan reveals yet another cataclysmic skeleton in the cupboard when it comes to how we have treated our Afghan allies. It is mind-boggling that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) could email a spreadsheet of all those with ties to the British state to an Afghan national, over the internet, to post on Facebook for the Taliban to see. But not for me. Whilst there will no doubt be a rush to blame the individual who sent it (I know who he is), it would be entirely unfair and wrong to do so. Because I can honestly say this whole farcical process has been the most hapless display of ineptitude by successive ministers and officials that I saw in my time in government, of which this poor individual was just the end of the line. I was subject to the injunction. I created and ran an Afghan task force to work rehome eligible Afghans under Rishi Sunak, the then prime minister. The Home Office, MoD, Department for Levelling Up and the Foreign Office just could not seem to work together; the prime minister asked me to try and unblock it from my neutral position in the Cabinet Office. I had also made no secret of my desire to relocate Afghan special forces personnel from that country to this, in the wake of August 2021. I stand by that wholeheartedly. These brave souls fought alongside us cheek by jowl; they carried stretchers of dead UK soldiers; they fought hard and battled bravely. But there were only ever about 1,000-1,200 badged members of CF 333 and CF444. I couldn't understand where all these Afghans were coming from. Everyone seemed to know about it I had no idea why the injunction existed in the first place; the list had appeared on Facebook and everyone, including the media, seemed to know about it. Officials seemed to get a bit of a kick out of something being 'Top Secret'. I thought it was weird, and it wasn't a secret. It was a direct result of the chaos that engulfed the MoD at the end of the Afghanistan war. Those on the ground during Op Pitting saw awful things, were incredibly brave and saved thousands of lives. I also saw how hard Ben Wallace worked to do the right thing. But since then it has been awful. The MoD has tried at every turn to cut off those from Afghan special forces units from coming to the UK, for reasons I cannot fathom. They also lied to themselves about doing it. The UK's director of Special Forces told me personally that he was offended and angry by my suggestion that his organisation was blocking the Triples. Certain MoD ministers had a criminal lack of professional curiosity as to why the Triples were being rejected when there were so many subject matter experts who said they clearly should be eligible. They even tried for a long time to say that Afghan special forces were not eligible. When I contradicted them, one 'friend' made an official complaint to the Cabinet Office permanent secretary about me not being 'collegiate', or going along with government policy. I had to inform them that they were directly lying to Parliament, and any statement I made publicly would repeat that. I think the whips told him to piss off too after he went moaning to them about me. And the net result of this spectacular cluster is that we've let into this country thousands with little or tenuous links to the UK, and still some Afghan special forces we set up the bloody schemes for, remain trapped in Afghanistan, Pakistan or worse, Iran. I feel furious, sad and bitter about the whole thing, and do as much as I can to get through each day not thinking about Afghanistan. But some don't have that luxury. Naveed, a sergeant from Commando Force 333, a partnering unit of Task Force 42, a British SBS Task Force who I was with in Afghanistan in 2008-09, thinks about it every day. Every day his comrades still reach out to him, thinking I can do something about it. His parents and immediate family, despite being under significant threat, remain in Afghanistan, three times rejected from resettlement pathways. I am ashamed of the MoD and how they have acted on these schemes for three years now. I don't think it is a conspiracy surrounding the Afghan inquiry – that sort of thing requires a level of competence I have never seen in either UK Special Forces or the MoD. Even now, there are brave folk in Afghanistan who soldiered alongside elite troops from this country prosecuting the highest level of UK objectives in Afghanistan, who are still hiding from the Taliban. I secured a review of all Afghan special forces applications after I pointed out that they were all being rejected in February 2024. It was supposed to take 12 weeks. Seventy-nine weeks later that review is yet to report. I've promised Naveed I will get his family too. Short of hiring a Land Rover and going for it, I'm running out of ideas.
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Bailey goes toe-to-toe with the Chancellor over her overriding growth mission, says ALEX BRUMMER
The Mansion House dinner in the City of London is one of the few official occasions when the governor of the Bank of England and the Chancellor appear together on the same platform. Andrew Bailey, who was once Rachel Reeves' senior on Threadneedle Street, did travel with her to Beijing in January this year. Eyebrows were raised because it happened to be a tense moment on the market for UK government bonds and a perceived mistake for both policy setters to be in the Pacific. Before the Bank was given its independence in 1997, the Mansion House was the great monetary event of the year when the Chancellor would give new marching orders to the governor. All that changed in deference to the Bank's independence. On both sides of the Atlantic, the issue of central bank independence has raised its head. In America, Donald Trump's relentless attacks on Federal Reserve chairman Jay Powell for failure to bring interest rates down more speedily has been unnecessarily crude. If anything, it stiffened the resolve of the Fed's interest rate setting Open Markets Committee not to be bullied. The latest US consumer price data for June, showing inflation zipped up to 2.7 per cent, partly fuelled by tariffs, suggest the battle between Fed and White House is not over. Matters are handled differently in Britain. Historically, all it needed was a twitch of the governor's eyebrows to make a change in the Square Mile. That era, and the Ken and Eddie show when Chancellor Ken Clarke and governor Eddie George would set interest rates together, is long over. In keeping with British understatement, disagreements between Bank and Treasury rarely bubble to the surface in public. Yet governors have ways of making their broader views known. Eddie George was highly sceptical of the 'one size fits all' of the eurozone. Mark Carney was less than enthusiastic about Brexit. He played a big role in the 2014 Scottish referendum when he argued that two economies, each going their own way with one central bank and currency, could be destabilising. The smiles and the connection that comes with being former colleagues does not mean Bailey and Reeves always are on the same page. In her determination to use all the levers possible to propel her growth mission, she is seeking backup powers from Parliament that would allow her to direct up to 10 per cent of pension fund savings into infrastructure projects, start-ups and equities. Bailey, rightly, repeatedly has rejected the compulsion. Privately, Reeves is thought to be frustrated by the Bank's reluctance to lower bank rate from 4.25 per cent to support flagging output. She nonetheless likes to take credit for interest rate cuts and lower mortgage rates since she arrived at No. 11. Remarks by Bailey suggest that, with the economy stumbling, he and colleagues on the Monetary Policy Committee will begin to ease rates in August which could relieve tension. Downing Street and the Treasury were less than pleased with Bailey's interview in The Times this week when he suggested that firms were 'adjusting employment' because of rise of the rise in employers' National Insurance contributions (NICs). The Treasury retorted that the NICs are paying for the NHS and helping waiting lists to fall. Tell that to the owners of pubs, hospitality outlets and retailers forced to close their doors. The Chancellor, having so far failed to put a fire under output, insists that easing the 'red tape' around City listings and fundraising, and a new 'concierge service', encouraging overseas investors to London, will assist. Reeves is also behind the initiatives to unblock mortgage lending for the less well-off, and ease capital ratios for the banks. As a former regulator and an official in the engine room of the Bank in the great financial crisis, Bailey is more cautious. There is no market or economic upside in the Bank and the Chancellor being at odds. Central bank independence is not yet an issue. However, grown-up dissension from the Bank is a useful antidote to Reeves. The Chancellor is openly chastised by business leaders for hearing but not listening.
