UK offered to speed up resettlement case of Afghan who posted leaked data online
The BBC understands the man is now in the UK, having had his rejected application overturned. He is not believed to be facing any criminal charges in relation to his conduct.Government sources close to the process told the BBC the individual had essentially blackmailed his way into the country using the leaked dataset.When asked about the actions of the individual and his subsequent relocation to the UK, the MoD declined to comment on the case.A spokesperson said "anyone who comes to the UK under any Afghan relocation schemes" must go through "robust security checks in order to gain entry".
The BBC has also approached the Met Police for comment.Johnny Mercer, the former veterans minister, who was covered by the super-injunction because of his knowledge of the events, told the BBC the breach was representative of the "chaos" around the relocation process, and the individual brought to the UK had used the data to get in."He put the names on Facebook and essentially bribed the MoD to get in the country. The Ministry of Defence offered to expedite his case and next thing you know he's in the UK," Mercer said."There were multiple data leaks from the MoD regarding these applications. I think that gives you some sense of the chaos and lack of care in how things were being run at that time."The breach occurred in February 2022 after someone working in UK Special Forces (UKSF) headquarters accidentally emailed the personal data of every applicant to the UK's Afghan resettlement scheme to date – nearly 19,000 people – to someone outside government.The data was sent to an Afghan person living in the UK, who passed the information onto others, including people in Afghanistan. One individual in Afghanistan, after having his application rejected, posted some of the data on Facebook.Alerting a defence minister to the presence of the data on Facebook in August 2023, an MoD case worker helping people seeking relocation called the possibility the Taliban might get hold of it "bone-chilling".The data came from the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) resettlement scheme, set up in 2021 as the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan.It was highly sensitive because Afghan nationals who worked with the British government during the conflict with the Taliban were at risk of serious harm and even execution with the group back in power.The breach led to the previous government setting up a secret £850m emergency resettlement scheme to bring some of those in the database to the UK.Both the breach and subsequent scheme were kept secret by an unprecedented super-injunction, until it was lifted by High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain on Tuesday.The emergency scheme – known as the Afghanistan Response Route and set up in April 2024 – has resulted in about 4,500 Afghans being brought to the UK so far, with a further 2,400 expected.The government announced this week the scheme was being closed down, but said relocation offers already made to those who remain in Afghanistan would be honoured.
Special forces veto had role in breach
The UKSF official who inadvertently leaked the data was assisting with the verification of a small number of applications from Afghan special forces when the accidental breach occurred.The official was in possession of the full dataset because UKSF – the umbrella group containing the SAS and SBS – was given a secret veto over Arap applications from former members of Afghan special forces.The BBC revealed last year that UKSF had used that veto to block hundreds of Afghan commandos who had fought alongside the SAS and SBS from relocating to the UK.Documents obtained by Panorama showed special forces had rejected applications despite some containing compelling evidence of service alongside the SAS on dangerous night raid operations.The personal information of many of those Afghan special forces were included in the massive data breach revealed this week.But sources told the BBC they were sidelined in the emergency evacuation process and their cases were essentially paused, while case workers were instructed to prioritise people who had worked on British military bases for urgent evacuation.Downing Street refused to say on Tuesday whether the UKSF official who accidentally leaked the data had faced disciplinary action. The BBC has confirmed he is no longer in the post he occupied at the time of the breach.The MoD refused to comment on how many applicants affected by the breach had been harmed by the Taliban in the years since it happened. It said some of those whose data was compromised by the breach were not informed until after the lifting of the super-injunction.
Defence Secretary John Healey told the BBC on Wednesday he was "unable to say for sure" that no Afghans were killed as a result of the data breach, and the Taliban would "almost certainly" have held the same type of information.Speaking in the Commons on Tuesday, he offered a "sincere apology" to those whose details had been included in the breach, which he described as a "serious departmental error" and a "clear breach of strict data protection protocols".Healey told MPs an independent review had found it was "highly unlikely" an individual would have been targeted solely because of the breach.In a 2024 High Court judgement made public on Tuesday, Mr Justice Chamberlain said it was "quite possible" that some of those who saw parts of the leaked document in a Facebook group "were Taliban infiltrators or spoke about it to Taliban-aligned individuals".Erin Alcock, a lawyer for the firm Leigh Day, which has assisted hundreds of Arap applicants including dozens of former Afghan commandos, said the breach represented a "catastrophic failure" of the government to "protect the personal information, and therefore the safety, of what is an extremely vulnerable group of individuals".
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 936Please 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
7 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Why thousands of Afghans were secretly relocated to the UK
This week an email was sent to people in Afghanistan. It told the recipients, who had all worked for British forces in Afghanistan, that some of their personal data 'may have been compromised'. All had applied for asylum in the UK, fearful because their work for Britain made them a target for the Taliban. Now they were told their asylum applications had been leaked into the public domain. They were advised not to take phone calls or respond to messages or emails from unknown contacts, to limit access to their social media, to consider closing their accounts, and to only go online via a private connection. Understandably, they were terrified. Dan Sabbagh, the Guardian's defence and security editor, tells Helen Pidd how 24 hours later, John Healey, the defence secretary, apologised for probably the biggest – and most expensive — data leak in British government history. And the former Afghan judge Marzia Babakarkhail tells Helen about how Afghans fear the data list could could endanger their lives.
Sky News
7 minutes ago
- Sky News
Woman handed criminal conviction despite 'unlawful' strip search by police in Greater Manchester
Maria's treatment by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) was so shocking the chief constable described it as "undefendable" and yet a year after a high-profile inquiry found she had been "unlawfully" arrested and strip-searched, Maria now has a criminal conviction for the crime the inquiry said she should never have been arrested for. The Baird Inquiry - named after its lead Dame Vera Baird - into GMP, published a year ago, found that the force made numerous unlawful arrests and unlawful strip searches on vulnerable women. A year on, the review has led to major changes in police processes. Strip searches for welfare purposes, where the person is deemed at risk of harming themselves, are banned, and the mayor's office told Sky News only one woman was intimately strip-searched to look for a concealed item by GMP last year. Women had previously told Sky News the practice was being used by police "as a power trip" or "for the police to get their kicks". However, several women who gave evidence to the Baird Inquiry have told Sky News they feel let down and are still fighting for accountability and to get their complaints through the bureaucracy of a painfully slow system. The case of Maria (not her real name) perhaps best illustrates how despite an inquiry pointing out her "terrible treatment", she continues to face the consequences of what the police did. 'Treated like a piece of meat' The story begins with an act of poor service. A victim of domestic violence, Maria went to the police to get keys off her arrested partner but was made to wait outside for five-and-a-half hours. The Baird Inquiry said: "This domestic abuse victim, alone in a strange city, made 14 calls for police to help her. "She was repeatedly told that someone would contact her, but nobody did. The pattern didn't change, hour after hour, until eventually she rang, sobbing and angry." The police then arrested her for malicious communications, saying she'd sworn at staff on the phone. Inside the police station, officers strip-searched her because they thought she was concealing a vape. Maria told Sky News she was "treated like a piece of meat". The Baird Inquiry says of the demeaning humiliation: "Maria describes being told to take all her clothes off and, when completely naked, to open the lips of her vagina so the police could see inside and to bend over and open her anal area similarly." After the inquiry found all this not only "terrible" but "unlawful", Chief Constable Stephen Watson described the actions of his officers towards Maria as "an inexplicable and undefendable exercise of police power". He added: "We've done the wrong thing, in the wrong way and we've created harm where harm already existed." Despite all of this, the charges of malicious communication were not dropped. They hung over Maria since her arrest in May 2023. Then in March this year, magistrates convicted her of the offence, and she was fined. Dame Vera's report describes the arrest for malicious communications as "pointless", "unlawful", "not in the public interest" and questions whether the officer had taken "a dislike to Maria". Yet, while Maria gained a criminal record, no officer has been disciplined over her treatment. A GMP spokesperson said: "The court has tested the evidence for the matter that Maria was arrested for, and we note the outcome by the magistrate. We have a separate investigation into complaints made about the defendant's arrest and her treatment whilst in police custody." The complaint was referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) in August 2023 and Maria was told several months ago the report was completed, but she has not heard anything since. 'There's been no accountability' Dame Vera's report also catalogues the "unlawful" arrest and strip search of Dannika Stewart in October 2023 at the same police station. Dannika is still grinding through the police complaints service to get a formal acknowledgement of their failings. She told Sky News: "Everyone involved in it is still in the same position. There's been no accountability from the police. We're still fighting the complaint system, we're still trying to prove something which has already been proved by an independent inquiry." Asked if anyone had been disciplined, Chief Constable Watson told Sky News: "There are ongoing investigations into individual failings, but for the most part the Baird review talked about systemic failings of leadership, it talked of failings in policy and failings of systems. "In some cases, those people who may have misconducted themselves at the level of professional standards have retired. There are no criminal proceedings in respect of any individual." He added: "Every single element of the Baird inquiry has been taken on board - every single one of those recommendations has been implemented - we believe ourselves to be at the forefront of practice." 'It's been three years' Mark Dove who was also found by the inquiry to have been unlawfully arrested three times and twice unlawfully stripped-searched says he's been in the complaints system for three years now. He told Sky News: "There have been improvements in that I'm being informed more, but ultimately there's no timeline. It's been three years, and I have to keep pushing them. And I've not heard of anyone being suspended." Sophie (not her real name), a domestic violence victim who was also found by the review team to have been unlawfully arrested by GMP, told Sky News that although most of her complaints were eventually upheld they had originally been dismissed and no officer has faced any consequences. She said: "They put on record that I'd accepted a caution when I hadn't - and then tried to prosecute me. Why has no one been disciplined? These are people's lives. I could have lost my job. Where is the accountability?" Since the Baird Inquiry, every strip search by GMP is now reviewed by a compliance team. GMP also provides all female suspects in custody with dignity packs including sanitary products, and they work with the College of Policing to ensure all officers are trained to recognise and respond to the effects of domestic and sexual trauma on survivors. The deputy mayor for Greater Manchester for policing and crime, Kate Green, says the lessons of the Baird Inquiry should reach all police forces. She said: "I would strongly recommend that other forces, if they don't already follow GMP's practise in not conducting so-called welfare strip searches, similarly cease to carry out those searches. It's very difficult to see how a traumatising search can be good for anybody's welfare, either the officers or the detainees. We've managed to do that now for well over a year." Ms Green also suggests a national review of the police complaints system. Deputy Chief Constable Terry Woods, of GMP, said: "Our reformed Professional Standards Directorate (PSD) has increased the quality of complaints handling and improved timeliness. "Where officers have been found to breach our standards then we have not hesitated to remove them from GMP, with more than 100 officers being dismissed on the chief constable's watch. "Out of 14 complaints relating to Dame Vera's report, four have been completed. Our PSD continues to review and investigate the other complaints. "We're committed to being held to account for our use of arrests and our performance in custody. "By its nature, custody has - and always will be - a challenging environment. "However, basic provisions and processes must always be met and, while we're confident our progress is being recognised across policing, we stand ready to act on feedback."
Daily Mail
7 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Fresh storm over John Torode's 'racist' comment: Friends of axed presenter accuse BBC of stitch-up because they think MasterChef is too 'male, pale, stale' - and say he is now considering legal action: GRANT TUCKER
It is the word that cost John Torode his highly lucrative role as the face of MasterChef after two decades. So, what could the 59-year-old have uttered that was deemed so offensive it warranted his dismissal? Since Torode outed himself on Monday night as the individual found to have used 'extremely offensive racist language' seven years ago in an inquiry into separate allegations against his co-host Gregg Wallace, that has been the question sparking feverish speculation among MasterChef fans and television insiders.
