Whistleblower who exposed chaos of Afghanistan evacuation wins unfair dismissal case against government
Josie Stewart, a former senior official who had worked at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) for seven years, lost her job after giving an anonymous interview to BBC Newsnight which saw her speak about her 'traumatic experiences' working in the Afghanistan Crisis Centre in summer 2021.
Following the Taliban gaining control of Afghanistan, the British government evacuated 15,000 people from Kabul in what was known as Operation Pitting.
Ms Stewart's security clearance was revoked and she subsequently lost her job after it emerged she revealed failings in the withdrawal from Kabul, as well as leaking emails suggesting that former prime minister Boris Johnson had prioritised staff from the animal charity Nowzad for evacuation over more deserving cases.
An employment panel of three judges found the FCDO unfairly dismissed Ms Stewart after she leaked information in the public interest.
In a legal first, the tribunal ruled that under whistleblower protection legislation it can be lawful for a civil servant to share unauthorised information directly with the media.
At a hearing which took place last May, counsel for the FCDO Ben Collins KC argued that the right to blow the whistle did not extend to giving security clearance to those with a record of leaking.
But Gavin Millar KC, the barrister acting for Ms Stewart, said such an argument would 'drive a coach and horses through' the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, aimed at protecting whistleblowers, if it succeeded.
In submissions to the panel, Mr Millar said that Ms Stewart's whistleblowing related to 'the endangerment of the safety and lives of extremely vulnerable people in danger of retribution from the Taliban at any moment, and a government communications strategy which concealed how badly the UK government let those people down'.
A landmark judgment issued on Tuesday said: 'The tribunal considered that it was reasonable for the claimant to go to the UK's public service broadcaster when relevant information and/or allegations had already been put into the public domain … and government ministers were publicly disputing them.'
The judgement continued: 'Was the claimant's belief that she made the disclosure in the public interest a reasonable belief? The tribunal found that it was. The prime minister and foreign secretary were denying things that the claimant believed to be true, based on what she had observed in the course of her work.'
However, the panel accepted that it was unavoidable that Ms Stewart was suspended from work 'while her security clearance was reviewed, as she was required to have such clearance'.
The judgement was dubbed 'groundbreaking' by Ms Stewart's solicitors, James and West, saying it was 'without precedent and raised numerous important issues about civil servants' rights to whistleblower protection under existing law'.
Ms Stewart said: 'My experience of the FCDO crisis centre in August 2021 reflected the worst of our political system. By calling this out, I lost my career. The outcome of this case doesn't change any of this, but it has achieved what I set out to achieve: it has established that civil servants have the right not to stay silent when systemic failures put lives at risk, as happened during the Afghan evacuation.
'We can't have a system that stays stay silent no matter what you see, and forces dedicated public servants to choose between their conscience and their career.'
Cathy James, Ms Stewart's solicitor, added: 'Today, the employment tribunal has vindicated my client's actions and upheld her rights. This is an important win not just for Ms Stewart but for civil servants, the public interest, and democracy.'
An FCDO spokesperson said: 'We will review the findings of the tribunal and consider next steps.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer to sign off major new trade deal in boost to UK firms and shoppers
Prime Minister Keir Starmer will meet Indian PM Narendra Modi on Thursday to rubberstamp a trade deal, which is expected to add around £4.8billion to the UK economy each year Keir Starmer will sign off a major trade deal to make it easier for British firms to sell goods like whisky, cosmetics and cars to India. The Prime Minister will meet Indian PM Narendra Modi on Thursday to rubberstamp the pact, which will add around £4.8billion to the UK economy each year. The agreement will slash tariffs on trade between the UK and India, making it easier for UK firms to export and potentially offering cheaper prices to shoppers. India's average tariff on UK products will drop from 15% to 3%, so it is cheaper for British companies to sell goods to the Indian market. Whisky producers will see tariffs slashed in half from 150% to 75%, and duties are expected to fall further to 40% over the next ten years. Tariffs on British cars will fall from 110% to 10% under a quota system, and other industries including soft drinks and cosmetics are also expected to see cheaper duties. In return, the UK is expected to reduce tariffs on imports from India, which is likely to mean lower prices for British shoppers on clothing, footwear, and food. The deal is being billed as a major win for Britain amidst the chaos triggered by Donald Trump's trade tariffs. As one of the world's largest economies, India has long been a target for Brexiteers keen to show the benefits of leaving the European Union. Boris Johnson began negotiations in 2022 but failed to deliver on his boast that he would get a deal "done by Diwali'. His Tory successors Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak also struggled to make progress, with stumbling blocks including Indian tariffs on Scotch whisky and visa rules. The agreement is the most significant bilateral trade deal since the UK left the EU, as India is the UK's 11th largest trading partner, with trade of goods and services worth around £42.6bn last year. It is expected to boost that trade by an additional £25.5bn a year by 2040, and drive up British exports by another £15.7bn. The Prime Minister said: 'Our landmark trade deal with India is a major win for Britain. It will create thousands of British jobs across the UK, unlock new opportunities for businesses and drive growth in every corner of the country, delivering on our Plan for Change. "We're putting more money in the pockets of hardworking Brits and helping families with the cost of living, and we're determined to go further and faster to grow the economy and raise living standards across the UK." The deal is expected to create another 2,200 jobs across the country and attract £6 billion investment by British and Indian businesses, according to the Government. Some Indian and British workers will also gain from a three-year exemption from social security payments, to stop them from being forced to pay twice if they are temporarily transferred abroad. The UK has similar deals with countries like the USA, Canada and the EU. The deal does not include any change to UK immigration policy, including for Indian students, which had previously been a sticking point. William Bain, Head of Trade Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said: "The signing of this agreement is a clear signal of the UK's continuing commitment to free and fair trade. It will open a new era for our businesses and boost investment between two of the world's largest economies. 'Currently around 16,000 UK companies are trading goods with Indian companies, and there is high interest in our Chamber Network to grow that. This deal will create new opportunities in the transport, travel, creative and business support sectors alongside traditional strengths in finance and professional services." The PM and his Indian counterpart are also expected to discuss bolstering joint efforts to tackle illegal migration and organised crime. Mr Modi is expected to meet King Charles on his two-day visit.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Ghislaine Maxwell subpoenaed by Congress over Epstein ahead of Trump team meeting
US Congress's House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer has issued a subpoena to Ghislaine Maxwell for a deposition to occur at Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee on August 11. 'The facts and circumstances surrounding both your and Mr Epstein 's cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny,' Comer wrote in a statement. 'While the Justice Department undertakes efforts to uncover and publicly disclose additional information related to your and Mr Epstein's cases, it is imperative that Congress conduct oversight of the federal government's enforcement of sex trafficking laws generally and specifically its handling of the investigation and prosecution of you and Mr Epstein,' he added. It came as a federal judge in Florida denied a Justice Department request to release grand jury transcripts from the investigation of Epstein. The quick denial blocked efforts by the Trump administration to blunt criticism of its handling of files related to the sex offender, who was once a friend of the president. One of Donald Trump's top law officials is set to meet with convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell in the next several days. Maxwell's attorney, David Oscar Markus, confirmed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche will talk directly to the disgraced British socialite. Her lawyer, David Oscar Markus, has been requesting meetings with Trump administration officials and has argued that Maxwell did not receive a fair trial. 'I can confirm that we are in discussions with the government and that Ghislaine will always testify truthfully," Markus told the Mirror. "We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
CBS Mornings anchor insults Stephen Colbert live on-air
Steven Colbert has been insulted live on-air by one of his CBS stablemates who implied the axing of the liberal star's talk show is no great loss. Tony Dokoupil branded Colbert and his stablemates 'one sided' on CBS Mornings Wednesday while he and his colleagues discussed Jon Stewart 's defense of The Late Show, which will disappear from screens in May 2026. Stewart claimed on his show Tuesday that a large part of CBS' parent company Paramount's $8 billion valuation was due to Colbert, despite The Late Show losing $40 million a year. Paramount plans to merge with media company Skydance in the coming months if it can gain approval from President Trump's Federal Communications Commission. Stewart and others have suggested anti-MAGA Colbert had been axed to grease the wheels of that deal. But Dokoupil was clearly unimpressed by that theory and even gave an exasperated sounding sigh live on air after the clip of Stewart was played. 'I understand the emotional views,' he said. 'I don't have an MBA but he's not right that the merger, the $8 billion, is based on reruns of a comedy show, no. 'People are buying the movies and the sitcoms and the sports. They're not based on reruns of us (CBS Mornings) either, so I think it's wrong.' Dokoupil then attacked Colbert himself, saying his show and its competitors 'got way way more one-sided than anything Johnny Carson was ever doing'. He was referring to talk show icon Carson, whose late night program paved the way for the likes of Colbert and who never shared his political views during his 30 years on air. He added: '[Stewart] acknowledged that these late-night shows are what he called like a Blockbuster kiosk inside a Tower Record – so the business is broken.' Co-host Gayle King ignored Dokoupil while adding that she felt sorry for Colbert, describing it as 'very difficult'. Dokoupil agreed, adding that he felt 'for the whole staff of both those shows, and whatever comes next for everybody'. Dokoupil is no stranger to going against the grain, and last year found himself hauled before CBS' in-house DEI team after clashing with author Ta-Nehisi Coates over his anti-Israel views. Stewart's spiel came during a reflective segment on The Daily Show, which originally aired alongside Colbert's since-cancelled 'Colbert Report' in the 2000s. He said Colbert went on to 'exceed all expectations' upon leaving Comedy Central for late-night, before acknowledging the fading format as a whole. 'Now, I acknowledge, losing money, late-night TV is a struggling financial model ,' he said. 'We are all basically operating a Blockbuster kiosk inside of a Tower Records.' 'But when your industry is faced with changes, you don't just call it a day,' joking. 'W hen CDs stopped selling, they didn't just go, "Oh, well, music, it's been a good run!".' He addressed executives at Paramount - CBS's parent company - directly, accusing them of capitulating to Trump to secure the sale. He said: 'I believe CBS lost the benefit of the doubt two weeks prior, when they sold out their flagship news program to pay an extortion fee to said president.' 'At that time, poor Andy Rooney must have been rolling over in his bed,' he joked of the late legendary news writer. 'That's right. He is alive. Andy Rooney is alive.' 'I understand the corporate fear. I understand the fear that you and your advertisers have with $8 billion at stake. But understand this,' Stewart added. 'Truly, the shows that you now seek to cancel, censor, and control? A not-insignificant portion of that $8 billion value came from those [expletive] shows,' he added. Last Thursday, CBS announced that the comedian's decade-long run as the host of CBS' late night flagship will end next May. Colbert was paid between $15 million and $20 million a year for his failing show. 'Insiders' immediately maintained to publications like Puck and Variety the top-rated show was canceled due to being a money pit what was losing $40million a year. The sudden move s parked immediate backlash from left-wing celebrities and politicians, who claim the decision was strictly politically-motivated.
