UK Defence Secretary Unable To Confirm Fatalities Amid Afghan Data Leak

The UK’s defence secretary has acknowledged that he is “unable to say for sure” whether the serious data breach involving Afghan allies of British forces led to any deaths.

However, John Healey downplayed the threat level, suggesting it was “highly unlikely” that inclusion on the list would now place individuals at greater risk from Taliban forces.

The incident in question stems from a mistaken disclosure in February 2022, when a UK official leaked sensitive information about nearly 19,000 Afghans who had submitted applications to relocate to the UK after the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan. Authorities only became fully aware of the breach in August 2023, when the data began circulating on social media.

A legal order that had previously blocked any reporting on the situation was lifted in court this week, allowing details to be publicly disclosed.

In response to the leak, a programme called the Afghanistan Response Route was launched in April 2024 to assist affected individuals. So far, this initiative has brought around 4,500 Afghans to the UK. Though the scheme is now closed, it is expected to have supported a total of 6,900 people by its conclusion. The financial outlay has already reached £400 million and could ultimately total £850 million.

Despite these efforts, officials say approximately 600 soldiers named in the leaked records and about 1,800 of their relatives remain within Afghanistan.

The breach and subsequent relocations were kept out of the public eye until Tuesday’s court ruling removed reporting restrictions.

Healey commented that this change enables “proper press reporting and scrutiny”.

“You cannot have democracy with super-injunctions in place,” he said.

Sir Ben Wallace, who served as defence secretary under the previous government, revealed that an initial four-month gag order had been sought when the breach came to light. A judge later escalated that into a full super-injunction.

He stated that his focus at the time was to “protect those people who could have been or were exposed”.

When the High Court lifted the injunction, Mr Justice Chamberlain pointed to findings from the Ministry of Defence’s internal review. The review concluded that the Taliban “likely already possess the key information in the dataset” and that acknowledging the breach publicly was unlikely to “substantially” increase danger for those named.

Authorities have since reached out to the individuals affected, advising them via email to “exercise caution” and take steps such as securing their digital presence and avoiding unknown contact.

During his remarks in Parliament, Healey confirmed that the individual responsible for the leak had been reassigned, adding a “sincere apology” for the incident.

There has been no official statement from the prime minister’s office regarding whether the employee involved has faced disciplinary measures.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has also issued an apology on behalf of her party.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a former party leader, criticized the decision to withhold information from lawmakers for such an extended period.

“Parliament cannot be ignored for that length of time, we owe a duty to the public to at least have examined this,” he said.

A young woman whose father had worked as a translator for British troops told reporters her family was gripped with fear after learning their details were exposed.

“No one knows where the data has been sent to – it could be sent to the Taliban, they could have their hands on it,” she said.

She also expressed concern for her grandmother, who remains in Afghanistan and is “completely vulnerable”.

The breach came in the wake of the 2021 pullout of U.S. forces from Afghanistan. The exposed data related to applicants of the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), a programme designed to move individuals at risk of Taliban retaliation to safety in the UK.

The broader evacuation, which brought 36,000 Afghans to British soil, has faced intense scrutiny. A 2022 review by a parliamentary committee described the effort as a “disaster” and “betrayal”.