High Court documents have raised new concerns about the elite regiment’s allegedly long-standing “shoot-to-kill” policy toward prisoners they believed to be Taliban.
According to one investigator quoted in the legal documents, he claimed he was put under “political pressure” to change his inquiries.
These revelations raise the possibility that senior defence officials may have manipulated a Royal Military Police investigation into the deaths.
And an SAS officer reportedly said that in order to avoid scrutiny, worries about unlawful killings should be “nipped in the bud.”
Between 2010 and 2012, the SAS killed up to 50 Afghans in questionable circumstances.
Peter Ryan, the director of judicial engagement policy at the Ministry of Defence, one of the Government’s most senior legal advisers, called the explanations offered “highly questionable, if not implausible.”
The new information came to light as the High Court was debating a request for a judicial review of SAS operations.
Following such an investigation, special operations soldiers might be re-interviewed regarding “war crimes” and charged with murder.
Many soldiers simply remained silent when the RMP questioned them in the past. Operation Northmoor, the investigation’s cover name, was finished in 2019 without any soldiers being held accountable.
However, the MoD documents made public at the High Court cast doubt on its objectivity and integrity.
The court documents disclosed claims that the commander of Operation Northmoor claimed in 2017 that he had come under “political pressure” to direct investigations toward “tactical level command responsibility.”
This implies that MoD officials were concerned that the RMP might reveal information that special forces and Army commanders in London may have had regarding events taking place at a lower command level in Helmand Province.
According to the document, there was improper pressure put on senior Operation Northmoor investigators to prevent them from looking into senior commanders’ command responsibilities.
Uncomfortable questions are also raised by Mr. Ryan’s point of view.
The RMP were sceptical about several reported fire engagements that left all of the Afghans dead, with little proof of captured Afghans with a weapon, he stated after researching the explanations SAS officers provided for Afghans dying while in their custody.
An interview with an SAS soldier who had participated in over 200 missions and insisted that “illegal killings” were “part of the job” was published in 2017 by The Mail on Sunday.
Today, the MoD attempted to stop the flow of information by proposing a “independent examination” of the available data regarding SAS practises.
The MoD “wants to decide what material is included,” according to the law firm representing one Afghan family, thus they have decided not to participate.
Saifullah Ghareb Yar, who claims four of his family were killed in 2011 during an SAS night operation, filed the lawsuit on his behalf.
The Government’s own evidence demonstrates that MoD officials regularly expressed worries that these executions were a part of a larger pattern of systemic wrongdoing and cover-ups, according to Tessa Gregory, a partner at Leigh Day.
‘The Defence Secretary has chosen to propose an independent investigation into concerns resulting from the handling of claims of misconduct that are the subject of these proceedings,’ according to a MoD spokeswoman.