A senior UK special forces officer who played a central role in rejecting Afghan asylum claims may be linked to an ongoing inquiry into alleged British war crimes in Afghanistan, the High Court has heard.
The officer, who acted as a liaison between the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and UK special forces (UKSF), had significant influence over decisions on whether former Afghan commandos could resettle in Britain. Many of those denied sanctuary served in CF333 and ATF444, elite Afghan units trained, funded, and deployed alongside UK forces, including those now under investigation for war crimes.
‘Deeply Concerning’ Links to War Crimes Inquiry
According to MoD evidence presented to the court, the liaison officer may have been “connected to matters within the scope of the Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan” due to his previous roles within UKSF. The inquiry, prompted by allegations that British forces killed unarmed Afghans and staged weapons to cover up unlawful killings, is examining operations from 2010 to 2013.
The court was told the officer had liaised with Operation Northmoor, a now-defunct Royal Military Police probe into 11 separate special forces raids in Afghanistan.
Despite these links, the MoD denied allegations of bias. An internal investigation found no evidence of personal prejudice but did conclude the officer’s approach was “lax and unprofessional”. He reportedly made decisions too quickly, relied heavily on rank rather than merit, and inconsistently investigated applicants’ eligibility.
Asylum Denials During ‘Summer Sprint’
The High Court heard that the officer oversaw resettlement decisions during a 2023 ‘sprint’, a push to clear a backlog of over 5,000 Afghan asylum applications. During this period, between 22 and 43 caseworkers were processing cases, all relying on a single UKSF liaison officer for critical input.
That summer, 1,585 applications were rejected.
Justice Dingemans remarked that the process was “inevitably bound to fail” under such pressure, calling into question the fairness of decisions made during the rush.
Senior Civil Servant Raised Red Flags
Natalie Moore, the MoD official responsible for Afghan resettlement, told the court she grew concerned in October 2023 after spotting changes in how cases were handled once the UKSF officer took charge.
She commissioned an internal review, which found procedural failings but no direct evidence of war crimes-related bias. However, Ms Moore said she was informed that internal concerns about UKSF handling of asylum cases dated back as far as October 2022.
“From summer 2022 lax procedures were being followed by UKSF that led to large numbers [of Triples cases] being rejected,” she told the court.
The MoD admitted its caseworkers had become “overly reliant” on UKSF input and were no longer exercising independent judgement, effectively allowing special forces to control who was granted sanctuary.
Officer Replaced After Ministerial Meeting
The UKSF liaison officer in question was quietly replaced in January 2024 following a meeting between then-Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer and senior officials, during which Mercer raised concerns about the fairness and consistency of the process.
A month later, ministers launched a review into the handling of cases from CF333 and ATF444, collectively referred to as “the Triples”, after uncovering that decisions were “inconsistent” and “not robust”.
