British special forces, MI6 spies and government officials were among more than 100 Britons on the lost Afghan dataset, it is understood.
The Daily Mail has seen the list and can now reveal that details of scores of UK operatives were among the 18,800 Afghans.
Ministers fought for two years to hush-up the data blunder with an unprecedented super-injunction that silenced the Mail and other media.
The High Court was told the draconian gagging order was necessary to protect 100,000 Afghans the UK had put ‘at risk of death’.
But after we were able to get access to the database and analyse its contents, it became clear that dozens of British spies, officials and senior commanders including a brigadier and members of the SAS were also exposed.
The Mail’s investigation triggered a massive secrecy row yesterday as security-cleared parliamentarians erupted in fury at being kept in the dark.
Lord Beamish, chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, said: ‘I am astounded at this.
‘The idea that members of MI6 are on this list…We get quarterly reports from the security agencies and we have heard nothing at all. Why?’
The ISC, comprising security-vetted MPs and peers, exists to enable parliament to safely scrutinise the work of the security services. It has vowed to seek answers – the third parliamentary probe launched in the wake of the Mail’s exclusive discovery of the data breach.
Ministers launched one of the biggest peacetime evacuation missions in modern British history to airlift Afghans to the UK.
The Government’s court order to silence the Press also kept the public and other MPs from knowing about the breach and the subsequent fallout. It only came to an end after journalists from the Daily Mail, The Times, the Independent and broadcaster Global worked to overturn the super-injunction. After it was lifted, on Tuesday after 683 days, the MOD then obtained another High Court injunction.
The court order also kept the public and other MPs from knowing about the breach and the subsequent fallout. It was only lifted after journalists from the Daily Mail, The Times, the Independent and broadcaster Global worked to overturn the super-injunction. After it was lifted, on Tuesday after 683 days, the MOD then obtained another High Court injunction.
This second gagging order prevented information from the dataset from being disclosed on the grounds of national security.
Farcically, John Healey, the defence secretary, then revealed some of this information anyway in Parliament. Addressing the House on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Healey gave away details that journalists had been banned from reporting on pain of being jailed.
Today, after another court hearing to consider the second injunction, the Government performed a U-turn enabling the Mail to reveal selected items. This newspaper wanted to expose how the Government had lost information on UK special forces which could have put them at risk.
The database reveals details about special forces, spies and senior military personnel such as brigadiers and major generals who had vouched for Afghans trying to come to the UK, according to defence sources.
Emails for government officials were also included as well as email exchanges between them discussing individual cases.
Defence sources said it also referred to a ‘secret route’ in which Afghans could use to come to the UK.
The database contained the details of 18,800 people who had applied to a UK scheme set up to help loyal Afghans who had worked alongside British forces or officials in Afghanistan, and feared reprisals after the resurgence of the vengeful Taliban.
Afghans affected by the data breach were sent a generic notification and apology from the UK government earlier this week, saying their data had been ‘compromised’ and to be careful about who they spoke to and where they travelled. Many were concerned they needed to move house to ensure they were safe.
It can now be disclosed that the list included names, family names, telephone numbers and email addresses.
Former frontline interpreter Wazir, a 38-year-old father-of-five, worked for five years with UK forces and lives in hiding in northern Afghanistan. His details were leaked, along with those of former British camp guard Jaiwad, 29, who is in hiding having had to move location nine times to keep out of the way of murderous Taliban warlords.
The dataset does not contain photographs or exact addresses. But the locations of terrified, hunted-down Afghans are on the list, according to defence sources. Phone numbers were also included. This is significant because phone numbers can be used by the authorities and telecoms operators to reveal a phone’s location. Yet for some Afghans desperate to keep out of harm’s way, their phone is also vital to keeping in touch with the British rescue teams.
One entry on the database includes an update on an applicants whereabouts, saying: ‘Actually I am still here in XXXX, hidden, and living alone in my XXXX warehouse.’
The list includes the names of family members, local identity card numbers and passport information, so they could be easily identified if they were trying to cross the border to neighbouring countries.
One entry states: ‘Principal has emailed to confirm he is in Mazar e Sharif, Afghanistan with his family. Needs visa waiver.’
Another said he was in a different country but his family remained in a location he specified.
Another said they had crossed a border several times ‘and now fear they will be spotted by the Taliban if they return again’.
There was a column in the dataset which referred to some individuals who had their cases approved by Ben Wallace, the defence secretary at the time of the breach, or had them sponsored by individuals, including by the chief of the defence staff and the then minister for the armed forces, James Heappey.
Members of the Intelligence and Security Committee, who are handpicked and have signed the Official Secrets Act, expressed fury after finding out they had deliberately been kept oblivious to the scandal. In a secret court hearing last year, a judge asked why the ISC had not been informed.
Lord Beamish demanded to see the intelligence assessments the Government used to obtain its super-injunction. He said: ‘The Government must share the intelligence with the committee, under our powers. I want to know why it is these individuals were on this list – and why we – were not told. The judge even asked why the committee could not be informed.
‘The government’s barrister said that was because it was sensitive. Well, sensitivity is not a justification under the justice and security act why they cannot share information with ourselves.
‘What was the decision making process? Who took decisions? Was it a government decision to go down this route?’
Speaking on Radio 4’s PM, Tobias Ellwood, former chair of the Commons defence select committee said: ‘I believe there are now three parliamentary enquiries so the complete picture will now emerge. There are some basic standards of operational security which have not been followed here. It needs to be explored. So many errors have been made. It was well intentioned but you can see where this has gone.’
The MOD said: ‘It’s longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on Special Forces. We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.’
A spokesman added: ‘The government strongly welcomes the Intelligence and Security Committee’s scrutiny of the Afghan data incident.
‘Defence Intelligence and the wider department have been instructed by the Defence Secretary to give their full support to the ISC and all parliamentary committees. If ministers and officials are asked to account and give evidence, they will.
‘We have restored proper parliamentary accountability and scrutiny for the decisions that the department takes and the spending that we commit on behalf of the taxpayer.’