Heads of UK Special Forces suppressed evidence of war crimes, officer tells inquiry

A former SAS war crimes commander told a public inquiry in closed evidence sessions that two former heads of all UK Special Forces suppressed evidence of possible SAS war war crimes. The officer, who was one of the most senior in special forces, said he had presented explosive evidence indicating criminal conduct to the then-director special forces in 2011. He also told the inquiry that the new commander of special forces, who took over in 2012, clearly knew there was a problem in Afghanistan and refused to act. The allegations came from a testimony published on Monday by the Independent Inquiry into Afghanistan, which is looking into reports that the SAS murdered prisoners and unarmed civilians, including children, during operations.

The officer testifying is identified by the cipher N1466. His testimony is significant because he is the first-ranking former special forces officer to complain that evidence of war crimes was suppressed by those leading the SAS. Not just one director who has known about this, N1466 said in his testimony, adding that UK Special Forces leadership was very much suppressing the allegations. Despite British law requiring commanders to notify the RMP of any possibility someone under their command may have committed a serious criminal offence, he said to the inquiry that neither of the two former heads of special forces had disclosed any of the troubling charges to the Royal Military Police (RMP). The officer's reporting limitations mean that the former officers convicted by the officer cannot be identified.

According to BBC Panorama in 2022, the Afghan investigation was launched in the aftermath of reports of unlawful killings by the SAS. According to the SASin's website, 54 prisoners and unarmed men had been killed in a six-month tour. Moreover, the program discovered evidence that the program's program, namely General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, had failed to investigate war crimes. Both Gen Carleton-Smith and Lt Gen Jonathan Page, the previous director general special forces, were named in court proceedings in connection with allegations that they had failed to notify the RMP of the allegations at the start of the investigation.

'Criminal behaviour'

After discovering that SAS reports returning from Afghanistan showed the regiment was killing people in suspicious conditions and in unusually high numbers, the N1466 expressed worry about the number of deaths. However, there were too few enemy arms recovered from other missions to justify the number. N1466 began his suspicions with a night raid on which nine Afghan men were killed and only three arms were found, according to the police. In 2022, BBC Panorama returned to the scene of that raid, finding bullet holes inside the room where the men were killed clustered near the ground. Weapons experts told the Panorama that the pattern implied that the victims had been shot when they were lying down, and that the SAS's analysis of the firefight was unlikely. The family said they were civilians and had no weapons at their house. The N1466 also told the probe that he had been made aware of whistleblower testimony that SAS troopers had been heard bragging during a training course about killing all fighting-age males during operations, regardless of whether they were a threat or not. The N1466 was left

deeply troubled by what I strongly suspect was the unlawful killing of innocent people, including children,

he testified, together with the operational findings.

We'll be clear that we're talking about war crimes,

he said. In reaction, N1466 ordered an investigation by another officer at the new SAS' special forces headquarters in April 2011. The SAS's findings were startlingly bad, he said. The study was part of the facts he submitted to the then-director special forces in 2011. There was a strong chance of criminal conduct, he said. N1466 testified that the director fully knew in Afghanistan with regard to the suspected war crimes, and that fully understood what his roles were when it came to reporting the allegations to military police. The director did not call police, but rather ordered an internal investigation into the SAS squadron's tactics, which was described as a warning shot to the squadronics, which included a callback from N1466 to dial the gunmen. According to the N1466, the director had made a conscious decision to conceal this, cover it up, and do a little fake exercise to make it seem as if he's done something. An SAS officer who went to Afghanistan but talked only to other Regiment members, conducted the subsequent tactics, techniques, and procedures investigation. The resulting report fully accepted the names of those suspected of perpetrating the unlawful killings. Bruce Houlder KC, a former head of service prosecutions, told the BBC that the legislation imposed a very specific duty on commanding officers to report suspected offences, including murder, which we are discussing here.

I would have requested the service police to look into the DSF for the failure to report in 2011,

he said. The evidence was eventually submitted by the N1466 directly to the Royal Military Police in January 2015, nearly four years after he first raised his doubts, but only after the RMP launched Operation Northmoor, an investigation into the SAS. He told the inquiry that it was a matter of great regret that he did not go earlier to the RMP nor pressed the director to hand over the facts to the RC, a move that prompted him to step out of line at the time.

When you look back on it, there were two toddlers shot in their bed next to their parents, but that would not have happened. necessarily have come to pass,

he said. He was referring to an SAS raid in Nimruz province in August 2012, which was first reported by the BBC, where two young parents fatally shot while in bed with their infant sons, who were also wounded and critically wounded. The raid, which took place after the new chief special forces had been taken over, was never reported to the military police. The charges made by N1466 were debunked, according to the BBC, and he would give a detailed response to each of these subjects in his testimony to the probe in due course. None of his senior commanders voiced any doubt or produced any evidence of unlawful killings at any time during his three years as president, and there was no charge or evidence that he was aware of to refer to the RMP. The former officer who was in charge of special forces in 2011 did not respond to a request for comment. The Afghan families involved in the investigation, according to Tessa Gregory of law firm Leigh Day, who represents the Afghan families, were

grateful to this officer for giving such open testimony.

They're really worried to learn that many of the soldiers who were on the ground during the investigations are now refusing to testify, relying on the right of privilege against self-incrimination.

They are hoping that others will follow this officer's example so they will find out the truth of what happened to their relatives.

Col Richard Williams, the SAS' commanding officer from 2005 to 2008, told BBC Radio 4's Today that the N1466's report was the critical opinion of one and gives a rather unbalanced picture and should be seen alongside that of those commanding the troops on the ground.I think for all observers - journalists, journalists, and the general public - would like to have a more balanced position published,he said.Forteign veterans' minister Johnny Mercer told the same program that the N1466's findings fit[s] a certain story of soldiers behaving badly, and that he cautioned against reading only one side instead.

I think people support it [the inquiry] because the military isn't full of people who want to go out and break the rules and murder civilians and children, and the overwhelming majority, as well as everyone I worked with, displayed the best of the characteristics that we know the UK Armed Forces are for, according to Mercer, a former British Army soldier.

Investigating the deliberate execution of Afghan males is not about split second decisions made in combat,a spokesperson for the inquiry said.The inquiry was

legally obliged to reveal what evidence we can, when we can,

the spokesperson said. Is there information about this story that you want to share? Get in touch usingSecureDrop, a highly anonymous and safe method of whistleblowing to the BBC that uses the TOR network. Or, use theSignal messenger app, an end-to-end encrypted messenger service designed to shield your personal information. Please note that the SecureDrop link will only work in a Tor browser. Here's some advice on how to use SecureDrop for information about keeping safe and anonymous. Get all the headlines you need to start the day with our flagship newsletter. Sign up here.