SAS fight back – senior officers accuse High Court war crimes inquiry of bias over ‘one-sided’ release of evidence

Senior figures in the SAS defended the regiment last night after more allegations emerged in the High Court investigation into alleged war crimes.

Former officers accused rival Special Boat Service commanders of having an agenda against the SAS and criticized the court for publishing ‘selective’ statements.

The fight was led by former SAS Commander Richard Williams, a staunch critic of ‘laws’ targeting British troops serving in Afghanistan and other conflicts such as Northern Ireland.

The Inquiry at the Royal Courts of Justice last night released the largest batch of documents and statements to date.

These were provided in closed-door sessions by senior Special Forces officers and civil servants who were on sensitive missions during the period when the suspected shootings allegedly took place.

The evidence points to, but in no way proves, alleged Extrajudicial Killings by the SAS targeting rebels from 2010 to 2013.

Soldiers found to have possibly committed IJK and police officers who may have covered up any illegal actions may also face criminal investigations.

BBC Panorama documentaries accused the SAS of carrying out extrajudicial killings in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The regiment’s most famous action was the storming of the Iranian Embassy in Knightsbridge in May 1980.

Colonel Williams, who led the SAS from 2005 to 2008, demanded to know why the Inquiry had not published evidence supporting the regiment’s actions.

The Mail understands that senior SAS officers and a former Director of the UK Special Forces have given evidence contextualising these events.

These testimonies have not been published yet. Last night the Inquiry shared material that appeared to support allegations that the SAS may have acted outside its Rules of Engagement.

Speaking exclusively to the Mail, Colonel Williams said: ‘This highly selective commentary and statement of judgment by inexperienced staff officers appears to be a one-sided, agenda-driven version of events.

‘These officers were thousands of miles away from the tragedies of war. It seems judgmental, as there is no counter-narrative or explanation offered by SAS soldiers in the field.

‘It is not a shining example of transparency or fairness and a very strange way to conduct a serious independent investigation.’

The Afghanistan Inquiry began hearing evidence in 2023. Since then, many witnesses have testified in closed and open sessions.

Most SAS and SBS witnesses gave evidence behind closed doors due to restrictions on identity and security classifications associated with operations.

Among the evidence released last night was the description of a soldier who allegedly ‘killed’ Afghan prisoners. However, the evidence may not consist of hearsay. The account was second-hand and was never tested as part of a criminal investigation.

A British unit was reported to have said: ‘They cleared a compound and then settled all the personnel. [Local Nationals] In a room for security. While he was under guard, another soldier entered the room and opened fire.

‘He was jumped on, but it resulted in the killing of some people in the room. The incident was covered up.’

The false claim was made by a Special Forces soldier in a different unit.

In another incident, a soldier was said to have opened fire under a mosquito net under which women and children were hiding. The statements were again second-hand.

Documents released by the Inquiry last night claimed that ‘the incident was covered up and the person who carried out the attack was allegedly given some kind of reward to make the incident seem legitimate’.

The inquest also heard that a senior officer at Special Forces headquarters in London had planned to report such incidents to the Royal Military Police but changed his mind.

The high-ranking commander, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, claimed that he was horrified by the allegations of Extrajudicial Killings.

But at the moment of the showdown, when he could have reported to the RMP himself, he remained silent for fear that contacting detectives would damage his career.

The witness said: ‘I believed this would have a negative impact on my promotion prospects and career longevity. to SIB in 2011[Özel Soruşturma Şubesi’ne]I would like to express my regret for not reporting.'[SpecialInvestigationBranchin2011′[SpecialInvestigationBranchin2011’

The Judge-led Inquiry is expected to obtain further evidence by 2026 and possibly 2027. A criminal investigation may be launched by the Metropolitan Police following the publication of its findings.

The SAS are alleged to have killed more than 80 Afghans in suspicious circumstances at remote compounds in Helmand Province during the long British campaign.

Nearly 500 British soldiers lost their lives in Afghanistan following Al Qaeda’s attacks on the USA on September 11, 2001.

The SAS were sent into the country to target the enemy’s Improvised Explosive Device (IED networks).

Testimony from four witnesses who held key positions in the UK Special Forces was released last night. For security reasons these were identified by the passwords used by the Investigation (N1466, N5461, N2444 and N1803).

Last night the Ministry of Defense said: ‘The Government is fully committed to supporting the Independent Inquiry into Afghanistan as it continues its work, and we are hugely grateful to former and current employees who have given evidence.

We are also committed to providing the support our Special Forces deserve, while maintaining the transparency and accountability that the British people rightly expect from the armed forces.