header-logo header-logo

16 July 2025
Issue: 8125 / Categories: Legal News , Data protection , Privacy , International , National security , Military
printer mail-detail

List put Afghans at risk of Taliban reprisal

The High Court has lifted a two-year super-injunction concealing the leak of a Ministry of Defence (MoD) list of more than 18,000 Afghan nationals who assisted British forces against the Taliban

The MoD learned of the data breach three years ago, initially thinking only a small number of people were affected. In August 2023, it learned the spreadsheet, of Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy applicants, was circulating online and contained details of far more people than first suspected. After a newspaper began investigating, the MoD sought an injunction. Mr Justice Robin Knowles not only granted the injunction but went further, barring disclosure of the injunction itself.

However, Mr Justice Chamberlain ordered the super-injunction be lifted this week, in MoD v Global Media and others [2025] EWHC 1806 (KB). He found ‘the sheer scale of the decision making, in terms of the numbers involved and the financial cost, meant that further secrecy was not feasible and was objectionable in principle’.

His decision follows an MoD review which concluded the Taliban likely already possess the information, therefore disclosure was ‘unlikely substantially to raise the risk faced by the individuals whose data it includes’.

Iain Wilson, managing partner of Brett Wilson, said: ‘Data breaches are an inescapable fact of modern life, with consequences that range from minor to potentially life-threatening.

‘Here, the Ministry of Defence appeared to present a strong evidential basis for the latter, and in September 2023 the court understandably granted a wide injunction. The MoD argued that revealing the injunction's existence could prompt the Taliban to try to locate the list, knowing it was considered highly sensitive. That reasoning holds, although any legal proceedings risk attracting attention.

‘The order has since been narrowed, following a government report that found the risk to those named is low. If that assessment is right, the basis for the original injunction has been undermined. There is clear public interest in the fact the government considered spending £7bn to relocate 20,000 people, especially if that was never truly necessary.’

Deputy Information Commissioner Emily Keaney said she was reassured the MoD has ‘minimised the risk of this happening again’.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll