The main points of an enormous information breach by the British army over Afghan nationals have come out this week. However behind the scenes, the fallout has been ongoing for years.
The scheme was to offer asylum for individuals who had labored with the UK armed forces within the battle towards the Taliban between 2001 and 2021.
The blunder was solely made public on Tuesday after a super-injunction blocking the media from reporting on the breach was eliminated.
It is solely now that the timeline of the info breach, a subsequent secret authorities scheme and the super-injunction can all be revealed.
Here is what the general public could not know till now:
April 2021
The Preliminary scheme to relocate Afghans who helped British army through the battle is launched. It was referred to as the Afghan Relocations and Help Coverage (ARAP).
February 2022
Please use Chrome browser for a extra accessible video participant
2:51
Timeline of Afghan information breach
14 August 2023
UK officers ship round 1,800 ARAP candidates in Pakistan a warning through WhatsApp to say their information could have been breached.
15 August 2023
James Heappey, then armed forces minister, is warned by a civilian volunteer who assists ARAP candidates that the breach could have put these on the checklist and their households in grave hazard.
The volunteer says: “The Taliban may well now have a 33,000-long kill list – essentially provided to them by the UK government.
“If any of those households are murdered, the federal government will probably be liable.”
25 August 2023
Then defence secretary Ben Wallace applies for a court order after the MoD gets two inquiries about the breach from journalists.
1 September 2023
High Court grants a super-injunction until a hearing scheduled for 1 December, preventing the reporting of the breach, as the MoD said the government needed four months to “do all the things it moderately can to assist those that may need been put at additional threat”.
23 November 2023
High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain gives private judgment saying the super-injunction is “is probably going to provide rise to comprehensible suspicion that the courtroom’s processes are getting used for the needs of censorship”.
But he continues it for four more weeks, as the MoD has reiterated that the threat to those in the dataset is “grave”.
18 December 2023
MoD lawyers say the risk to life due to the breach is “immensely severe”. Mr Justice Chamberlain extends the super-injunction until February 2024.
19 December 2024
The Domestic and Economic Affairs committee meets and says that a new route of settlement in the UK should be offered to some individuals who were ineligible for ARAP.
At this time, it is agreed to be a targeted cohort of around 200 people and their dependents at the highest risk following the breach, and it is called the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR).
The ARR is also covered by the super-injunction.
15 February 2024
Mr Justice Chamberlain continues the super-injunction, finding a “actual chance that it’s serving to guard” some of those identified on the dataset.
But he adds: “What is obvious is that the federal government has determined to supply assist to solely a really small proportion of these whose lives have been endangered by the info incident and that the choices on this regard are being taken with none alternative for scrutiny by the media or in Parliament.”
21 May 2024
Mr Justice Chamberlain rules the super-injunction should be lifted in 21 days, saying there is a “important chance” the Taliban already know about the dataset and that it is “basically objectionable” to keep it a secret.
25-26 June 2024
The MoD challenges the decision in the Court of Appeal, which rules that the super-injunction should continue for the safety of those affected by the breach.
In a written ruling, judges Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Singh and Lord Justice Warby say: “Because the variety of relations concerned is a number of occasions the variety of affected individuals, the overall numbers of people that could be uncovered to a threat of dying or severe hurt if the Taliban obtained the info is between 80,000 and 100,000.”
4 July 2024
Labour wins the general election, and Sir Keir Starmer’s government inherits the scheme. It keeps the super-injunction in place.
2 February 2025
A review into the data incident response reveals that the ARR’s plans would mean relocating more Afghan nationals than the original scheme, and would end up costing up to £7bn.
It recommends that the defence secretary order an independent review into the breach and subsequent scheme.
19 May 2025
The High Court is told by a Manchester-based law firm that it has more than 600 potential clients who may sue the government under data protection laws.
4 July 2025
After an independent review by retired civil servant Paul Rimmer, the government tells the High Court that the super-injunction “ought to now not proceed”.
It comes after the review found the breach was “unlikely to profoundly change the prevailing threat profile” of those named and that the government possibly “inadvertently added extra worth to the dataset” by in search of the unprecedented super-injunction.
15 July 2025
Mr Justice Chamberlain lifts the super-injunction, making the breach and scheme reportable for the primary time.
It’s revealed that almost 7,000 Afghan nationals both have been or are being relocated to the UK as a part of the breach response scheme, with the MoD saying it should price round £850m.
It stated the inner authorities doc from February which stated the associated fee may rise to £7bn was outdated as a result of the federal government had minimize the variety of Afghans it will be relocating.
Please use Chrome browser for a extra accessible video participant
7:31
Minister defends dealing with of breach
What occurs now?
Some 5,400 Afghans who’ve already obtained invitation letters will probably be flown to the UK within the coming weeks. This can carry the overall variety of Afghans affected by the breach being relocated to the UK to 23,900.
The remainder of the affected Afghans will probably be left behind, The Instances reported.
Round 1,000 Afghans on the leaked checklist are getting ready to sue the MoD, demanding at the least £50,000 every, in a joint motion led by Barings Legislation.
Adnan Malik, head of information safety at Barings Legislation, stated: “This is an incredibly serious data breach, which the Ministry of Defence has repeatedly tried to hide from the British public.”
Regardless of the federal government’s inside assessment enjoying down the dangers brought on by the info breach, Mr Malik stated the claimants “continue to live with the fear of reprisal against them and their families”.
The Telegraph has reported {that a} Whitehall briefing be aware circulated on 4 July warned that the MoD would want to work with the federal government to organize to “mitigate any risk of public disorder following the discharge of the injunction”.
