Mercer faces jail threat over Afghan inquiry

Minister refuses to name whistleblowers who raised concerns over unlawful killings

JOHNNY MERCER faces the threat of prison for refusing to reveal the identities of Special Forces whistleblowers who raised concerns about the alleged executions of Afghans.

The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs has declined to cooperate with requests from the official inquiry into the unlawful killing of Afghans, The Telegraph understands. He has been asked to identify sources who had warned him about alleged atrocities committed by the SAS.

The soldiers are not suspects but witnesses who Mr Mercer believes are vulnerable and whom he wants to protect. He had given them assurances that they would remain confidential sources when they came to him with concerns about seven years ago. But Sir Charles Haddon-Cave, the inquiry chairman, has warned Mr Mercer that his refusal to name sources was “completely unacceptable”. In a rebuke, the judge said Mr Mercer risked being “part of what is, in effect, an omerta, a wall of silence, and this wall of silence is obstructing the inquiry and access to the truth”.

During Mr Mercer’s appearance in February, Lord Justice Haddon-Cave told him that he has “very significant powers under the Inquiries Act 2005”, which he would use if necessary. The ultimate sanction if Mr Mercer continues to defy the inquiry is imprisonment,with a maximum sentence of 51 weeks behind bars, or a fine. Non-compliance also carries with it a criminal penalty which could put Mr Mercer in breach of the ministerial code, potentially forcing him out of office.

The Afghan inquiry has cast a dark shadow over SAS operations in Afghanistan while claims of a cover-up of atrocities inside the Ministry of Defence are deeply concerning for the Conservative administration. Mr Mercer told the inquiry that he believed the Army had “failed in their basic duty” to find out the truth of allegations of executions conducted by a special forces unit known as UKSF1.

Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, a Court of Appeal judge, is investigating allegations that special forces carried out extrajudicial killings in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013. The inquiry was set up in December 2022 over initial claims that one SAS squadron had killed 54 Afghans in suspicious circumstances.

If the standoff continues, Lord Justice Haddon-Cave has the power to serve Mr Mercer with a section 21 notice that gives the judge the authority to compel witnesses to provide information as requested to a public inquiry.

Mr Mercer, a former Army captain who served on three tours of Afghanistan, said in a 19-page written statement provided to the inquiry in November last year, that “serving officers” had informed him in 2017 that there were “serious allegations of incidents” regarding UK Special Forces “that made members of that community feel very

uncomfortable”. He said he was “also made aware” of a separate allegation by a member of the Special Forces that he had been asked to carry a “dropped weapon”. Mr Mercer said in his written statement: “I understood this to mean that he had been asked to carry an extra weapon (one that could not be linked to Nato forces) to be dropped on the body of a person to make it appear as though they had been a legitimate target as a combatant. The request made him uncomfortable and he refused.”

But asked during oral evidence at the end of February if he was able to provide the names of his “multiple sources” to the inquiry, Mr Mercer said: “Not at this stage, no.” When asked why not by Oliver Glasgow KC, counsel to the inquiry, Mr Mercer replied: “This has been a prolonged saga for me over many years, and my faith in the system to interrogate these issues is not where it needs to be for that to happen.”

At the end of the second day of testimony, Lord Justice Haddon-Cave warned Mr Mercer of the consequences of refusing to cooperate, telling the minister: “I have, I’m afraid, very significant powers under the Inquiries Act 2005, which I would prefer not to have to use. But you can be assured, Mr Mercer, that I will if necessary. My patience is not inexhaustible because I have a public inquiry to run and pursue as quickly as possible, in the public interest, and in the interest of all those who have had allegations made against them, or who have a dark cloud sitting over them, their families and their careers.” He added: “You need to decide which side you are really on,” which was either to get “to the truth of these allegations quickly, for everyone’s sake; or being part of what is, in effect, an omerta, a wall of silence, and this wall of silence is obstructing the inquiry and access to the truth”. He said Mr Mercer was staying silent out of what he called “a misguided understanding of the term ‘integrity’, and inappropriate sense of loyalty”.

Mr Mercer declined to comment when approached by The Telegraph.