Over 1.9 million Afghan migrants were deported from Iran and Pakistan in seven months, prompting UN calls to halt forced, unsafe returns immediately.
Volker Türk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has reported that more than 1.9 million Afghan migrants have been deported from Iran and Pakistan in the past seven months.
Speaking on Friday, July 18, Türk stated that over 1.5 million people were returned from Iran, while more than 300,000 were expelled from Pakistan.
He warned that many of those being deported face serious risks of abuse, torture, or arbitrary detention in Afghanistan and should not be forcibly returned.
The High Commissioner called for an immediate halt to deportations, emphasizing that returns must be voluntary, safe, dignified, and in line with international law.
According to Türk, Afghanistan is facing a severe humanitarian and human rights crisis. Returnees—whether forced or voluntary—face discrimination, violence, economic hardship, and lack of employment opportunities.
He stressed that specific groups such as women, girls, journalists, and former government employees are particularly vulnerable and under serious threat in Afghanistan.
These warnings come as the pace of forced deportations of Afghan refugees from neighboring countries continues to increase, raising alarm among rights organizations.
In a recent case, Germany deported 81 Afghan refugees, citing criminal records. This incident adds to growing international concern about the safety and legality of such deportations.
The UN has urged all countries to prioritize protection, uphold asylum rights, and avoid returning individuals to dangerous conditions. The current deportation trend, if continued, may deepen Afghanistan’s ongoing crisis and put thousands more lives at risk.
UN Human Rights Chief: Over 1.9 Million Afghans Deported from Iran and Pakistan
According to a report by (UN-Habitat), the dramatic decline in Kabul’s water levels has put nearly six million people at risk of water scarcity.
Afghanistan’s capital, Kabul, is currently grappling with one of the most critical water crises in its history.
According to data, water levels in many central and western parts of Kabul have dropped significantly, severely affecting the lives of millions of residents.
Mohammad Agha, a Kabul resident, said: “Everything depends on water. Without it, life becomes extremely difficult. If these petrol stations stop giving water, people will die of hunger and thirst.”
Another resident, Najibullah, added: “Children and women wander day and night with buckets, but there’s no water. A woman came and said she hadn’t performed ablution today because there’s not even enough water for that.”
According to a report by the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), the dramatic decline in Kabul’s water levels has put nearly six million people at risk of water scarcity.
The agency described the crisis as “unprecedented,” emphasizing the need for large-scale investment, stronger cooperation, and increased public awareness on water use and management to confront the issue.
Meanwhile, residents are urging the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan to address their concerns by expanding water supply networks and digging deeper wells.
Mohammad Naseem, another Kabul resident, said: “If these petrol stations don’t give us water, no one else will. Our children go to the neighbors, but they get beaten and told they won’t be given water. We ask the Islamic Emirate to drill wells for us so we can have our own water and access it day and night.”
Despite the growing concern among Kabul’s population, officials from the Islamic Emirate have repeatedly promised to resolve the issue, but no concrete action has yet been taken.
Without providing details about the nature of these talks, he added that Qatar played a key role in facilitating them.
Friedrich Merz, the Chancellor of Germany, stated that recognizing Afghanistan’s interim government is not on Germany’s agenda.
This statement comes amid questions raised within Germany regarding the nature of relations between Kabul and Berlin, following the deportation of 81 Afghan asylum seekers.
Merz said: “I reiterate: Diplomatic recognition of the Taliban is not on the agenda at all, and such a matter is not being considered. Therefore, the critical question is how we engage with them. Until further notice, this matter will remain limited to technical coordination.”
Although the German Chancellor confirmed that discussions with Afghanistan’s interim government have taken place, he clarified that such interactions are strictly technical.
Without providing details about the nature of these talks, he added that Qatar played a key role in facilitating them.
Friedrich Merz stated: “I cannot and will not speak about the details of these discussions because they were held confidentially. There had been prior technical contacts with Afghanistan. I want to clearly thank the Emir of Qatar and the Qatari government. Qatar played an important role in this process.”
Meanwhile, Germany’s Interior Minister, Alexander Dobrindt, who had previously emphasized the need to engage with the interim Afghan government, now maintains that Germany must be able to carry out deportations to Afghanistan and other countries independently of strategic partners such as Qatar.
Dobrindt said: “Qatar supported us as a strategic partner in this effort. However, I state clearly that we must also be able to carry out such deportations in the future without strategic partners whether to Afghanistan or Syria.”
Yesterday, with Qatar’s mediation, Germany deported 81 Afghan nationals it classified as criminals, flying them from Leipzig Airport to Kabul.
Germany’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that the deportation took place following extensive discussions between the German government and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.
Merz: Diplomatic Recognition of Islamic Emirate Is Not Under Consideration
The estate of an Afghan man who was killed after appearing in the acclaimed documentary “Retrograde” is suing, claiming negligence.W
The complexities of reporting in conflict zones are getting a public airing in a negligence lawsuit working its way through a Los Angeles court against the makers of an acclaimed documentary about the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan.
The suit filed in California Superior Court for Los Angeles County against National Geographic, Disney, Hulu and director Matthew Heineman’s production company alleges that an Afghan man who appeared in the Emmy-winning “Retrograde” was killed by the Taliban because filmmakers ignored warnings that showing him would put him in danger.
The suit accuses the defendants of depicting the man in the 2022 film “for commercial gain while knowingly placing him in grave danger.” The suit also labels the filmmakers and distributors as “immoral, unethical, oppressive [and] unscrupulous.”
The dead man’s estate is represented by a prominent Florida law firm, Kelley Uustal, that won an $82 million jury award in a business-dispute case for hip-hop artist Flo Rida. The firm has also done legal work on behalf of a teenager who claims he is the rightful owner of the baseball that Los Angeles Dodgers star Shohei Ohtani knocked into the stands last year for his historic 50th home run, setting off a violent fan scramble. (The man who retrieved it from the fracas sold it at auction for more than $4 million.)Follow
In its court responses to the “Retrograde” lawsuit, attorneys representing Our Time Projects, Disney, National Geographic and Hulu have moved to strike the complaint under a law that allows for early termination of cases that threaten to punish speech protected by the First Amendment. National Geographic produces documentaries as part of a joint agreement with Disney; “Retrograde” was shown on Disney-owned Hulu.
“The First Amendment [does not] allow courts to hold producers and distributors liable for the actions of third parties, like the Taliban’s violent reprisals following their return to power,” a defense court filing states.
“The fact that numerous Afghan civilians who worked to better their country were targeted and tortured by the Taliban is horrible,” a court filing acknowledged. “But that doesn’t mean documentarians reporting on the Taliban’s resurgence are responsible for that conduct.”
Attorneys for the filmmakers and distributors also argue that the lawsuit seeks to “sidestep the First Amendment” by arguing they should have blurred faces. “That is a fully protected editorial decision,” the lawyers wrote. (The defense is represented by the national firm of Davis Wright Tremaine, whose media clients have included The Washington Post.)
Lawyers for the defense state that the documentarians obtained consent from their subjects to be filmed, including showing their faces, and that allegations in the lawsuit involve conduct that cannot be attributed to National Geographic, Disney and Hulu.
In an affidavit, Heineman says that he obtained consent to film the Afghans from the leaders of their unit and that the subjects were filmed “openly and obviously” without objection.
“The Supreme Court has made crystal clear that the First Amendment protects editorial judgments regarding matters of public concern,” Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., an attorney for Heineman and producer Caitlin McNally, said in an email to The Post. “This includes the use of footage from combat zones that the filmmakers presented in Retrograde, consistent with the well-established approach taken by numerous news organizations.” (Boutrous has also represented The Post on media issues.)
“Retrograde” was removed from all platforms, including the Hulu streaming service, in 2024 after The Post contacted National Geographic and Disney with questions about whether the film endangered Afghans hired by the U.S. military to clear mines. The Post’s article revealed that five former and current U.S. service members warned the filmmakers, including McNally and Heineman, that they should blur faces of the Afghan mine-clearers.
Charlie Crail, a U.S. military media officer assigned to the film project, told The Post last year that the Afghan mine-clearers consented to be filmed before the U.S. withdrawal. After the withdrawal, Crail said he warned the documentarians against showing the faces of workers who were still in the country, because of concerns about Taliban reprisals.
The U.S. military signed off on the film after a prerelease review, one of its conditions for assisting the project. The military’s reading of its contract with Heineman’s team was that it did not give them the right to demand changes related to Afghan contractors, according to a U.S. service member involved in the process.
In a statement to The Post for the2024 article, Heineman and McNally said they had no recollection of receiving specific warnings about the bomb-clearing crew and emphasized that the film was released following sign-offs from the U.S. military and National Geographic/Disney.
“Any attempt to blame ‘Retrograde’ because the film showed faces of individuals in war zones — as has long been standard in ethical conflict reporting — would be deeply wrong,” their statement said.
If the California negligence lawsuit goes to trial, it’s possible that issues raised by both the plaintiffs and the defendants about the filmmaking process and the ethics of conflict reporting would be presented to jurors.
Since its original article, The Post has obtained previously unreported documents and emails that shed additional light on the making of “Retrograde” and its depiction of Afghan contractors.
The documents show that concerns about the dead man — whom U.S. Green Berets had nicknamed “Justin Bieber” because of his good looks and thick hair — were included in a minute-by-minute security review of the documentary conducted by “Retrograde” crew members in August 2022, shortly before the film was slated for its festival debut at Telluride, Colorado. (The Post is not using his name to protect his family from potential harm. He is referred to as “John Doe” in the lawsuit.)
The new documents show that not only did the “Retrograde” crew receive general warnings from current and former U.S. service members before its theatrical and streaming debutsabout the risks of endangering Afghans shown in the movie, they also appear to have received a specific warning about the man who was later killed.
Multiple Afghans are shown in a scene in which Green Berets tell Afghan mine-clearers that the United States is withdrawing — the only scene in which the man who later died appears. The man is the only mine-clearer mentioned in the security review, which was conducted by McNally and another “Retrograde” crew member, Joe DeGrand.
In the security review, McNally flagged a section in the film, writing “we’re very concerned about the [National Mine Removal Group] guy because he is still in country from what we hear; blur all identifying info on uniform.” She repeats the request to blur identifying information for two other sections of the film. (McNally did not respond to a question about who had told her the man was still in Afghanistan.)
DeGrand emailed the security review to Heineman, including recommendations for dozens of sections of the film.
Later, another “Retrograde” crew member emailed McNally and DeGrand with Heineman’s suggestions for addressing some of the flagged concerns with “reframes, subtle blurs or VFX,” a reference to a visual-effects technique.
In an email, Boutrous said that the review resulted in the removal of “identifying information, including names on the uniforms” of several military personnel depicted in the documentary.
But since the man who later died had “no such identifying information on his uniform that was visible on-screen … no action was necessary,” and filmmakers made no changes to his appearance.
In The Post’s May 2024 article, a National Geographic spokesperson said Disney’s global intelligence and threat analysis manager conducted a review of the film before it was released but rebutted statements by two U.S. military service members, in interviews and text messages reviewed by The Post, who saidthey cautioned Disney about showing faces of the Afghan contractors and urged the company to blur faces or take other steps to protect them.
When the film debuted, the man was shown in a lingering close-up.
“It was just so needlessly unsafe to me,” DeGrand said in an interview with The Post. “They chose to put this guy into the spotlight when there were other shots and materials available to not do that. There are tons of different ways to do this scene that anonymize him or don’t feature him so prominently.”
Shortly after the film’s theatrical and streaming releases, a pirated clip of the scene showing the man circulated on social media. He was later captured by the Taliban and tortured, eventually dying from his injuries, according to The Post’s reporting. In his final days, the man said that his captors told him they identified him because of the clip showing him in “Retrograde,” according to one interpreter and text messages from another interpreter and a family friend.
“Retrograde” went on to receive positive reviews from critics and three Emmy Awards — for cinematography, editing and current affairs documentary. It was shortlisted for an Oscar and won an Edward R. Murrow Award for current affairs documentary.After The Post reported on the man’s death, the Radio Television Digital News Association, which oversees the Murrow Awards, conducted a review and rescinded “Retrograde’s” prize — the first time in the organization’s history that it had pulled back an award for issues related to journalism.
DeGrand did not learn of the man’s death until The Post published its 2024 article. Ever since, he said, he has agonized over his involvement on the film and lamented that the recommendation to shield the man’s identity was not followed.
“To knowingly put someone in danger for the benefit of your movie is selfish,” DeGrand said. “And I don’t think it makes it a better movie.”
The court has not yet ruled on the request by Our Time Projects, Disney and National Geographic to dismiss the lawsuit. The defendants have asked for a hearing on their request.
Hope Hodge Seck and Alice Crites contributed to this report.
In ‘Retrograde’ lawsuit, war-zone filmmaking could face a legal test
The personal details of serving and former members of UK special forces, and the security services, were included in the Afghan data breach, it can now be reported
In total, the details of more than 100 British officials were released in February 2022, alongside thousands of Afghans’ details
The breach happened when a British official leaked a spreadsheet by mistake – it was later subject to a super-injunction, meaning no details could be reported. Here’s a timeline of key events
Edited by Alys Davies with Joel Gunter reporting from the High Court
British spies and SAS named in Afghan data breach
14:31 17 July
Adam Durbin
Live reporter
The controversy around the leak of information related to thousands of Afghans who worked with British forces has worsened, with the revelation that personal details of sensitive UK military personnel were also released.
We’ve learned today from the High Court that more than 100 British officials’ details were leaked alongside Afghans nationals in February 2022, including serving and former members of the special forces and spies.
Questions are also circulating around the government’s – both former Conservative and current Labour – attempts to suppress the news legally, employing until recently a super-injunction banning all reporting on the scandal.
If you’d like to read a full report on today’s developments, our reporter at the High Court Joel Gunter has put together a full summary of the case here.
We’ll be closing our live coverage here, thanks for joining us.
Meeting took place between former Afghan Special Forces and MoD today – source
14:23 17 July
Joe Inwood
World news correspondent
I’ve also spoken to one of the female members of the “Triples”. She tells me that a meeting took place today between former Afghan Special Forces and someone from the UK Ministry of Defence. She wasn’t there, but has spoken to people who were.
“The representative of the Ministry of Défense was saying, ‘Don’t worry, today’s threat from the Taliban is just a psychological war. They haven’t harmed anyone so far,’” she says.
She says there was a sense of real anger among the Afghans there. “The whole world knows how many military personnel have been killed and tortured in the past few years. I don’t know why the Ministry of Defence said such a thing. It was really ridiculous.”
We have reached out to the Ministry of Defence for a response and will bring it to you when we have it.
The Taliban has stated publicly that there is an amnesty for former members of the Afghan National Government and the armed forces, but despite that we’ve been told of people being tortured and killed, it’s believed by local Taliban figures, often with a score to settle. The Taliban has previously denied this.
‘A matter of life and death’
14:10 17 July
Joe Inwood
World news correspondent
I’ve been covering the story of former Afghan Special Forces, known as the “Triples”, for nearly two years now. Since news of the data breach emerged, some have got back in touch. They have spoken of their fear and anger at what one said was “more than a technical error. It’s a matter of life and death.”
We’re not using his name, but we have previously confirmed this man’s service with 333, the most elite unit of the Afghan army. “Our lives, and the lives of our families, have been thrown into fear and chaos,” he tells me.
Despite being safely in the UK, he says he is “terrified that the Taliban could use the data leak to track us down. The sense of safety we hoped to find in the UK has been shattered.”
We’ve spoken to around a dozen former soldiers and officers over the years, and without exception their biggest fear is for those who were left behind.
“Our brothers, sisters, uncles, parents now face an even greater risk of being found, arrested, or killed by the Taliban. Many are already on the move, relocating from one place to another to avoid being discovered. They’re living in constant fear.”
He went on to say that “since the breach was made public, I’ve received over 50 calls and emails from people who are desperate, terrified, and sleepless. They are begging for help, but I don’t have the power to protect them. Some tell me they expect the Taliban to knock on their door at any moment.”
Without exception, the Triples we spoke to were intensely proud of the work they did with the UK military. It is for that reason they felt such a sense of betrayal at the way they were treated by the British government.
Both Afghan and British soldiers felt the Triples had earned the right to protection. He told me that obligation is even greater now.“I urge the UK government to act immediately: evacuate those at risk, offer real protection, and take responsibility before lives are lost. We cannot afford to wait.”
What is a super-injunction and why was one put in place?
14:01 17 July
Ben Wallace was the defence secretary at the time
The Afghan data breach all occurred when Ben Wallace was the defence secretary. At the time, he made an application to the High Court on 1 September 2023, seeking an injunction which would criminalise making the leak public.
The Taliban could seek out the list and use it to target people, the government feared.
Mr Justice Knowles said the request was “exceptional” and went “further” than the government had asked, upgrading it to a super-injunction. This made it illegal to both reveal details of the leak and refer to the existence of the court order.
It was regularly reviewed by another judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, who in November 2023 said it was the first injunction of its kind and raised freedom of speech concerns.
He sought to lift the order the following May but the government appealed and it remained before being lifted on Tuesday – when the details of the data breach, the government’s response, and the number of Afghans given the right to live in the UK was revealed.
Another injunction was granted to prevent some of the most sensitive details in the leaked document being made public. Then today, restrictions on the names of British nationals – including spies and special forces – that were on the spreadsheet, were lifted.
No comment from MoD on special forces revelation
13:39 17 July
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson has said it’s the “longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on special forces”, following the revelation that the personal details of serving and former members of UK special forces, and the security services, were included in the 2022 Afghan data breach.
“We take the security of our personnel very seriously, particularly of those in sensitive positions, and always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security,” the spokesperson says.
‘It’s not about if – it’s when the Taliban get him’
13:27 17 July
Adam Hale and Fazel Ahmad Yalghoz
BBC News and BBC World Service
Rahim – not his real name – says his father-in-law learned on Tuesday that his name was on the leaked list.
The Taliban intensified their efforts to track his father-in-law down in 2023 and 2024, he tells the BBC, adding that he can now understand why. Rahim fears it is only a matter of time before they succeed. “It’s not about if – it’s when the Taliban get him,” he says.
Rahim, now 42 and living in the UK, knows all too well about Taliban score-settling. Two of his cousins were killed by the group in the two years before it seized power.
A couple of years later, the target of such revenge appeared to be his father-in-law, who is currently in hiding.
“We couldn’t work it out, why [from 2023] there was a sudden spike in the hunt by the Taliban to capture him,” Rahim says.
“We can’t say for sure, but we believe they have access to that data.”
Rahim says his father-in-law provided evidence of these attempts to hunt him down to the Ministry of Defence (MoD), most recently last December – his third attempt to be resettled in the UK under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap).
He says his father-in-law’s previous applications through the scheme were turned down because it was decided he had not worked directly with the UK government.
The MoD says it will not comment on individual cases, and that a review into the data breach carried out in 2025 had concluded that there was limited evidence that certain individuals had been targeted with any degree of consistency as a result of it.
A spreadsheet containing the personal details of almost 19,000 people who had asked to come to the UK in order to flee the Taliban was accidentally leaked by an official working at UK Special Forces headquarters in February 2022.
That unnamed official emailed the document outside of the government team processing Afghan relocation applications and it made its way into the public domain.
The police decided no investigation was needed. The BBC has confirmed he is no longer in the post he occupied at the time of the breach.
The leaked document contained the names, contact details and, in some cases, family information of a huge number of people who believed their association with British forces during the Afghanistan war could leave them at risk of harm.
And now we’re also reporting that the personal details of serving and former members of UK special forces, and the security services, were included in the breach.
This shows how important the super-injunction was – former army commander
13:02 17 July
We’ve just heard from former UK and Nato senior officer Hamish De Bretton-Gordon, who says the latest breach revelation shows “just how important” the super-injunction was.
The Ministry of Defence will have to make sure the damage is limited, he adds, and have very tight security measures in the future.
“We are in an era now when the keyboard is as dangerous – if not more dangerous – than weapons of war,” he adds.
“It shows how important that super-injunction was”, says Hamish de Bretton-Gordon
Lib Dems call for immediate inquiry into ‘devastating scandal’
12:50 17 July
The Liberal Democrats have called for an inquiry after the news that personal details of UK special forces and spies were included in the Afghan data breach.
MP Helen Maguire – a former military captain – says “the more we find out about this data leak, the worse it gets”.
She says special forces’ confidential details “should never have been somewhere where they could accidentally be shared”.
“Both Afghans at risk for their brave work supporting the British operation – and the UK operatives who facilitated it – were put in immense danger thanks to the incompetence of the MOD under the Conservatives,” she adds.
As a result, Maguire calls on the government to “immediately launch an inquiry” into the “devastating scandal”.
Afghan whose data was leaked fears for brothers still in Afghanistan
12:36 17 July
Hafizullah Maroof
BBC Afghan Service
As we’ve reported, most of the people affected by the February 2022 data leak – which was first revealed earlier this week – were Afghans.
Asif [not his real name], 27, worked for more than three years in the “Triples” – Afghan special forces trained by the British Army in Afghanistan. The Triples used to participate in joint operations with British Army against the Taliban across the county.
Asif was brought to the UK six weeks ago from Islamabad – he was told to move to Pakistan to be evacuated, and waited for three months there.
But it was only in the past week he was told his details were in the data breach.
“I was notified two days ago and received an email from MoD about the data breach,” he says. “I was not told about the breach when I was in Afghanistan.”
Asif adds: “I have more fears about family – particularly about my three brothers who live in Afghanistan. I really wish nothing happens to them since they were not part of any military operation with me.
“I proud that I have served my country, I don’t regret it, but I am disappointed by the data breach. I have many colleagues fought with us shoulder to shoulder but they left in Afghanistan.”
Afghan who published part of leaked data was able to come to UK
12:10 17 July
Joel Gunter
Reporting from the High Court
We revealed last night that the Ministry of Defence offered to expedite a review of one Afghan’s resettlement application after he obtained the leaked dataset and posted part of it on Facebook.
The BBC understands that the man had previously been rejected for resettlement, but was brought to the UK after posting names from the data on Facebook and indicating that he could release the rest.
Government sources with knowledge of the events told the BBC that the individual “essentially blackmailed” the government into bringing him to the UK.
The BBC understands the man did not face any criminal charges in relation to use of the leaked data.
The Ministry of Defence declined to comment about the individual’s specific case, but told the BBC that “anyone who comes to the UK under any Afghan relocation schemes” must go through “robust security checks in order to gain entry”.
The BBC also approached the Met Police for comment.
For a case officer in the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), having your name and details outed in public is potentially a career-killer.
For serving and former members of the highly secretive Special Air Service (SAS) and Special Boat Service (SBS) such leaks can in theory expose them to the risk of threat to life, given the operations some will have taken part in that involved the deaths or capture of individuals.
The revelation today that 100 or more names and details of British operatives were included in this unauthorised data breach is certainly shocking. But the leak was – belatedly – discovered in August 2023.
That has given the UK Intelligence and SF Communities nearly two years to come up with ways to mitigate this disaster. Among the worse case scenarios they will have had to consider is that Russia, China and Iran may also now be in possession of those leaked names.
But for now, those who have most to fear are the 600 former Afghan government soldiers and their estimated 1,800 relatives who are still in Afghanistan.
Whatever routes out that were being suggested to them will have now been compromised and the publicity surrounding this whole story will have re-energised some within the Taliban to hunt down those on the list and exact what they perceive as rightful revenge.e
A timeline of key events
11:54 17 July
The leak of personal information of Afghans trying to flee the Taliban and come to the UK was more extensive than previously disclosed. Let’s take a look at a timeline of how events unfolded:
February 2022: The details of nearly 19,000 people are leaked by mistake by a British official
August 2023: A Facebook post with some details from the spreadsheet goes online
1 Sept 2023: The Ministry of Defence (MoD) files a super-injunction blocking the leak from going public
23 November 2023: The super-injunction is extended, on the basis that the Taliban may not have been aware of the data
April 2024: A resettlement scheme is set up for Afghans on the list
21 May 2024: The injunction is nearly lifted after a judge rules in favour. The MoD appeals and wins, but the Court of Appeal says it must be reviewed every three months
15 July 2025: The details of the data breach, the government’s response, and the number of Afghans given the right to live in the UK is revealed
17 July 2025: We learn that the names of British nationals – including spies and special forces – were on the spreadsheet
Why the latest revelation was allowed to be reported
11:37 17 July
Joel Gunter
Reporting from the High Court
Very little was said in court today that the public was allowed to hear – but what was said paved the way for the dramatic revelation that current and former members of the UK’s special forces and security services were compromised by this leak.
The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, told the court that the barristers for the Ministry of Defence and for a group of media organisations had reached a compromise in a closed-door hearing.
That meant that the media organisations involved in the case – including The Mail, Global Media and the Independent – could now report that sensitive British officials were in the leak.
That revelation had been prevented by an injunction issued earlier this week, but then Defence Secretary John Healey said in Parliament on Tuesday that a “small number” of senior military officials, MPs and other government officials had been affected.
Then on Wednesday the Sun newspaper reported that special forces and spies were involved. It was enough to push the group of media organisations in this case to request an emergency hearing and ask the judge to lift the restrictions on them.
The data breach was much worse than we thought
11:20 17 July
Joel Gunter
Reporting from the High Court
It was already a huge scandal earlier this week, when the country learned that the details of thousands of Afghans at risk from the Taliban had been accidentally leaked by someone in UK Special Forces headquarters, and a secret scheme had been set up to bring them to the UK.
Today we can report that the data breach was much worse than previously thought: it contained personal details of more than 100 British officials including those whose identities are most closely guarded – special forces and spies.
In the light of today’s revelations, it is no wonder that the British government obtained an unprecedented super-injunction, a kind of gagging order that prevents the reporting of even the existence of the injunction.
Taken together, the leak of the personal information of both at-risk Afghans and some of the most sensitive officials in the UK make this one of the worst security breaches in modern British history.
Special forces’ identities are tightly kept secrets
11:05 17 July Breaking
Joel Gunter
Reporting from the High Court
The security breach was kept under wraps by an injunction until today, when the gagging order was lifted in part by a High Court judge.
Details of more than 100 British officials were included in the leaked data, which may have fallen into the hands of the Taliban.
The identities of members of the UK’s special forces regiments, including the SAS and SBS, and the identities of people working in the security services are tightly kept secrets.
The breach occurred in February 2022, when a database was accidentally emailed outside of government by an individual working at UK Special Forces headquarters in London.
The database also contained the personal information of nearly 19,000 Afghans who had worked with the British during the 20-year conflict in Afghanistan and had applied to be resettled to the UK after the Taliban retook control in 2021.
Many of those who had applied were judged to be at risk of serious harm or even death as the Taliban sought revenge against those who had worked with the British government during the war.
More than 100 British people included in Afghan data leak
10:59 17 July Breaking
The details of more than 100 British people – including spies and special forces – were included in a massive data leak that resulted in thousands of Afghans being secretly relocated to the UK.
Personal details of UK special forces and spies were included in Afghan data breach
BERLIN (AP) — Germany deported dozens of Afghan men to their homeland on Friday, the second time it has done so since the Taliban returned to power and the first since a new government pledging a tougher line on migration took office in Berlin.
German authorities said a flight took off Friday morning carrying 81 Afghans, all of them men who had previously come to judicial authorities’ attention and had asylum applications rejected.
Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the deportation was carried out with the help of Qatar and was preceded by weeks of negotiations. He also said there were contacts with Afghanistan, but didn’t elaborate.
More than 10 months ago, Germany’s previous government deported Afghan nationals to their homeland for the first time since the Taliban returned to power in 2021. Then-Chancellor Olaf Scholz vowed to step up deportations of failed asylum-seekers.
Merz noted that, while diplomatic relations between Germany and Afghanistan have not formally been broken off, Berlin does not recognize the Taliban government in Kabul.
“The decisive question is how one deals with this regime, and it will remain at technical coordination until further notice,” he said at a news conference in Berlin. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, visiting Paris, said that “there is no expansion of relations and no recognition of the regime there.”
The Interior Ministry said the government aims to carry out more deportations to Afghanistan, but didn’t specify when that might happen.
Just after he took office in early May, the government stationed more police at the border — stepping up border checks introduced by the Scholz government — and said some asylum-seekers trying to enter Europe’s biggest economy would be turned away. It has also suspended family reunions for many migrants.
Asylum applications declined from 329,120 in 2023 to 229,751 last year and have continued to fall this year.
“You can see from the figures that we are obviously on the right path, but we are not yet at the end of that path,” Merz said.
The Afghan deportation flight took off hours before German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt discussed migration with counterparts from five neighboring countries — France, Poland, Austria, Denmark and the Czech Republic — as well as the European Union’s commissioner responsible for migration, Magnus Brunner. Dobrindt hosted the meeting on the Zugspitze, Germany’s highest peak, on the Austrian border.
Dobrindt said the countries agree that the European migration system “must be hardened and sharpened,” with faster asylum proceedings and “return hubs” outside the EU.
“We wanted to send a signal that Germany is no longer sitting in the brakeman’s cab on migration issues in Europe, but is in the locomotive,” Dobrindt said.
Germany deports 81 Afghan men to their homeland in 2nd flight since the Taliban’s return
Germany’s interior minister has hosted five of his European counterparts to discuss ways of tightening the region’s asylum rules, as his country deported 81 Afghans to their Taliban-controlled homeland.
The European Union’s immigration system needed to be “tougher and stricter”, Minister Alexander Dobrindt said after Friday’s meeting in southern Germany with the interior ministers of France, Poland, Austria, the Czech Republic and Denmark, as well as EU Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner.
The cohort issued a five-page communique on their aims, which included the establishment of “return hubs” for holding people outside the EU, enabling asylum procedures in third countries, and allowing deportations to Afghanistan and Syria as standard practice.
All measures would require approval from Brussels.
“When we analyse what has been agreed here, it’s lofty ambitions, but not much detail about how they intend to pursue what’s in these five pages,” said Al Jazeera’s Dominic Kane, reporting from Berlin.
Ministers, he said, had talked about “the sorts of things that they agree on, but they know they can’t implement them themselves as unilateral decisions.”
Speaking after the meeting, Dobrindt said, “We wanted to send a signal that Germany is no longer sitting in the brakeman’s cab on migration issues in Europe, but is in the locomotive.”
Afghans deported
Hours before the meeting, Germany demonstrated just how serious it was about cracking down on migration by sending 81 Afghan nationals back to their homeland, prompting an outcry from rights organisations.
Amnesty International criticised the deportations, saying the situation in Afghanistan was “catastrophic” and that “extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances and torture are commonplace”.
Europe’s top economy had stopped deportations to Afghanistan and closed its embassy in Kabul following the Taliban movement’s return to power in 2021.
But Berlin resumed expulsions last year when the previous government of Olaf Scholz expelled 28 convicted Afghans.
Current Chancellor Friedrich Merz defended the expulsions of the 81 Afghan men, saying he was “grateful” to be able to deliver on promises made when entering government in May.
None of those deported “had a residence status any more. All asylum applications were legally rejected without further legal recourse”, he said at a news conference.
Bavaria state’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann said 15 of the deported Afghans had been incarcerated for crimes, including murder and manslaughter, sexual offences and property crimes.
The state of Baden-Wuerttemberg said 13 Afghans deported from there had been jailed for crimes including homicide, bodily harm, drug offences and serious arson.
In the wake of the announcement, the United Nations said no one should be sent back to Afghanistan, whatever their status.
The UN human rights commissioner called for an “immediate halt to the forcible return of all Afghan refugees and asylum-seekers”, highlighting the risks faced by returnees.
Source: Al Jazeera and news agencies
Germany and EU allies push for ‘tougher, stricter’ asylum rules
They were found to be eligible for sanctuary in the UK nine months ago due to his father’s former service alongside UK special forces – but they are still waiting, in fear for their long-term safety, to be brought to the UK.
On Tuesday, along with thousands of others, he received an email from the Ministry of Defence warning him that, due to a data loss in 2022, “some of the personal data associated with this email address may have been compromised”.
As he typed the family’s application reference number into the government’s checking system, a bright red warning sign flashed up alerting him that they were affected by the huge Afghan data leak, which has led to the names and contact information of 18,700 people with links to British forces being shared “in error”.
The catastrophic breach of Afghan applications to the MoD’s resettlement scheme was inadvertently shared by a member of the armed forces, potentially putting 100,000 people at risk of reprisals from the Taliban.
Rayan is one of around 2,000 people who have been evacuated from Afghanistan but haven’t yet arrived in the UK, to have been affected by the leak.
Learning that the breach could have put his family at risk was “an awful experience”, he told The Independent. The Taliban has already burnt down their family home and arrested some family members because of his father’s previous role.
He said: “At the moment, we are in fear of emails from the UK, we are afraid that they will reject us. I saw it said that some data had been released. The second email said we could check if our data had been breached.
“When I checked it, I found that our data was linked. It was a really awful experience. I feel like a ball in a football pitch with everyone kicking us from one side to the other”.
Rayan and his family have been waiting nine months for the UK to relocate them to safety (The Independent)
Now he is desperate for an answer to one urgent question: when will they be brought to safety?
The need to leave Pakistan is pressing. Three months ago, the family were arrested by Pakistani police and taken to a deportation centre, sparking fears they would be returned to the hands of the Taliban, he said.
Speaking from his hotel in Islamabad, which is being used by the UK government to house Afghans eligible for sanctuary in Britain, he said: “We have seen 24 families go from Pakistan to the UK but our family has been waiting here. Our visas expired, and at least three times, Pakistani police have tried to capture us.
“Once they arrested all of our family and took us to a deportation centre in Pakistan. It was a Sunday three months ago at around 10pm.
“We were inside our rooms and the manager told us they were asking about our visas. I showed them our permissions from the British High Commission in Pakistan and they said that was unacceptable.”
Rayan said he and his family were then taken to a deportation centre where they were threatened with being sent back to Afghanistan the next day.
Thousands of Afghans were evacuated in a covert operation after the catastrophic data leak, which led to the names and contact information of 18,700 people being shared in error (The Independent)
Luckily, he was able to pay a police officer to use his phone, and, after several attempts, got through to their caseworker, who confirmed their eligibility to be there.
“After around 30 hours, a diplomat came from the British High Commission and we were allowed out,” he said.
In total, 16 members of his family are now sharing three hotel rooms as they wait for relocation. Two babies have been born in the time that they have spent in limbo in Pakistan, one aged four months and the other seven months.
Each room has only a single bed, he said, leaving the rest of the family to sleep on mattresses on the floor.
With no money and their belongings lost to the fire, they have had to rely on the kindness of others to get by.
“When our children were born, we asked our caseworker if they could help with some supplies for them. We told them that our house had been burned down by the Taliban and we didn’t have any money. The weather was really cold in Pakistan and we didn’t have the money to buy things for our child.
“Unfortunately, we had to go to the other Afghan families, who helped us with some clothes for our daughter. They were a big size, but we didn’t have any other choice”.
When he first received the email from the MoD’s Afghan caseworker team on Tuesday, he was worried it might be retracting his family’s offer of safety.
But there is still no end in sight for the family, who must now continue their agonising wait to find out when they can come to the UK.
As well as those stuck in Pakistan, there are 5,400 people impacted by the data breach who the government has issued invitations to come to the UK, but are still in Afghanistan.
The government has been using hotels in Pakistan to house Afghans eligible to come to the UK for some years. However, the pathway through the country will not be available indefinitely.
In an MoD brief sent to the armed forces minister Luke Pollard on 3 December 2024, officials advised that “the government of Pakistan has stated its desire to end relocations through Pakistan by the end of 2025”.
Referring to the secret resettlement scheme set up in the wake of the data breach, they said: “It is no longer a safe assumption that we will enjoy the support of GOP [Pakistan’s government] for the duration of the programme”.
The Ministry of Defence has been contacted for comment.
‘We were lucky to escape Afghanistan alive – nine months later, we’re still waiting to be brought to safety’
As the 15-day deadline set by Tajik authorities for Afghan refugees nears its end, reports indicate that the government has already begun forcefully deporting more individuals. According to multiple sources, over 150 people were rounded up from local markets and public areas yesterday and deported from the country.
Among those deported are men, women, elderly individuals, and minors under the age of 18. In many cases, families have been separated—children deported while their parents remain in Tajikistan, or spouses removed while their partners and children are left behind. The abrupt and aggressive nature of the deportations has caused widespread distress among the Afghan refugee community.
What has raised particular concern is that the majority of those targeted hold legal refugee status. Many are registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and possess valid refugee cards. Several individuals are also in the process of being resettled to Canada, having active asylum applications under review.
While the real motive behind the forced deportations remains unclear and has not been officially disclosed by the Tajik government, many observers believe it may be linked to recent geopolitical developments. In particular, Russia’s formal recognition of the Taliban administration in Afghanistan appears to have influenced policy shifts across the region. Tajikistan, long known for harboring Afghan opposition figures and anti-Taliban sentiment, may now be aligning itself more closely with Moscow’s stance. Some analysts suggest that the presence of anti-Taliban groups in Tajikistan has prompted the government to begin expelling Afghan refugees as a gesture of regional alignment and political repositioning.
Most Afghan refugees in Tajikistan are resettled in Wahdat, a district located approximately 20 kilometers east of the capital, Dushanbe. Formerly known as Kofarnihon, Wahdat is one of the more densely populated areas of the country and has become a central hub for refugee communities. Despite its proximity to the capital, Wahdat has limited infrastructure and resources to support large populations, making the sudden deportations even more devastating for the displaced families and their host communities.
In response to the escalating situation, several online petitions have begun circulating, urging the Canadian government to expedite resettlement processes or initiate emergency evacuations for those whose asylum cases are already under review. Human rights advocates and refugee support groups have described the situation as chaotic and alarming, calling for immediate international intervention to prevent further harm to vulnerable Afghan families.
Despite the presence of the United Nations and other international advocacy organizations in Tajikistan, their influence appears limited. The Tajik government has largely ignored calls for compliance with international treaties and refugee protection standards, raising concerns about the effectiveness of international oversight and the lack of accountability in ongoing deportations.
This latest wave of deportations follows a controversial 15-day ultimatum issued earlier this month by the Tajik government, ordering all Afghan refugees to leave the country. As reported previously, the directive has triggered widespread fear and confusion, even among those holding valid residency permits and refugee documentation. Tajik authorities have since intensified efforts to detain and deport Afghan nationals—many of whom are former civil servants, military personnel, or individuals associated with the previous Afghan government—despite ongoing asylum applications and the well-documented risks they face upon return to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.
Tajikistan Begins Forced Deportation of Afghan Refugees Ahead of Expiry of 15-Day Deadline
The Islamabad High Court has rejected a petition filed by a defense lawyer seeking to halt the forced deportation of Afghan migrants, stating that it does not intervene in government policies.
According to Pakistan’s Express Tribune newspaper, the court dismissed the petition on Thursday, July 17. The petition was submitted by lawyer Umer Ijaz Gilani on behalf of a coalition known as the Supporters of Afghan Migrants.
In its response, the court stated that reviewing or interfering with government decisions does not fall within its judicial authority. It emphasized that immigration policies are within the jurisdiction of the executive branch. This ruling comes amid a renewed wave of forced deportations of Afghan migrants, with thousands already being compelled to leave Pakistan.
In recent months, Pakistan has adopted a tougher stance toward Afghan migrants. Since last year, the government has begun deporting thousands of undocumented — and in some cases, even registered — Afghan refugees. This policy has drawn widespread international criticism, with human rights organizations repeatedly expressing concern about the humanitarian conditions faced by Afghan migrants in Pakistan.
With the rejection of this petition, the deportation process is expected to continue — and possibly intensify — in the coming weeks. Rights groups warn that many deportees may face serious risks upon return to Afghanistan, especially given the current socio-political instability there.
As Pakistan proceeds with its migration policy, the international community is likely to keep a close eye on the humanitarian consequences. Continued pressure from global human rights bodies may influence future decisions, but for now, the government’s stance remains unchanged.
Islamabad High Court Rejects Petition to Stop Forced Deportation of Afghan Migrants
Afghanistan Peace Campaign
