Connect with us

Published

on

Veterans minister Johnny Mercer has been told he faces going to prison if he does not reveal the names of those who told him of alleged murders carried out by special forces in Afghanistan.

Sir Charles Haddon-Cave, the chairman of the Afghanistan Inquiry, has given the MP for Plymouth until 5 April to provide a witness statement with the names of those in question.

Mr Mercer has repeatedly refused to hand over the names of “multiple officers” who have told him of allegations of murder and a cover-up in Afghanistan, saying he was not willing to compromise his “integrity”.

The Afghanistan inquiry was launched in 2022 to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by the British Armed Forces during deliberate detention operations in the country between 2010 and 2013.

Mr Mercer gave evidence to the inquiry last month when he revealed “multiple officers” had told him about allegations of murder and the subsequent cover-up during his time as a backbench MP.

The minister told counsel to the inquiry Oliver Glasgow KC last month: “The one thing you can hold on to is your integrity and I will be doing that with these individuals.”

Politics live: Labour frontbencher hands over cheque from ‘Bank of Chicken’

More on Afghanistan

But during his evidence to the probe last month, Sir Charles told Mr Mercer his decision to “refuse to answer legitimate questions… at a public inquiry” were “disappointing… surprising… and completely unacceptable”.

The inquiry pointed out that Mr Mercer was served with a Section 21 notice on 13 March, which compels him to hand over the names. The inquiry has insisted will be “treated in confidence” but that a failure to comply without reasonable excuse would be “a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment and/or a fine.”

Sir Charles also said the High Court could enforce the order through contempt of court proceedings, which “may result in imprisonment”.

Policy of executions

The inquiry is examining whether a special forces unit, known as UKSF1, had a policy of executing males of “fighting age” who posed no threat in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013.

Afghan families have accused UK special forces of conducting a “campaign of murder” against civilians and that senior officers and personnel at the Ministry of Defence “sought to prevent adequate investigation”.

A British soldier is silhouetted as he walks with his machine gun on a roof top of a residential house in the village Qari Sahib, Nad Ali district, Helmend province, southern Afghanistan, Monday, Feb. 15, 2010 (AP Photo/Altaf Qadri)
Image:
Afghan families have accused UK special forces of conducting a ‘campaign of murder’ against civilians. Pic: AP

Sir Charles has also told Mr Mercer that if he believed it unreasonable for him to hand over the names, or if he was unable to comply with the order, he would have to make submissions in writing by 3 April.

‘Wall of silence’

He previously told Mr Mercer: “You need to decide which side you are really on, Mr Mercer.

“Is it assisting the inquiry fully… and the public interest and the national interest in getting to the truth of these allegations quickly, for everyone’s sake, or being part of what is, in effect … a wall of silence – and this wall of silence is obstructing the inquiry and access to the truth.

“And doing so because of, if I may say so, a misguided understanding of the term integrity and an inappropriate sense of loyalty.”

Read more:
Tractors descend on Parliament over ‘betrayal’ of British farmers in post-Brexit trade deals

China responsible for two ‘malicious’ cyber attack campaigns in UK, says Dowden

Two Royal Military Police investigations, codenamed Operation Northmoor and Operation Cestro, are due to be examined at the inquiry.

Operation Northmoor was a £10m investigation that was established in 2014 to examine allegations of executions by special forces, including those of children.

No charges were brought under the investigation.

Operation Cestro brought about the referral of three soldiers to the Service Prosecuting Authority, but none of them were prosecuted.

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Published

on

By

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

The CARF regulation, which brings crypto under global tax reporting standards akin to traditional finance, marks a crucial turning point.

Continue Reading

Politics

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Published

on

By

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

The nascent real-world tokenized assets track prices but do not provide investors the same legal rights as holding the underlying instruments.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Rachel Reeves has hinted that taxes are likely to be raised this autumn after a major U-turn on the government’s controversial welfare bill.

Sir Keir Starmer’s Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill passed through the House of Commons on Tuesday after multiple concessions and threats of a major rebellion.

MPs ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to universal credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.

Initially aimed at saving £5.5bn, it now leaves the government with an estimated £5.5bn black hole – close to breaching Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules set out last year.

Read more:
Yet another fiscal ‘black hole’? Here’s why this one matters

Success or failure: One year of Keir in nine charts

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma

In an interview with The Guardian, the chancellor did not rule out tax rises later in the year, saying there were “costs” to watering down the welfare bill.

“I’m not going to [rule out tax rises], because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that,” Ms Reeves told the outlet.

More on Rachel Reeves

“We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.

“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”

Meanwhile, The Times reported that, ahead of the Commons vote on the welfare bill, Ms Reeves told cabinet ministers the decision to offer concessions would mean taxes would have to be raised.

The outlet reported that the chancellor said the tax rises would be smaller than those announced in the 2024 budget, but that she is expected to have to raise tens of billions more.

It comes after Ms Reeves said she was “totally” up to continuing as chancellor after appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why was the chancellor crying at PMQs?

Criticising Sir Keir for the U-turns on benefit reform during PMQs, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.

Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she would, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”

In her first comments after the incident, Ms Reeves said she was having a “tough day” before adding: “People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday.

“Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Reeves is ‘totally’ up for the job

Sir Keir also told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby on Thursday that he “didn’t appreciate” that Ms Reeves was crying in the Commons.

“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said. “That’s what it was yesterday.

“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”

Continue Reading

Trending