Senior SAS figures defended the regiment last night after a High Court inquiry into alleged war crimes released more damning claims.
The former officers accused rival Special Boat Service commanders of having an agenda against the SAS and criticised the court for its ‘selective’ release of testimonies.
The fightback was led by former SAS Commanding Officer Richard Williams, a staunch critic of the ‘lawfare’ targeting British troops who served in Afghanistan and other conflicts such as Northern Ireland.
Last night the Inquiry, being held at the Royal Courts of Justice, released its biggest batch of documents and testimonies to date.
These were provided in closed sessions by senior Special Forces officers and civil servants employed in sensitive roles at the time when the suspicious shootings allegedly took place.
The evidence points to, but by no means proves, so-called Extra Judicial Killings by the SAS targeting insurgents from 2010 to 2013.
Soldiers found to have possibly committed EJKs could face criminal investigations – so too any officers who may have covered up any illegal actions.
Elite SAS troops were ordered to eliminate the Taliban’s networks of Improvised Explosive Devices
BBC Panorama documentaries have accused the SAS of conducting Extra Judicial Killings in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The regiment’s most celebrated action was the storming of the Iranian Embassy in Knightsbridge in May 1980.
Colonel Williams, who led the SAS from 2005 to 2008, demanded to know why the Inquiry had not published evidence supporting the regiment’s actions.
The Mail understands senior SAS officers and a former Director of UK Special Forces have provided testimony contextualising these incidents.
As yet, these testimonies have not been published. Last night, the Inquiry shared material that appears to support allegations the SAS may have acted outside their Rules of Engagement.
Speaking exclusively to the Mail, Colonel Williams said: ‘This very selective release of interpretations and judgements made by inexperienced staff officers reads like a one-sided, agenda-driven version of events.
‘These officers were thousands of miles from combat tragedies. With no counter narrative or accounts provided by SAS soldiers on the ground appears judgemental.
‘Hardly a shining example of transparency or fairness and a very odd way for a serious independent inquiry to behave.’
The Inquiry Relating to Afghanistan began hearing evidence in 2023. Since then, scores of witnesses have provided evidence in closed and open sessions.
Most SAS and SBS witnesses have given testimony behind closed doors due to restrictions around their identity and security classifications surrounding operations.
The evidence released last night included a description of a soldier supposedly ‘murdering’ Afghan captives. However, the evidence may be no more than hearsay. The account was second hand and was never tested as part of a criminal investigation.
It said a British unit: ‘Cleared a compound and then placed all personnel [Local Nationals] in one room for safety. While being guarded another soldier entered the room and opened fire.
‘He was jumped on but it did result in a number of those in the room being killed. The incident was covered up.’
The unsubstantiated claim was made by a Special Forces trooper from a different unit.
In a separate incident, a soldier was said to have opened fire beneath a mosquito net beneath which women and children were taking cover. Again, the testimony was second-hand.
Documents released by the Inquiry last night claimed ‘the incident was covered up and the individual who did the shooting was allegedly given some sort of award to make it look legitimate’.
The Inquiry also heard that a senior officer at Special Forces headquarters in London intended to notify the Royal Military Police about such incidents, only to change his mind.
The high ranking commander, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, claimed he was appalled by allegations of Extra-Judicial Killings.
Yet at the moment of reckoning, when he could have filed a report to RMP himself, he kept quiet fearing that contacting detectives would harm his career.
The witness said: ‘I believed it would have had an adverse impact on my promotion prospects and career longevity. I wish to express my regret that I did not make a report to SIB [Special Investigation Branch in 2011.’
The judge-led Inquiry is expected to hear further evidence long into 2026 and possibly into 2027. The publication of its findings could be followed by a criminal investigation by the Metropolitan Police.
It is alleged the SAS killed more than 80 Afghans in suspicious circumstances in remote compounds in Helmand Province during the long British campaign there.
Approaching 500 British soldiers lost their lives in Afghanistan following the Al Qaeda attacks on the US on 11th September 2001.
The SAS were sent to the country to target the enemy’s Improvised Explosive Device (IED networks).
Evidence provided by four witnesses who held key posts within United Kingdom Special Forces were released last night. For security reasons they were identified by cyphers used by the Inquiry – N1466, N5461, N2444 and N1803.
Last night, the Ministry of Defence said: ‘The government is fully committed to supporting the Independent Inquiry Relating to Afghanistan as it continues its work and we are hugely grateful to former and current employees that have given evidence.
‘We also remain committed to providing the support that our Special Forces deserve, while maintaining the transparency and accountability that the British people rightly expect from their armed forces.
