The MoD Data Leak Scandal: A Cover-Up That Weakens the Core of Our Democracy
19/07/25
Embedded Files
THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE MAIN BUILDING, LONDON, IMAGE: HARLAND QUARRINGTON
At midday on Tuesday, July 17, Lewis Goodall broke one of the most shocking stories in modern British history. This story detailed an unprecedented cover-up of a major security breach that put at risk the lives of many people who had risked everything to help us in Afghanistan. Parliament was denied the ability to hold the government to account thanks to out-of-control courts, and many questions remain unanswered, leading to the conclusion that a full national inquiry is imperative to prevent this blatant abuse of power from happening again.
The issue at the core of this scandal is a data breach which took place in 2022. The data of around 18,000 people within Afghanistan who had worked with Western forces had been compromised, and thus they were open to the wrath of the newly established Taliban government. When considering the family members of those who had worked with us, this catastrophic error affected 100,000 individuals. It is not uncommon, given these circumstances, for a government to seek an injunction to ensure the safety of as many people as possible before the media reports on the story. This is the exact justification that the Sunak government used when it initially sought the injunction. However, the judiciary, in this case Justice Robin Knowles, suggested the government go further and impose a super-injunction (meaning that journalists cannot even report they have a story under injunction). The government, seemingly not believing its luck, accepted this under the guise of it being a time-limited imposition.
However, at the subsequent hearing, the government significantly shifted the goalposts of the injunction. The Sunak government only proposed the evacuation of 1,000 people from Afghanistan, an almost negligible fraction of the total. One would be forgiven for thinking that this would mean the government would discharge the injunction; yet, instead, they said they would not, because the Taliban may not be aware of the dataset, and we should not alert them. Despite a series of questions from Goodall and his legal team, the government were unable to clarify how it would be proved that this condition had been met, and thus he was left in limbo. As this process continued, the government began to bring more people over than they had initially planned to, seemingly in an effort to prolong this court order and save themselves the political embarrassment.
This process came to an end only this week when the super-injunction was lifted. Following Labour’s ascent to power last year, John Healey (who was aware of the story while in opposition but unable to tell Keir Starmer) commissioned a report into the factual basis of the super-injunction. This report found that the basis of the super-injunction had been overestimated and that the injunction could, in fact, be lifted. Finally, this national scandal could be reported on.
JOURNALIST LEWIS GOODALL WHO FOUGHT FOR 2 YEARS TO RELEASE THE TRUTH REGARDING THE DATA LEAK , IMAGE: THE NEWS AGENTS
So, where do we go from here? The magnitude of this scandal and subsequent cover-up leaves many questions unanswered. Firstly, as a matter of urgency, a public inquiry with full statutory powers must be established. This must have the full weight of the law behind it, and all of those involved must be held to account. This enquiry must ensure that Parliamentarians are never again deceived in such a way again, and that the victims of the data breach receive justice. Secondly, we must be informed of the number of super-injunctions currently in place, and there must be an immediate review of all of these to assess their propriety. This will allow Parliament greater transparency into the working of the executive branch and may unearth scandals of even greater magnitude.
In addition, I believe this story poses profound questions about the judiciary's role in our political system. Was it indeed proper for Justice Robin Knowles to suggest a more severe injunction to the government in the first place? During many of the various hearings that Lewis Goodall attended, it was common for the already closed hearing to become even more secretive, with not even the KC challenging the government being allowed into this extra-secretive session. This appears to be in breach of one of the core principles of equal justice and, in my view, merits an urgent review.
At its core, this story is a testament to the highest quality of journalism. Lewis Goodall, along with others later, have persevered and exposed one of the most consequential stories of our time. The efforts to deprive Parliament of its rightful role in scrutinising the executive have been exposed, and a process of accountability must now begin. The ramifications of this are yet unknown, but should Parliament want to preserve its constitutional role, it must investigate every element of this thoroughly. Accountability is vital in politics, especially at a time of growing anti-establishment sentiment, and Parliament must now use its powers to ensure that it achieves justice not only for itself but for the brave men and women whose lives were put at risk due to this astounding level of incompetence.
Google Sites
Report abuse