Refusal to disclose names could have legal consequences, Afghan Inquiry chair tells Mercer

Johnny Mercer's repeated refusal to hand over names of what he called "multiple officers" who told him about allegations to the Afghanistan Inquiry was "unacceptable", according to the inquiry chair.

The Minister for Veterans' Affairs has been told his actions could give rise to legal consequences and he must decide which side he is on – assisting the inquiry fully or being part of a wall of silence.  

The comments came from the chair of the ongoing inquiry at the conclusion of a day-and-a-half of evidence from the former Army officer.

Inquiry chair Sir Charles Haddon-Cave thanked Mr Mercer for giving a great deal of evidence which he described as very clear and candid.

The minister again repeated that he felt he was not being told the truth as he looked into allegations of war crimes by special forces in Afghanistan.

Mr Mercer told the Afghanistan Inquiry he felt "something stinks" over an alleged cover-up of murders by UK special forces, but he was unable to disprove it.

The Veterans' Affairs Minister told the independent investigation he was aware of an "odour" of a special forces unit, known to the inquiry as UKSF1, shooting civilians who did not pose a threat when it took over operations in Afghanistan in 2009.

The former Army officer said he was party to conversations about the allegations while training to be a member of the special forces, but said he considered them at the time to be "rumours".

In 2020, an article in the Sunday Times revealed Ministry of Defence documentation that he had not been shown.

Mr Mercer told the inquiry: "This is the point where I went within the department thinking 'there's a bit of resistance to discovering what actually happened here' to it became clear that people were working against me because I had specifically asked, as you covered yesterday, to see all documentation and evidence relating to these issues."

Lord Justice Haddon-Cave told him: "You need to decide which side you are really on, Mr Mercer. Is it assisting the inquiry fully, as Mr Glasgow said, and the public interest and the national interest, getting to the truth of these allegations quickly, for everyone's sake?

"Or being part of, what is in effect... a wall of silence... this wall of silence is obstructing the inquiry and access to the truth?"