By Ben Kerrigan-
The Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, Johnny Mercer,(pictured) has been given a stark ultimatum: reveal the sources behind allegations of British troops’ involvement in war crimes in Afghanistan or potentially face imprisonment.
Mercer, who essentially conceded last month during the public inquiry into the allegations, has been at the center of controversy for his steadfast refusal to divulge the names of “multiple officers” who confided in him about alleged unlawful killings by members of the SAS (Special Air Service) between 2010 and 2013.
Despite acknowledging his belief in these grave accusations, Mercer has adamantly declined to cooperate with the inquiry’s demands for transparency.
The pressure escalated when Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, chair of the Afghanistan inquiry, issued a deadline of April 5th for Mercer to provide a witness statement containing the names of his sources.
Failure to comply, Haddon-Cave warned, could result in criminal charges, including imprisonment and fines. Mercer has until April 3rd to appeal, citing inability or unreasonableness to comply with the notice.
Former army chief Gen Lord Dannatt voiced support for Mercer, asserting that the minister is diligently seeking the consent of whistleblowers before revealing their identities.
Dannatt emphasized the paramount importance of maintaining trust in the confidentiality of whistleblower communications.
Similarly, former British soldier Robert Campbell, who was exonerated after years of investigations, echoed the sentiment, highlighting the vital role of MPs in safeguarding the interests of service personnel.
However, amidst the unfolding legal showdown, questions loom over Mercer’s allegiance to the inquiry’s quest for truth.
Haddon-Cave admonished Mercer, urging him to decide whether he stands for aiding the inquiry and the national interest or perpetuating a “wall of silence” that obstructs justice.
Mercer’s journey into the heart of the controversy began in 2017 when he received alarming warnings from military associates about the gravity of the allegations.
The inquiry, meanwhile, has reassured Mercer of robust procedures to protect witnesses’ identities. Yet, the standoff persists as Mercer faces a critical juncture: balancing legal obligations with ethical imperatives.