A public inquiry into alleged unlawful killings by British special forces in Afghanistan has heard that concerns about possible war crimes by SAS troops were not referred to military police because senior figures feared an investigation could damage morale and disrupt operations.

The Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan is examining allegations of unlawful activity by UK Special Forces during deliberate detention operations in Afghanistan between mid-2010 and mid-2013. The inquiry is also reviewing whether concerns raised within the military and the Ministry of Defence were properly handled, and whether previous investigations were adequate.

According to newly released evidence, a former senior officer in UK Special Forces, identified only by the cipher N2252, told the inquiry that allegations involving the SAS were not passed to the Royal Military Police at the time. The inquiry heard that one reason for this was concern that a police investigation could negatively affect troop morale and interfere with ongoing operations.

The evidence has raised serious questions about accountability within Britain’s elite military units. Under military law and the laws of armed conflict, officers are expected to report credible suspicions of war crimes. Critics argue that failing to refer such concerns to investigators may have allowed allegations of unlawful killings to remain hidden for years.

The inquiry is looking into claims that SAS soldiers killed Afghan civilians and detainees during night raids and later submitted misleading accounts of those operations. These allegations have not yet been proven, and the inquiry has not made final findings of criminal liability. However, the latest testimony adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that senior officers were aware of concerns about the conduct of special forces in Afghanistan much earlier than previously acknowledged.

Reports presented to the inquiry have also pointed to troubling operational patterns. One recurring concern involved Afghan men being separated during raids and later killed after allegedly producing weapons. Witnesses have suggested that in some cases, there were fewer weapons recovered than people killed, raising questions about whether the official explanations matched the reality on the ground.

The inquiry has also heard that Afghan partner forces became reluctant to work with the British special forces unit under scrutiny. Evidence indicated that concerns over civilian deaths had grown serious enough for then Afghan President Hamid Karzai to raise the matter with NATO commanders.

The Ministry of Defence has said it remains committed to supporting the independent inquiry while also providing support to current and former members of the armed forces. It has maintained that the inquiry should be allowed to complete its work before full conclusions are drawn.

The case has placed the UK’s military accountability system under renewed scrutiny. For years, allegations of unlawful killings by British forces in Afghanistan have been politically sensitive, with supporters of the armed forces warning against unfair treatment of soldiers who operated in extreme conditions. But human rights lawyers and campaigners argue that protecting morale cannot be used as a reason to delay or avoid investigation into suspected war crimes.

The inquiry’s findings could have far-reaching consequences for the Ministry of Defence, the Royal Military Police and the leadership of UK Special Forces. Beyond the specific allegations, the central question is whether Britain’s military chain of command acted lawfully and transparently when confronted with signs of possible criminal conduct.

At its heart, the inquiry is not only about what happened during raids in Afghanistan more than a decade ago. It is also about whether elite military units can be held accountable when their actions are hidden behind secrecy, national security and operational pressure. The latest evidence suggests that the fear of damaging morale may have taken priority over the duty to investigate some of the gravest allegations a military force can face