Son of a father exposed in an extensive UK data breach has told BBC that deporting him back to Afghanistan could pose life-threatening danger, with the Taliban potentially using leaked information against him.
Sensitive information–including names, phone numbers and emails of Afghan applicants–was compromised during a data breach in early 2022 when an accidental mistake by a British defence official sent out thousands of Afghan applicants’ records in a spreadsheet sent via email. Although this breach occurred in February 2022, its existence remained hidden under a “super-injunction” until July 2025 when courts lifted this gag order and eventually came to light when courts lifted it altogether. Our video provides more context. For additional reading go here or read The Times/AP News for coverage
The UK government had responded by initiating a covert resettlement scheme known as Afghanistan Response Route (ARR), designed to protect those most at risk from Taliban reprisals. By mid-2025, around 6,900 eligible under this scheme had been relocated according to court documents (AP News +4 Wikipedia +4 WP +4)
However, many Afghans whose names were in the leaked database remain fearful for their safety.
One such case involves the father who his son described as being terrified to face deportation. His appeal to the BBC highlights the human consequences of breach; specifically highlighting its emotional toll and anxiety-inducing effects that continue to burden families caught up in this ordeal.
Legal challenges to the scandal have also ensued; over 665 Afghans have filed claims against the UK Ministry of Defence and are demanding accountability and protection guarantees from data breach and privacy violation, according to The Financial Times and The Times respectively.
Advocacy groups insist that deporting vulnerable individuals exposed by the leak and who thus find their safety compromised would violate fundamental human rights.
This incident has reignited debate surrounding governments’ use of super-injunctions. One such order, designed to prevent public disclosure of both its breach and existence, effectively prevented media scrutiny and parliamentary oversight for nearly two years. High Court Judge Martin Chamberlain strongly criticized its impact on democratic accountability when lifting it; The Times, The Washington Post, AP News all reported this ruling as well.
Critics charge that the delay and secrecy in notifying those affected have allowed the Taliban to exploit leaked data with insufficient safeguards in place to protect those most at risk; campaigners advocate providing adequate protection rather than blame or deportation as the means for effective outcomes.
Families like that of the individual named by Reuters experience the impact of deportation to be highly personal. His son told BBC, in a warning statement: “if deported he may be hunted down or captured”, thus stressing how immediate and life-threatening UK authorities’ removal could be for his father’s well being.