T4K3.news

Grant Shapps defends Afghan data breach secrecy

Sir Grant Shapps states the decision to withhold details was to prioritize saving lives.

July 18, 2025 at 11:08 AM

Sir Grant Shapps says his focus was on saving lives after Afghan data breach

The former defense secretary supports keeping the Afghan data breach details hidden to save lives.

Grant Shapps defends secrecy over Afghan data breach

Former defense secretary Grant Shapps defended his choice to keep a data breach secret involving thousands of Afghans and British officials. He stated that his primary goal was to protect lives, particularly as the Taliban targeted individuals who collaborated with the UK. In a recent interview, he claimed that the decision to maintain a super-injunction was justified, emphasizing the risks of exposing the identities of those in danger. The injunction was lifted earlier this week, drawing attention to the incident where nearly 19,000 Afghan details were leaked in February 2022, including sensitive information about British operatives.

Key Takeaways

✔️

Grant Shapps claims keeping the data breach secret was justified to save lives.

✔️

Nearly 19,000 Afghans had their details leaked in a security breach.

✔️

The super-injunction blocking reporting was lifted earlier this week.

✔️

Shapps emphasizes that exposing these details could have led to fatalities.

✔️

The decision raises important questions about government accountability.

✔️

Public trust may be eroded by prioritizing secrecy over transparency.

"Erring on the side of caution was entirely justified."

Grant Shapps defends his decision to keep the breach secret to protect lives.

"I'd much rather now be in this interview explaining why a super-injunction was required than being in this interview explaining why I failed to act and people were murdered."

Shapps explains his rationale for the super-injunction after the data leak.

"The risks started to lessen; I thought it would have ended last year."

Shapps addresses the timing of the super-injunction's lifting.

"Even a hint of this getting around meant the risks were incredibly high."

Shapps on why the intelligence committee was not informed about the breach.

Shapps' defense of the secretive measures highlights a tension between government transparency and national security. By prioritizing safety, he suggests that withholding information is sometimes necessary in crisis situations. However, this raises critical questions about accountability and the balance of power within government communications. Individuals affected by such decisions may view this as a breach of trust, leading to public outcry surrounding governmental practices in data security and privacy.

Highlights

Saving lives sometimes means keeping secrets.
Secrecy was necessary to prevent fatalities.
The risks of exposure were incredibly high.
Prioritizing safety over transparency can erode trust.

Secrecy over Afghan data breach raises accountability concerns

The decision to keep the data breach secret has sparked criticism regarding government transparency and accountability, especially as lives were put at risk due to potential Taliban retaliation.

As security and privacy issues evolve, governments must find a new balance between caution and openness.

🏷️

data breach afghanistan national security politics defense human rights

Enjoyed this? Let your friends know!