The British government has today appointed General Sir Gwyn Jenkins as First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff. That makes him the most senior officer in the Royal Navy.
But this announcement, made by Defence Secretary John Healey and confirmed by the King, comes amid serious, unresolved allegations that Jenkins failed to report suspected war crimes and later blocked the relocation of key witnesses.
It is a decision that raises grave concerns about the state of accountability in British military leadership.
According to a BBC Panorama investigation, Jenkins was made aware in 2011 of credible claims that members of the Special Air Service (SAS) had executed handcuffed detainees during operations in Afghanistan. Instead of referring this information to the Royal Military Police, as required by the Armed Forces Act 2006, Jenkins reportedly classified the evidence – locking it away and ensuring no investigation took place.
A decade later, as head of UK Special Forces, Jenkins allegedly oversaw the rejection of hundreds of relocation requests from Afghan commandos – many of them from CF 333 and ATF 444 – who had served alongside British troops and possessed direct knowledge of those very operations. These rejections, many of which were later overturned, effectively prevented potential witnesses from reaching British soil and testifying to the ongoing public inquiry into the Afghan campaign.
Taken together, these actions appear to form a disturbing pattern, one that Jenkins himself denies. But, if they turn out to be true, raises the question not only of negligence, but of obstruction.
Under English law, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice does not require success – only intent and action. The failure to report credible allegations of unlawful killings, combined with the exclusion of those who might testify about them, meets the threshold for further inquiry.
Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) wrote to the Royal Military Police ‘s Provost Marshal – Brigadier S L Pringle-Smith – in November 2023 requesting exactly that: a formal investigation into whether Jenkins’ actions amount to criminal wrongdoing. They said that the Defence Serious Crime Command (DSCC) was aware of our request. We wrote to them but did not hear back.
But it seems, rather than initiate a probe, the Ministry of Defence instead rewarded Jenkins with the Navy’s top job.
The Afghan Inquiry, currently underway, lacks the power to compel foreign witnesses to attend. Denying relocation to those who could give critical testimony makes those absences systemic, not accidental. Internal MoD communications reportedly show that civil servants were overruled by a UKSF officer hand-picked by Jenkins. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer has called the process “deeply inappropriate” and a “significant conflict of interest.” Some of the Afghan commandos denied sanctuary were later killed or tortured by the Taliban.
These are not unfortunate footnotes to an otherwise impressive career. They are core questions about whether Britain’s most senior military leaders can operate with impunity. Whether the rule of law can be sidelined for institutional convenience.
It is not acceptable that a lance corporal can be court-martialled for falsifying travel claims while a general is promoted despite facing credible allegations of obstructing justice in cases of alleged murder, without the air being cleared of the accusations. This is wrong. Military hierarchy demands responsibility at the top, not just obedience at the bottom.
General Jenkins has not been charged with any offence. The Ministry of Defence maintains there is “no evidence” of obstruction. But evidence can only be found where there is the will to look—and at present, that will appears totally absent.
Jenkins now serves not only as First Sea Lord, but also as Aide-de-Camp to the King. That both appointments have gone ahead without independent scrutiny of these allegations is not merely a failure of oversight.
It is a moral failure of state.
The armed forces claim to uphold values of honour, integrity, and justice. If those are to mean anything, the rule of law must apply not just in theory but in action. Silence is not integrity. Suppression is not honour. And promotion in the face of unresolved and credible allegations – by the BBC no less – is not justice.
AOAV approached General Jenkins for comment. None was received at the time of publication.
Did you find this story interesting? Please support AOAV's work and donate.
Donate