The Ministry of Defence has admitted it has no dedicated unit to investigate civilian deaths caused by British military operations – an omission that critics say reveals the UK’s failure to take responsibility for the human cost of its wars.
In response to a Freedom of Information request submitted by London-based charity Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) and exclusively seen by Declassified, the MoD stated that it “does not currently have a specific branch tasked solely with assessing and investigating allegations of civilian harm.”
The admission comes despite longstanding criticism over the UK’s lack of transparency and accountability in cases of civilian casualties linked to its overseas military campaigns.
Earlier this year, the Royal Air Force refused to disclose how many individuals – civilian or otherwise – were killed or injured during Rishi Sunak’s airstrikes in Yemen in 2024.
Citing national security and the sensitivity of targeting procedures, the RAF declined to provide casualty figures in response to another FOI request from AOAV.
The Ministry stated that releasing such data could undermine future operations by revealing analytical methods, yet it failed to offer any independent verification of its claims that civilian harm was minimised.
MoD statements have merely reiterated that the strikes were conducted overnight and that no evidence of civilian casualties had been found – assertions that could not be independently confirmed.
A MoD spokesperson said: “We have no evidence that the UK’s 2024 strikes on Houthi military facilities, which were in line with international law, resulted in civilian casualties.”
While Keir Starmer is yet to order direct strikes on Yemen as prime minister, the RAF has provided aerial refueling to US jets involved in last month’s raids on the Houthi group.
At least 28 civilians were killed and 66 injured in those strikes, according to the Yemen Data Project.
Donald Trump’s national security adviser said in a leaked Signal group chat that a missile “collapsed” the home of a “girlfriend” of an alleged Houthi figure, indicating that civilians were deliberately targeted.
RELATED
Copying Trump?
Despite the Trump administration’s ambiguous approach to international law, the MoD is drawing on recent efforts by the United States to overhaul its own systems for monitoring civilian harm.
“We are following the US’s Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) developments closely,” the MoD noted in the FOI, “and conducting our own review to identify whether improvements can be made to our own practices.”
This refers to the US Department of Defense’s CHMR Action Plan, which was published in August 2022 and outlined how it would improve oversight, reporting and response mechanisms in relation to civilian harm.
The reforms included commitments to enhanced data systems, clearer guidance, and the establishment of a dedicated civilian protection centre.
At the time, a coalition of civil society organisations urged the UK government to introduce similar measures.
In its FOI response, the MoD insisted that it adheres to the principles of International Humanitarian Law, including necessity, proportionality, distinction and humanity.
It said that experts in targeting conduct assessments to examine whether the effects of UK military strikes matched those anticipated, including any unintended consequences such as civilian casualties.
When allegations emerge and contain sufficient evidence, these are cross-referenced with operational records to determine whether British forces were active in the area in question.
If an allegation is deemed credible, or new evidence arises regarding a previous incident, the MoD said it will assess whether UK targeting could have caused the harm claimed.
Legal claims of civilian harm are referred to the Directorate of Judicial Engagement Policy, the Ministry’s legacy investigations department.
RELATED
‘Ultimate test’
However, the adequacy of these mechanisms was called into question during an information tribunal hearing in November 2023.
The hearing followed legal action by investigative group Airwars, which challenged the MoD’s refusal to release further details about the death of a civilian in Syria on 26 March 2018.
At the time, the MoD had publicly admitted to just one civilian death during its entire campaign against Islamic State in Syria and Iraq – a figure widely viewed by experts and officials as implausibly low.
According to reports in the Guardian, senior MoD official Alexander Oliver was unable during the tribunal to clarify what standards of proof were applied in civilian harm investigations, or whether such allegations were being systematically recorded or tracked.
Emily Tripp, the director of Airwars, told Declassified: “The RAF conducted airstrikes in Syria last month and have actively been involved in airstrikes in Yemen in the last year. These aren’t hypothetical questions that are being asked. Having a dedicated team to track and respond to civilian harm allegations is the ultimate test for a state’s commitment to protecting civilians.
“The failure to have such a system in place, despite decades of active military engagement, years of pressure from civil society and others on this very topic, and a long list of civilian harm allegations reflects just how far behind the UK is in investing appropriately in civilian protection.”
Asked whether any changes had been made since that hearing, the MoD declined to comment directly, citing the ongoing nature of the tribunal. However, it stated that it remains “closely involved with reviewing the US CHMR process and reviewing and analysing our current processes, which may identify where improvements could be made.”
In a letter to Liberal Democrat MP Richard Foord in May 2023, the then armed forces minister James Heappey stated that the MoD was “committed to working with civil society organisations” and learning from the US CHMR reforms.
The MoD’s internal review of its processes – spurred by pressure from civil society and growing international standards – may signal the beginning of change. But for campaigners and families of potential victims, the UK’s approach remains far from transparent.
A MoD spokesperson said: “We always seek to minimise the risk of civilian casualties through our rigorous targeting processes and remain committed to investigating all credible allegations of civilian casualties.”
