Two years after the Afghanistan Inquiry Compensation Scheme was set up, Defence documents released under freedom of information laws reveal that no decisions to pay compensation have been made.
Claims by Afghans who say they were victims of Australian war crimes, and claims by their families, are still being considered by the appointed compensation advocate. Other claimants, including Afghans who suffered horrific injuries they say were inflicted by Australian soldiers, are at a loss after receiving letters rejecting their compensation claims.
One man who was refused compensation, Ghulam Jailani, lost his eye and suffered multiple gunshot wounds to his chest during a raid in Kakrag, Uruzgan, in 2006. He and many other locals say Australian soldiers indiscriminately shot at villagers.
After submitting a claim, he received a letter from the Afghanistan Inquiry Response Task Force (AIRTF) saying the Australian government did not dispute any part of his account. Still, his claim was rejected.
“While the matters you have raised do not meet the criteria for referral under this Scheme,” the letter said, “we acknowledge that the injuries you suffered are serious and concerning in nature and we empathise with your circumstances.”
The director-general of the AIRTF explained that Jailani might wish to apply for an “Act of Grace” payment instead. “Please be aware that there are no circumstances that guarantee and [sic] act of grace payments and the process is lengthy.”
Part of the problem with the compensation scheme is that it applies only to incidents substantiated by a 2020 report by the then inspector-general of the Australian Defence Force, Maj-Gen. Paul Brereton. Many Afghan victims do not know if they are in the report – partly because of a language barrier and low literacy rates, and partly because sections of the report have been redacted.
Jailani’s son, Kamin, told The Saturday Paper: “They are playing with us.”
The compensation scheme was born out of the Brereton report. On finding credible information concerning allegations of unlawful killings of 39 Afghans by Australian Special Forces in 23 incidents, the inquiry made 15 recommendations relating to compensation for victims and their families. Importantly, it recommended that compensation be paid without awaiting findings of any criminal liability.
In November 2024, former NSW Supreme Court judge Ruth McColl was appointed as the compensation advocate. Under the scheme, she is to assess eligible compensation claims referred by the Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) via the AIRTF. These are then to be reported back to the CDF for a final decision on compensation.
Official correspondence between the CDF and the compensation advocate show at least six claims have been referred to Justice McColl since August 2025, although none have been compensated.
Afghans who have yet to receive a decision on their compensation applications include the families of three men killed in incidents said to involve Australia’s most decorated soldier, Ben Roberts-Smith.
Farmer Ali Jan, killed in 2012, is said to have been pushed off a cliff in Darwan, Uruzgan, by Roberts-Smith and then executed by another soldier on Roberts-Smith’s instructions. A man named Ahmadullah, who had a prosthetic leg, and his father, Mohammed Essa, are said to have been killed while they were “under control” during a 2009 military operation at a compound dubbed Whiskey 108. Ahmadullah is said to have been machine-gunned by Roberts-Smith and Essa executed by another soldier on Roberts-Smith’s orders.
“The uncertainty and lack of transparency only compound the suffering of families seeking redress. It is deeply disappointing that families are still waiting for an outcome.”
Roberts-Smith was arrested on April 7 this year and charged with five counts of war crimes murder, including those three deaths. Though he has not yet been required to enter a plea, he has strenuously denied the accusations. He had unsuccessfully sued for libel over publication of the allegations; in that case, the court made its finding on the balance of probabilities rather than to the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.
Roberts-Smith’s bail conditions were varied last month so he could attend last weekend’s ceremony at the Australian War Memorial, alongside the prime minister, commemorating the 25th anniversary of Australia’s service in Afghanistan.
According to Kimberley Motley, an international human rights lawyer who represents a number of Afghan claimants, including Ali Jan’s family, the compensation process has been slow and arduous. She lodged an initial claim on behalf of Ali Jan’s family almost a year ago.
“The process of dealing with the families’ claims has been unclear, has progressed extremely slowly and has been unsuccessful thus far,” she says. “Although legal processes and funding appear to exist for such victims, we have received vague responses and even fewer answers.”
Natalija Nikolić, the lawyer representing the families of Mohammed Essa and Ahmadullah, says the continuing delay is prolonging the suffering of families who have already endured so much. “The uncertainty and lack of transparency only compound the suffering of families seeking redress,” she says. “It is deeply disappointing that families are still waiting for an outcome.”
Defence documents obtained earlier this year show there have been 105 webform submissions for compensation since the website went live in November 2024. The documents are current up to June 29 this year, and show that 45 submissions have been deemed ineligible.
Today, the impact of the raid on Jailani’s village is ever-present. Residents bear horrendous scars and disabilities. Many still suffer nightmares. One woman, left a paraplegic, says her teenage daughter was killed. When news of the compensation scheme reached the village, locals such as Jailani became hopeful there might be some recourse.
In August 2025, Jailani and his son Kamin, who was also caught up in the raid, submitted an online claim through the ADF’s website with the help of an English-speaking Afghan friend. Although the scheme’s website provides information in Dari and Pashto, many rural Afghans are illiterate and unfamiliar with technology and bureaucratic government processes.
The AIRTF responded a few days later to Jailani’s claim, asking for additional information. He responded: “That moment changed my life forever. I was struck by three bullets in my chest. Those bullets are still inside my body to this day, and since then, one of my lungs no longer works. I was also shot in my left eye, which has been blind ever since.”
In its rejection letter, the AIRTF stated the scheme was “bound and limited to only those matters” where the Brereton report had found “credible information of alleged unlawful assault, property damage or killings by Australian Defence Force members on operations in Afghanistan during the period 2005-2016”. It concluded: “While we acknowledge the serious and concerning circumstance outlined in your claim, and empathise with your circumstances, the incident you describe was not established by the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force Inquiry. Therefore, your claim cannot be referred to the Afghanistan Inquiry Compensation Advocate.”
The family was extremely upset and felt retraumatised by the rejection. The letter did not dispute that Australian soldiers had shot and maimed Jailani, but for arbitrary reasons it said Jailani could not be compensated for those injuries. His family did not understand what the Act of Grace payment scheme was, or the Brereton inquiry. The process appeared perfunctory and cruel. There was no offer to investigate and the Act of Grace scheme Jailani was referred to promised a process that was uncertain and lengthy.
“It would be naive to assume that the Afghanistan inquiry managed to capture all the allegations that could be levelled against the Australian Defence Force,” says Associate Professor Thomas Gregory, of the University of Auckland, author of Weaponizing Civilian Protection: Counterinsurgency and Collateral Damage in Afghanistan.
“As more people come forward with stories about the violence they experienced during the conflict, it is incumbent upon the Australian Defence Force to investigate these allegations and provide compensation when appropriate,” he said.
Motley, who was the first foreign litigator to practise in the Afghan courts, says: “There are even more people who were unarmed civilians savagely murdered in Uruzgan as a result of war crimes and who are not mentioned in the Brereton report that deserve justice.”
In a joint press release commemorating the 25th anniversary of Australia’s service in Afghanistan, issued last week, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Defence Minister Richard Marles and Minister for Defence Personnel and Veterans’ Affairs Matt Keogh made no mention of the Afghans who were injured or lost their lives during the conflict.
“My hope is that my suffering, and the suffering of my family, will not be forgotten,” Jailani told the AIRTF.
The Australian Defence Force did not respond to requests for comment.