Lawfare is the SAS's Greatest Threat Today

As the UK government seeks to repeal the Northern Ireland Legacy Act, the SAS faces unprecedented legal battles that could undermine its legacy and morale.

Gavin Mortimer, explores in The Spectator (26/7/25) the fast-growing threat facing Britain’s Special Air Service (SAS) — not from combatants or terrorists, but from the legal system itself.

Mortimer highlights the UK's government's intention to repeal the Northern Ireland Legacy and Reconciliation Act, which was passed by the Tories in 2023. The Act aimed to limit legal actions against veterans involved in the Northern Ireland conflict, yet the government now seeks its repeal, citing its incompatibility with human rights requirements.

The decision to reopen legal proceedings against veterans, including those who served in the SAS, risks further alienating an already divided nation, especially given the widespread pride Britons have in their armed forces.

James Cartlidge, the Shadow Defence Secretary, summed up the situation as “crazy,” arguing that the government’s actions are directly undermining morale in the special forces community, which has long been a symbol of national pride.

At the heart of this issue is the controversy over the events at Loughgall in 1987, where eight IRA members were killed by the SAS. Mortimer points out that relatives of the deceased terrorists, particularly the sister of one of the men involved, are pushing for legacy inquests and accountability. Their demands, supported by certain political groups in Northern Ireland, could lead to renewed prosecutions of long-retired British soldiers. This has become a central theme in the ongoing "war" against the SAS — one that is now being fought in the courtroom.

Mortimer frames this legal onslaught against the SAS as a form of "lawfare" — the use of the legal system as a weapon against soldiers. He contends that this may be the most dangerous enemy the SAS has faced in its history, as it undermines the regiment's legacy and places its members at risk of prosecution decades after their service.

The “war” on the SAS, Mortimer argues, extends beyond legal battles to a broader cultural attack, particularly from the British left, which has long viewed the regiment with suspicion. This antagonism is rooted in historical events, such as the post-WWII disbanding of the SAS under the Labour government, and the ongoing left-wing critique of the regiment's tactics in Northern Ireland and beyond.

Ultimately, Mortimer’s piece portrays the SAS as caught in a dangerous intersection of political and legal warfare. He argues that the real threat to the regiment today is not from external enemies, but from a concerted effort to rewrite its history and hold its veterans accountable for actions taken in the heat of conflict. This legal assault represents a powerful form of "lawfare" that threatens not only the legacy of the SAS but also the morale of future generations of soldiers.

Mortimer’s analysis reveals the depth of the cultural and legal battle unfolding in the UK, where the actions of soldiers, particularly those in special forces like the SAS, are being scrutinised through the lens of retropectively applied modern human rights law. As he concludes, the real danger may lie in how the legal system is weaponised against those who fought to protect the nation, making the fight against lawfare the most dangerous and insidious one yet for the SAS.