Taliban have created commissions, military courts and internal monitoring units to oversee their security forces since returning to power five years ago, but a lack of transparency and barriers that discourage victims from reporting abuses have weakened those accountability efforts, according to a new report by the United Nations mission in Afghanistan.
The 38-page report, released Monday by UNAMA examines oversight of the Taliban’s main security institutions since August 2021 and documents a system in which personnel have, in some cases, been arrested, investigated, dismissed or prosecuted for misconduct.
But UNAMA said Taliban institutions provide too little public information about complaints, investigations and their outcomes to determine whether accountability is applied consistently across the security apparatus.
“The limited amount of public information on complaints received, investigations conducted, and disciplinary or judicial actions taken by relevant de facto bodies undermine confidence and weaken deterrence,” Georgette Gagnon, the deputy special representative of the UN secretary-general and officer-in-charge of UNAMA, said in a statement accompanying the report.
The report focuses on Afghanistan’s principal security institutions under Taliban rule, including the Interior Ministry, the General Directorate of Intelligence and the Office of Prison Administration. It also examines military courts and several oversight bodies created or retained by the Taliban.
UNAMA said Taliban had issued directives and established internal monitoring units intended to promote discipline and investigate misconduct. It also documented cases in which Taliban security personnel were arrested and investigated and cases were referred to military courts.
But those actions have not been accompanied by systematic public disclosure.
Taliban security institutions do not routinely publish disaggregated data showing how many complaints against their personnel have been received, how many were investigated, how many resulted in disciplinary action or prosecution and what ultimately happened in those cases.
According to the report, only the Taliban Interior Ministry provided UNAMA with copies of some internal procedures, limiting the mission’s ability to determine whether practices across the security institutions comply with international standards.
That lack of information is particularly significant because UNAMA has previously documented serious human rights violations involving Taliban authorities, including arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and ill-treatment, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.
Multiple oversight bodies, limited transparency
The Taliban’s accountability structure extends well beyond the security agencies themselves, the report says.
UNAMA has identified several institutions with authority to monitor personnel, investigate complaints or refer cases for further action. They include the Security and Filtration Commission, the High Directorate of Supervision and Monitoring of Decrees and Edicts, the morality ministry’s Commission for Hearing Complaints and the Taliban-controlled Supreme Court.
Provincial governors, the prime minister’s office and the office of Taliban leader Hibatullah Akhundzada also have roles in the broader system.
The Security and Filtration Commission was established in December 2021, while the High Directorate of Supervision and Monitoring of Decrees and Edicts was created in March 2023. The morality ministry’s complaints commission was formalized later that year.
UNAMA said the existence of those bodies, together with internal security monitoring units and military courts, showed that Taliban authorities had taken steps toward oversight and discipline.
The problem, the mission said, is determining what those institutions actually accomplish.
Public information about their work is often limited to broad figures or announcements that do not identify the allegations involved, whether they concerned security personnel, what investigations found or what penalties followed.
“Visible and consistent accountability measures indicate that rules are applied equally and to every person, including those in positions of authority,” Gagnon said.
She said improving accountability was both a legal obligation and necessary for better governance and respect for human rights, which she linked to Afghanistan’s stability and its eventual reintegration into the international community.
Nearly 10,000 complaints reported by morality ministry
Some Taliban institutions have released aggregate figures, the report says.
The Taliban Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice reported that it had registered 9,808 complaints by August 2024, according to UNAMA.
Of those, 5,486, or about 56 percent, were described as resolved, while another 2,179 complainants received “guidance.”
But UNAMA said the figures did not show how many complaints concerned security personnel, how many involved alleged human rights violations or what action was taken in cases classified as resolved.
The report also identifies another problem: some Afghans may be unwilling or unable to complain in the first place.
UNAMA said fear of reprisals, distrust of Taliban institutions and other barriers discourage people from reporting alleged misconduct. Women face particular obstacles because of the extensive restrictions imposed on their daily lives under Taliban rule.
Although the morality ministry’s complaints system formally accepts complaints from both men and women, UNAMA found that Baghlan was the only provincial department reported to employ female staff.
The lack of women handling complaints elsewhere could deter female victims who would generally have to deal with male Taliban officials, the report said.
UNAMA called for complaint mechanisms that are accessible regardless of gender and allow people to report misconduct without fear of retaliation or discrimination.
Up to 250 Taliban personnel reported in prison
The report contains limited but significant evidence that Taliban personnel themselves have faced detention and criminal punishment.
In March 2024, an official from the Office of Prison Administration told UNAMA that approximately 200 to 250 Taliban personnel were being held in prisons.
But the official did not specify how many were members of the Interior Ministry, intelligence agency or prison administration. Nor was it clear how many were awaiting trial and how many had already been convicted.
The incomplete data typifies the transparency problem identified throughout the report: figures sometimes demonstrate that disciplinary or judicial action is occurring, but lack sufficient detail to measure its scope or effectiveness.
Military courts impose sentences of up to 17 years
Military courts provide some of the clearest evidence of criminal penalties against Taliban personnel.
UNAMA identified cases in which military courts imposed prison sentences ranging from one to 17 years. In almost all of those cases, the defendants appeared to be Taliban security personnel.
In one case involving intentional killing, a defendant was sentenced to death and executed.
But UNAMA said it had found no publicly announced military-court sentence specifically for torture or ill-treatment, despite having previously documented such treatment in Taliban custody.
The Taliban-controlled Supreme Court regularly publishes information about sentences involving ordinary defendants, according to the report, but provides far less comparable information about proceedings involving security personnel.
The discrepancy makes it difficult to determine how frequently serious allegations against security officials result in criminal prosecution.
More than 1,200 people ordered released from security lockups
Taliban Supreme Court figures cited by UNAMA also provide a glimpse into military court oversight of detention.
Between Oct. 4 and Dec. 31, 2024, military courts ordered 1,214 people released from Security and Executive Command lockups.
During the same period, 974 people were ordered detained, while 1,183 prisoners were transferred to intelligence and public prisons for investigation.
The figures show military courts reviewing detention decisions on a substantial scale. But UNAMA said the available information does not explain the circumstances behind individual cases or establish why those ordered released had initially been detained.
Civilians tried by military courts
UNAMA raised separate concerns about military courts exercising jurisdiction over civilians.
The report said civilians had been tried in cases involving alleged links to ISIS-K, abductions, suicide attacks, human trafficking and other accusations.
International human rights standards generally require civilians to be tried by independent civilian courts, with military trials of civilians permitted only in exceptional circumstances and subject to strict safeguards, UNAMA said.
The finding raises a broader issue within the accountability system: the institutions responsible for policing misconduct must themselves operate in accordance with international standards.
Intelligence official reportedly dismissed over torture allegations
UNAMA documented individual cases suggesting that internal investigations have, at times, produced consequences for Taliban officials.
In one case, an intelligence official was reportedly dismissed following an investigation into allegations that detainees had been tortured.
But the mission also documented examples of alleged interference with internal monitoring.
UNAMA said officials had, in some instances, pressured inspectors to remove violations from reports being sent to Kabul.
The report recommends measures to prevent interference with monitoring, complaint handling and investigations and to protect victims, witnesses and whistleblowers from retaliation.
Many complaints remain unresolved
UNAMA said many complaints of misconduct reportedly remain unresolved even as the Taliban have expanded the institutions responsible for handling them.
The mission said effective accountability requires more than internal rules or disciplinary bodies. Security institutions need clear standards governing the use of force, arrests, detention, searches and crowd policing, as well as codes of professional conduct that apply uniformly to personnel.
UNAMA also called for security personnel to be required to report misconduct and for commanders to be held responsible for enforcing discipline.
Accountability should operate before, during and after security operations, the report said, through training, supervision, monitoring and prompt and impartial investigations.
Serious cases should be referred to courts where appropriate.
Former human rights oversight system dismantled
The report also examines how the institutional landscape changed after the Taliban seized power in August 2021.
The Taliban dismantled institutions that had previously exercised independent human rights oversight, including the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, and restructured other parts of the former government’s justice system.
In their place, the Taliban have established or retained an array of mechanisms that largely operate within their own executive, judicial, security and religious institutions.
UNAMA’s assessment makes an important distinction: establishing oversight bodies does not, by itself, demonstrate that perpetrators of human rights violations are being held accountable.
Credible accountability requires independent and impartial investigations, appropriate prosecution and punishment, protection for complainants and witnesses, and effective remedies for victims.
UNAMA calls for public data
Among its recommendations, UNAMA called on Taliban to regularly publish information about complaints, allegations of misconduct, investigations, disciplinary measures, prosecutions and court outcomes.
It also recommended stronger data collection and record-keeping systems that could identify patterns of abuse and measure whether security institutions were improving over time.
Better disclosure, UNAMA said, could also strengthen professionalism and public trust in the security institutions.
The report does not conclude that Taliban security personnel are never punished. It documents arrests, investigations, dismissals, imprisonment and criminal convictions.
Instead, its central finding is that those examples exist within a system whose overall effectiveness remains difficult to measure because information is fragmented, complaints remain unresolved and victims can face significant obstacles in seeking redress.
For UNAMA, accountability ultimately depends not on how many commissions or monitoring bodies exist, but on whether rules are consistently enforced — including against people holding positions of authority.
“Improving accountability is a legal obligation of the de facto authorities,” Gagnon said, adding that it was also necessary for improving governance and respect for human rights and for Afghanistan’s compliance with its international obligations.
