Key facts
- MI5 has been reprimanded by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's Office (Ipco) for lying about its relationship with a neo-Nazi informant.
- The informant, agent X, used his role to threaten his girlfriend, Beth, who had made legal complaints against MI5.
- MI5 initially misled courts and the regulator about agent X's status, frustrating Beth's legal efforts.
- An MI5 official confirmed to a BBC reporter that agent X was an informant, contradicting the agency's later statements.
- MI5 acknowledged providing false evidence in court cases and paid compensation to Beth.
- Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans to strengthen oversight and accountability structures within MI5.
MI5 has been reprimanded by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (Ipco) for lying about its relationship with a neo-Nazi informant, referred to as agent X, who allegedly used his role to violently threaten his girlfriend.
Ipco criticized MI5's handling of agent X, stating that some officers misled the courts and the regulator about his true status. While MI5 had confirmed to the BBC that agent X was an informant, the agency initially told Ipco and the courts it could "neither confirm nor deny" its relationship with him. This lack of candor frustrated efforts by agent X's girlfriend, "Beth," to bring legal complaints against MI5 after he attacked her and allegedly used his informant status to discourage her from speaking out.
Investigatory Powers Commissioner Brian Leveson stated that MI5's management of agent X fell "far below the standards the public, the courts and Ipco have every right to expect." He added that the case was particularly grave because Ipco and the courts were misled, undermining oversight and accountability.
Agent X, a foreign national involved in neo-Nazi movements, was recruited by MI5 before 2019. When a BBC reporter, Daniel de Simone, contacted him about reporting on his neo-Nazi activities, agent X alerted MI5. Fearing for X's safety, MI5 officers reportedly told De Simone that X was "not a real extremist, but was pretending to be so at the behest of MI5." An MI5 official, Officer 2, then confirmed to De Simone that X was an informant. However, De Simone continued his investigation, partly based on testimony from Beth, who described X as "a seriously violent and abusive person, with paedophilic tendencies."
The BBC eventually published its report in May 2022, following a legal battle with the government. Afterward, Officer 2 told his successor, Officer 3, that he "thought he had not" confirmed X's informant status to the BBC. Officer 3 then informed colleagues that X's status "had not been breached," which formed the basis of MI5's position in Beth's court proceedings. When the BBC corrected the record, MI5 was compelled to retract its statements and apologize.
This case comes as the Hillsborough law, which includes a duty of candor for public officials, cleared the Commons after amendments were made to apply it to individual MI5 officers. Previously, a public inquiry into the Manchester Arena attack found that an MI5 witness had not accurately represented what the agency knew about the bomber, and that intelligence potentially capable of preventing the attack had been withheld.
MI5 had previously acknowledged that a senior spy provided "false evidence" in three court cases related to agent X, and compensation was paid to Beth earlier this year. Two versions of the Ipco report were provided to the prime minister and Keir Starmer: a secret version and a public version released with Downing Street's permission.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood described the Ipco report as "stark reading," highlighting organizational and individual failings within MI5 that led to false evidence. She intends to strengthen accountability structures for MI5 head Ken McCallum, increase oversight, and improve the agency's approach to court cases. McCallum reiterated apologies for the incorrect evidence and the delay in recognizing the issues, and also apologized to Beth for the additional distress caused by MI5's errors. The high court and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal will now determine if further action is warranted against MI5.