MI5 has accepted that evidence given to three courts in the Neo-Nazi Spy Case was based on “lies”, marking an unprecedented admission by the British intelligence service over its handling of a violent neo-Nazi informant. Timothy Otty KC, representing MI5, made the statement during a High Court hearing in London on Friday, saying the security service accepted the findings of a report without reservation.
The report found that MI5 had falsely maintained that it had adhered to its core secrecy policy, known as “neither confirm nor deny” (NCND), regarding the agent status of the neo-Nazi informant. A panel of three senior judges is now considering whether contempt of court proceedings should be brought against certain MI5 officers or the security service itself.
MI5 Accepts Findings Of ‘Serious And Systemic Failures’
Otty told the High Court that MI5 “fully accepts and acknowledges the gravity of the issues raised” in the report and said such failures must not happen again. The report, prepared by former deputy Investigatory Powers Commissioner Sir John Goldring, found that one senior MI5 officer, identified as Officer 2, had repeatedly lied, while another, Officer 3, misled colleagues and lied about information provided to him.
Sir John also found “serious and systemic failures in MI5’s conduct” throughout the case. Otty said the security service had committed to a major reform programme under the leadership of director general Sir Ken McCallum.
The question now before the High Court is whether the conduct identified in the report warrants contempt proceedings. Any such action against MI5 or its officers would be unprecedented, with the three-judge panel considering the evidence and the circumstances surrounding the false statements made to the courts.
MI5 has argued against such proceedings being launched, with Otty saying it would not be in the public interest following Sir John’s detailed investigation, the service’s apology and its commitment to reform. He also told the court that Officer 2 had resigned from MI5, while Officer 3 had been suspended and was facing disciplinary proceedings that could lead to his dismissal.
The two officers have separately challenged aspects of the findings. Matthew Butt KC, representing Officer 2, said his client accepted that his conduct had fallen “below the standard expected of him” and had apologised, but denied acting dishonestly or interfering with the administration of justice.
Aaron Watkins, representing Officer 3, also apologised and accepted that his client’s conduct “undoubtedly” contributed to the courts and other parties being misled. However, he denied that this resulted from dishonesty and argued that the evidence did not meet the threshold for contempt of court.
Neo-Nazi Agent X Case Led To Court Secrecy Dispute
The case centres on Agent X, a foreign neo-Nazi and misogynist who was an MI5 informant and whose conduct was investigated by the BBC. The man, known as X in legal proceedings, was accused of coercively controlling and physically and sexually abusing his partner, known as Beth, including attacking her with a machete.
The dispute over MI5’s handling of X later moved into the courts. The government took the BBC to court in 2022 in an attempt to prevent its investigation, while separate proceedings brought by Beth against MI5 reached the Investigatory Powers Tribunal and subsequently the High Court.
MI5 had argued for secrecy in those proceedings, maintaining that it had consistently followed its NCND policy and had never confirmed X’s status as an agent. That position was central to arguments that information about his relationship with the security service should remain secret.
The High Court panel is yet to decide whether contempt proceedings will be initiated. MI5 has accepted the findings of Sir John’s report and apologised, while the individual officers involved continue to dispute allegations of dishonesty.