By Karim Hammam
MI5 and its staff will not face contempt of court proceedings even though the security service admitted its evidence to three courts was false, senior judges have ruled. The three judges, including Lady Chief Justice Baroness Sue Carr, said a contempt case would be too complex for the court to manage and not in the public interest to pursue.
Police may investigate individual officers
The ruling states that police have the appropriate investigatory powers and resources to handle the matter, opening the possibility of criminal investigations for misconduct in public office against individual MI5 officers. The Home Office declined to say whether it would refer the case to police, saying officials are still considering the judgment's implications. A spokesperson said the case highlighted serious failings by individual officers and that the Home Secretary has taken decisive action to strengthen oversight of MI5.
False evidence in Agent X case
The false evidence concerned a violent neo-Nazi informant known as Agent X. A BBC investigation previously revealed that the agent used his role to coercively control his girlfriend, known as Beth, and attacked her with a machete. MI5 had claimed to three courts that it maintained its "neither confirm nor deny" policy about the agent's status, but it had in fact disclosed his status to the BBC in 2020 while trying to dissuade the investigation.
Goldring report found systemic failures
In July 2024, an investigation by Sir John Goldring concluded that one senior MI5 officer lied repeatedly and another misled colleagues and lied about what he was told. The report criticised other senior spies and found "serious and systemic failures in MI5's conduct." MI5 accepted the findings without reservation. The two most criticised officers deny dishonesty; one has resigned and the other faces internal disciplinary proceedings.
Victim and advocates express disappointment
Beth, in a statement through the Centre for Women's Justice, said she was deeply disappointed the court would not pursue contempt proceedings. The centre's joint head of litigation, Kate Ellis, called the ruling surprising, noting the Goldring report found two senior officers knowingly allowed the courts to be misled.
Judges say contempt process unmanageable
The judgment states that a contempt process could not realistically be undertaken by the court alone and would likely duplicate Sir John's findings. Instead, the judges suggest criminal offences such as misconduct in public office or perverting the course of justice may be more straightforward to prove. They acknowledged their findings will inevitably affect courts' confidence in future MI5 evidence.
Contrast with other contempt case raises concerns
The decision not to pursue contempt against MI5 comes as barrister Rajiv Menon KC faces an unprecedented contempt process for a speech defending a client linked to the banned group Palestine Action. The judges said nothing would be gained by contempt proceedings against MI5 as an entity and that they have already made trenchant public criticisms of its conduct.
