MI5 lied to courts to protect Neo-Nazi spy, apologizes for 'serious error'

Britain’s MI5 admitted to lying in three separate court cases to protect a violent neo-Nazi agent, misleading judges while attempting to block reporting on his crimes. The agency falsely claimed it had upheld its policy of not confirming or denying informants’ identities, even though it had disclosed the man’s status to a journalist in an attempt to dissuade an investigation. MI5 only acknowledged the deception after evidence—including a recorded phone call—was presented, forcing the Security Service to issue an “unreserved apology” to the courts and the BBC.

The agent, publicly known only as “X,” was a state informant who brutally attacked his girlfriend, known as Beth, with a machete. Despite MI5’s knowledge of his violent behavior, it continued to protect him. Beth is now challenging the agency’s role in a specialist court, arguing MI5 failed to prevent the attack. Her lawyer, Kate Ellis from the Centre for Women’s Justice, called the revelations “deeply concerning,” questioning MI5’s transparency and the reliability of its evidence in court.

The BBC’s legal battle revealed that MI5 first lied in a case where the government sought to prevent reporting on agent X’s misconduct, then repeated the falsehood in a judicial review and again in Beth’s case. The truth came to light when the BBC applied to the High Court, leading Justice Chamberlain to declare MI5’s evidence “false” during a hearing at London’s Royal Courts of Justice.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has appointed Sir Jonathan Jones KC, former head of the government legal service, to lead an independent review into how MI5 provided false evidence. The agency says it has also launched an internal disciplinary investigation. Sir James Eadie KC, representing the government in court, said the inquiry highlights “the seriousness with which this is being taken” and promised updates in April.

In a rare response, MI5 Director General Sir Ken McCallum defended the agency’s use of informants, stating, “For agents to keep protecting us, we must protect them.” However, critics argue MI5’s secrecy policies may be obstructing accountability, especially when agents commit crimes. The agency’s admission of lying raises concerns about its credibility in other secret court cases, including those involving counterterrorism, deportation, and national security decisions.

Beth’s case will now return to the specialist court, which will reassess whether MI5 violated her rights and whether evidence should continue to be heard in closed sessions, excluding her from proceedings. The BBC is urging greater transparency, warning that the scandal damages trust in MI5’s evidence and raises broader questions about oversight of the UK’s intelligence agencies.