MI5 will not face contempt of court charges despite admitting its evidence was a lie

Image source, Getty Images

A previous BBC investigation found an MI5 agent used his role to abuse his girlfriend

MI5 and its staff will not face contempt of court proceedings despite the spy agency admitting that its evidence to three courts was a lie, senior judges have ruled.

The three judges, including Lady Chief Justice Baroness Sue Carr, say a contempt case would be too complex for the court to manage, meaning it is not in the public interest to proceed.

The police have the right “investigatory powers and resources” to handle the case, they rule, with individual MI5 officers now potentially facing investigation for misconduct in public office.

MI5 gave false evidence to three courts in a case concerning an abusive informant known as Agent X.

The false evidence was about conversations between MI5 and the BBC about the agent, someone we had investigated and were seeking to expose.

In July 2025, the three judges asked MI5’s watchdog to investigate how the security service came to give false evidence. At the time, they deferred any decision on contempt proceedings until after the investigation had reported.

In July this year, an investigation by Sir John Goldring – which had been ordered by the prime minister – concluded that one senior MI5 officer lied repeatedly while another misled his own colleagues and lied about what he was told. It also criticised other senior spies and found “serious and systemic failures in MI5’s conduct”.

In September, MI5 said it accepted the report’s findings “without reservation”.

The two MI5 officers who have been most criticised both deny any dishonest conduct. One has resigned from MI5, while the other is facing internal disciplinary proceedings.

Last week, the watchdog’s boss, investigatory powers commissioner Lord Leveson, said the case was as “serious as anything” he has faced in his role.

MI5 false evidence in neo-Nazi spy case a serious failing, says intelligence watchdog

MI5 lied to courts to protect violent neo-Nazi spy

How I exposed MI5’s lie about its violent abusive agent

Despite this, the high court has now decided not to take any further action, either against two individual MI5 officers who faced the gravest criticisms, or on a corporate basis against MI5 and its Director General Sir Ken McCallum.

The judgment proceeds on the basis there is enough evidence to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the two senior MI5 officers, but concludes it is not in the public interest to do so.

A contempt process could “not realistically be undertaken by the court on its own” and the “investigative aspects of the task would be likely to be unmanageable”, the judgment states.

“No purpose would be served by contempt proceedings, which are unlikely to do more than duplicate Sir John’s findings,” it concludes.

Instead, the judges say if there is to be further action, it should “follow an investigation by the police, who have the appropriate investigatory powers and resources,” with the Crown Prosecution Service identified as the appropriate body to decide whether to prosecute.

The three judges suggest that the criminal offences of misconduct in a public office, or perverting the course of justice, may be more straightforward to prove evidentially than the contempt of court option available to them.

Related topics