According to a report by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on November 3, although MI5 admitted that it provided false evidence to three courts, the High Court still ruled on that day that MI5 and its personnel would not face legal proceedings for contempt of court.
Three judges, including Sir Justice Su Cal of England and Wales, stated that the trial of contempt of court is 'too complex and difficult to manage' for the court, and continuing it does not serve the public interest. They pointed out that the police have the 'power and resources to handle this case', and some officers from MI5 may be investigated for improper conduct as public servants.
The court ruled that there was sufficient evidence to initiate contempt of court proceedings against two senior MI5 officials, but such action did not serve the public interest. The judgment stated that contempt proceedings “were essentially beyond the court’s ability to handle on its own,” and the related investigations were likely difficult to manage. Continuing with these proceedings “would be of no benefit, merely a repetition of the findings of Sir John’s investigation.” The judge also noted that any further action should be taken “after the police investigation has been completed,” with the Royal Prosecution Service being the appropriate authority to decide whether to prosecute.
This decision stems from a case involving a spy known as “Agent X” who committed abuse against his partner. Investigative expert John Godling examined how MI6 provided false evidence to three courts: MI6 claimed that it had always adhered to a policy of “neither confirming nor denying” (NCND) regarding the agent status of this informant, but this was not the case.
The suspect imposed a controlled environment on his partner (under the alias Beth) and attacked her with a machete. During the investigation, MI5 helped him escape to another country to continue his intelligence work. In 2022, the government sued the BBC, attempting to prevent the BBC from investigating ‘Agent X’, but this effort was unsuccessful. However, the man was granted legal anonymity. Beth then filed a lawsuit against MI5 in a court of inquiry, and in 2024, she sought a review of a ruling by the High Court.
The MI6 claimed to comply with the NCND policy to three courts, and thus the courts allowed them to keep confidential information about Beth and all others, putting her in a severely disadvantageous position. However, the BBC stated that the MI6’s claims were false. In fact, in 2020, when the department tried to persuade BBC journalists not to investigate the man, they already disclosed his identity as an agent over the phone. A senior official even tried to cover up for the man, claiming that he was neither a man who abused women; he even offered to arrange a meeting between the BBC journalist and the agent. Throughout this process, he repeatedly deviated from the NCND policy.
Army intelligence chief Kenneth McCallister expressed welcome for the verdict, stating that the judgment "emphasized the serious misjudgment of Army Intelligence in this case." He further added: "I once again apologize for these errors and for the additional suffering they caused Bess."
The judge has issued “severe criticism” of the MI6, stating that its future methods of providing evidence to the court must be changed. In their ruling on Tuesday, they said that it was “obvious” that the conclusions of Goldsmith’s investigation were serious, and that “it will inevitably affect” the court’s trust in the evidence provided by MI6. They added: “We have emphasized the seriousness of these findings in this judgment. Criminal investigations may be conducted into the actions of individual officials.”
The BBC believes that the judgment on the 3rd did not resolve the legal issue regarding whether MI5 and its director could face a contempt of court lawsuit. The judge stated, “Prosecuting MI5 as a whole would not bring any benefit,” and they “have already made sharp public criticisms of MI5’s actions.”
