MI5 lied to three courts in neo-Nazi agent case, inquiry finds

Senior figures at Britain’s internal security agency MI5 lied repeatedly in court over the case of an abusive neo-Nazi agent. Deputy investigatory powers commissioner Sir John Goldring has slammed a number of senior figures at MI5 over their behaviour.

As the Canary reported on 17 March 2026, the spy agency has been ordered to pay compensation to a woman:

coercively controlled, abused, and attacked with a machete by a neo-Nazi agent it employed.

The fascist agent also:

had fantasies about eating children.

Goldring’s new report is scathing, confirming BBC revelations that:

MI5 lied to the courts, something the security service vehemently denied.

Goldring, who was ordered to investigate allegations MI5 had lied in its testimony in the High Court, said:

MI5 recognises without hesitation the seriousness of our failings in these proceedings […]

I repeat my previous apologies to both courts for the incorrect evidence that was provided, and for our slowness in recognising what had happened.

The details beggar belief. The BBC said:

The investigation examined how MI5 gave false evidence to three courts about having kept to its core secrecy policy – known as ‘neither confirm nor deny’ (NCND) – about the agent status of the violent neo-Nazi informant.

Adding:

MI5 claimed it had maintained NCND and, consequently, the courts allowed it to keep information secret from a woman who was abused by the informant.

The report found MI5’s claims to be untrue.

Senior figures at MI5 lied

The report found numerous senior figures deceived the courts. One senior MI5 officer, known as Officer 2 had:

repeatedly told “lies” and these “formed the foundation of MI5’s false account” to the three courts. He “put forward a wholly fictitious account” in which he denied ever telling me that X [the neo-Nazi agent] was an MI5 agent.

Another senior officer, known as Officer 3 had:

“misled” his own colleagues and did not act in good faith. The report concludes that he “bears considerable responsibility for the continuation of MI5’s falsehood” because he “misrepresented” what Officer 2 had said to him. He was not “truthful” about warnings he received from colleagues.

The spy agency’s lies could have had a serious negative effect on the case brought by the woman, named Beth, abused by their agent:

The courts accepted MI5’s arguments. This meant Beth and everyone else was banned from ever officially being told X was an agent and denied access to the key evidence. She was left at a serious disadvantage and may have lost the case.

The BBC reported:

A panel of senior high court judges, including the Lady Chief Justice, will now have to decide whether to initiate contempt of court proceedings against any MI5 officers or MI5 itself.

They added that:

Given the find that lies were told, there is also the potential for a criminal inquiry.

As the Canary has pointed out in regard to this case, MI5’s website claims its mission is:

to keep the country safe, both now and in the future.

How recruiting and retaining a far-right neo-Nazi sympathiser with a known fetish for violence squares with these aims is unclear. But it is clear that it is long past time the security services were subject to proper democratic scrutiny.

Featured image via the Canary