𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Senior MI5 officers “misled” investigators in a probe into the intelligence agency’s handling of a violent, misogynistic neo-Nazi agent, a scathing report has revealed. Officers “relied” on a “false account” which had been allowed to “take hold and persist” after confirming “X” was one of their agents.

They had claimed they had neither confirmed, nor denied (NCND), his role during a watchdog probe and in misleading responses to journalists. The intelligence agency has admitted giving false evidence to three courts over its handling of the man and confirmed it has settled a legal claim brought by the victim “without admission of liability”.

MI5 was forced to pay X’s victim, known as Beth, after she was allegedly attacked with a machete by her former partner, a violent, ‘extremist’ misogynist neo-Nazi, who used his MI5 role to coercively control her.

But the Investigatory Powers Commissioner published a scathing 213-page report into Agent X.

It said the “key individual who departed from NCND to the BBC journalist knew throughout what he had done yet failed to report it.

“Others in MI5 knew that NCND had been departed from, but a false account was allowed to take hold and persist.

“That false account was subsequently relied upon in the injunction proceedings, before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal and in judicial review proceedings. Opportunities to correct the position were missed.”

Investigatory Powers Commissioner Sir Brian Leveson said: “What makes this case particularly grave is that IPCO and the courts were misled. Failings of candour undermine the entire basis of oversight and accountability.”

The IPT, a specialist tribunal which investigates allegations against the UK intelligence services, said in July last year that MI5 giving false evidence “gives rise to real cause for concern” and “must never happen again”.

MI5 Director General Sir Ken McCallum 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.

“I also repeat my apology to Beth, who suffered additional distress as a consequence of what MI5 got wrong in the course of responding to her serious claims.

“With legal proceedings still in train, I cannot comment today on specific details.

“However, I can say that over the last 18 months MI5 has done much to improve our policies and processes, to ensure we never find ourselves in this position again.

“We have strengthened our record-keeping processes. We have updated the way in which we provide evidence in legal proceedings.

“With valuable input from independent experts, we have updated our policies and training on how we identify and respond to information suggesting individuals might be at risk of harm.

“We will use today’s extensive and detailed report to target our further improvement efforts.

“The people of MI5 work day and night to keep this country safe.

“We get much right. In this instance we fell well short of what the public expect and deserve.

“The best response MI5 can make is to ensure we are consistently hitting the highest professional standards in delivering our vital mission. I know that the Home Secretary, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner and the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament will, rightly, continue to hold us to account.”

Beth claimed her abusive ex-partner boasted about being a paid informant for MI5.

Shocking video footage published by the BBC allegedly showed her ex-partner attacking her with a machete.

And ‘X’ had previously been reported to police abroad about allegations of domestic violence against a previous partner.

MI5 confirmed ‘X’ was one of their agents, shredding their claim that they never confirm an agent’s identity under a principle known as “neither confirm nor deny”.

Beth took legal action against MI5, claiming the intelligence agency breached her human rights by failing to protect her from agent X.

She took the case to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT). Judges ruled much of the case should be held in secret after MI5 said it does not confirm agent identities.