MI5 Spared Contempt Proceedings After False Evidence Given to Three Courts

MI5 and its director general, Sir Ken McCallum, will not face contempt of court proceedings despite the Security Service admitting it provided false evidence to three courts, senior High Court judges ruled on Tuesday. The judges said it would not be in the public interest for the court to initiate contempt proceedings over the agency failures.

How the false evidence was used

In 2022, the incorrect evidence was used in a successful bid for an injunction against the BBC, which prevented the broadcaster from airing a documentary naming a man known as X. X has allegedly abused two women and is a covert human intelligence source, known as a CHIS. The injunction remains in force. The BBC was allowed to air the documentary, but not to identify X, who the programme alleged was a misogynistic neo-Nazi who attacked his then girlfriend with a machete.

MI5 maintained that the information was accurate for three years, then admitted it was wrong, and Sir Ken McCallum apologised. In a witness statement for the injunction proceedings, MI5 falsely claimed it had maintained its policy of neither confirming nor denying, known as NCND, to the BBC over whether X is a CHIS. The BBC later told MI5 that it had recorded a conversation in 2020 with an officer known as Officer 2, who confirmed that X was a CHIS.

What the review found

In July, the Deputy Investigatory Powers Commissioner, Sir John Goldring, found serious and systemic failings by MI5, and found that Officer 2 had lied about his role in the incident. Officer 2 resigned from MI5 last year.

Beth, the former girlfriend of X, settled her claim against MI5 in March, with the service making no admission of liability. That claim was defended by MI5 before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, where the same false evidence was also given.

Why the judges declined proceedings

Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, sitting with Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain, said proceedings at this stage would be unlikely to do more than duplicate the findings of the Goldring report. She said proceedings against individual officers would be highly resource intensive and would face substantive hurdles, including establishing a causal link, and that there was no public interest in further action against Sir Ken McCallum.

Reading a summary of the decision, Baroness Carr said any court proceedings "should follow consideration by the police, and consideration of charges by the Crown Prosecution Service". A finding of contempt can carry a maximum sentence of two years.

After the ruling, Sir Ken McCallum said: "In this instance the agency I lead fell badly short." He said the judgment "underlines MI5's serious failures in this case".