🔗 Share this article

UK's Premier has directed a renewed probe into how the Security Service provided inaccurate testimony to three regarding discussions with a media outlet.

Sir Keir Starmer's mandate comes after calls from the High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal, which both disregarded the intelligence agency's accounts about the events.

Investigation Focuses on Neo-Nazi Informant

The case centers on a extremist government agent referred to as an unnamed source who exploited his MI5 role to intimidate his girlfriend, whom he attacked with a bladed weapon.

Earlier this week, the Prime Minister wrote to the oversight official Sir Brian Leveson instructing him to conduct a comprehensive review.

"I have now issued a direction to the Commissioner to initiate this investigation promptly."

He noted that the courts "shall utilize the outcome of this inquiry to decide their subsequent actions in relation to the matter of Agent X."

Sir Keir commented that the judicial authorities had concluded that MI5's investigations into the inaccurate information "were plagued by significant process flaws."

Disclosures and Regret

Months ago, a media outlet exposed that the intelligence agency had lied several tribunals while justifying its handling of the abusive MI5 agent, whom the outlet had investigated in a previous inquiry.

Requesting secrecy, the Security Service told judicial authorities it had adhered to its protocol of not confirming or denying informants' identities.

However, the agency had divulged the individual's position in discussions with a reporter, as it sought to discourage the reporter not to look into the agent. The service persistently upheld its stance until evidence showing it was incorrect was provided, including a recording of one of the conversations.

Subsequent to these exposés, MI5's chief expressed regret. Two internal investigations then occurred which absolved the service and its personnel of knowing failure, asserting the inaccurate information was down to mistakes and poor memories.

Courts Reject Explanations

But, in July, a group of senior high court judges decided that the "investigations conducted by the Security Service to date suffer from significant process flaws" and that "the court cannot depend on their conclusions."

The judges said it would be "too early" to rule whether to begin judicial defiance proceedings against any MI5 officers before a new investigation took place.

Afterward the following weeks, the legal authority also disregarded MI5's accounts and requested a fresh inquiry.

Fresh Probe Commissioned

The renewed probe will be conducted under the auspices of the regulatory head, who has oversight of MI5's intelligence gathering. His office was also supplied false evidence by MI5 in the case.

A representative said: "The Home Secretary are alarmed that false testimony was provided to the High Court and Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The Director General of the Security Service has appropriately expressed regret for this significant shortcoming, both openly and to the Courts."

"Each tribunal concluded that additional inquiry was essential to determine how inaccurate information ended up being submitted to them. The government endorsed their advice and the PM has tasked Sir Brian Leveson – the oversight head – to lead this investigation. It would be improper to remark more until it is completed."