Britain’s domestic intelligence agency, MI5, misled a top watchdog to cover up false information given to the courts over its handling of a violent neo-Nazi agent, a BBC investigation has revealed.

The Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO), the body charged with holding MI5 to account, has admitted it was “misled” into rewriting a draft report that had originally concluded MI5 broke internal secrecy rules in its dealings with an informant known publicly as “X.”

X, a confirmed neo-Nazi and covert human intelligence source (CHIS), allegedly abused his position as an agent to manipulate and terrorize his then-girlfriend, referred to as “Beth.” The case has raised significant questions about accountability within the UK’s intelligence services and the integrity of the agencies meant to oversee them.

IPCO’s investigation, initiated in 2022 after a BBC report revealed disturbing conduct by Agent X, originally found MI5 had made the “extraordinary” decision to reveal X’s status to a BBC journalist — a clear breach of the agency’s “neither confirm nor deny” (NCND) policy regarding its agents. But MI5 strongly objected, denying any such disclosure.

Despite lacking documentary evidence and providing no clear explanation for how it persuaded the journalist not to publish a story about X, MI5 maintained its stance. The watchdog ultimately reversed its position and issued a final report stating MI5 had not broken NCND protocol — a claim now known to be false.

In a stunning admission to the BBC, IPCO said it altered the final report based on “assurances provided by MI5” which have since been proven untrue. The body now concedes its initial findings were correct and the report’s revisions inaccurately reflected MI5’s actions.

The final IPCO report included at least three significant false claims: That MI5 had an agreed operational plan not to disclose X’s agent status. In reality, MI5 repeatedly used that status to pressure the journalist into dropping the story. That it was not MI5 policy to record conversations with journalists. This was directly contradicted by internal policy, which required such conversations to be documented and That a witness statement submitted by the journalist confirmed no disclosure was made. In fact, the statement said no such thing.

MI5 Director General Sir Ken McCallum has since apologised to IPCO, after the BBC raised its concerns. IPCO confirmed that the final report’s inaccuracies arose from “incorrect information” provided by MI5, and now admits it was “misled into amending our draft report.”

Former High Court judge and current Investigatory Powers Commissioner Sir Brian Leveson had written in December 2023 that MI5’s version of events was unsupported and possibly represented either “inadequate record keeping” or a deliberate failure to disclose documents — both of which he described as “serious compliance failures.”

The incident reveals a broader crisis of confidence in the UK’s intelligence oversight system. MI5’s ability to provide false or misleading information to every institution charged with reviewing its conduct — from IPCO to the courts — has raised red flags among civil liberties advocates and legal experts.

The fact that MI5 was able to influence IPCO’s findings, despite a lack of supporting documentation, is especially troubling. The revelation suggests that the very agencies designed to oversee MI5 can be manipulated by the service’s internal assertions — even when key evidence, including journalist witness statements, points to misconduct.

The scandal is likely to trigger fresh calls for an independent review of MI5’s agent-handling procedures and the oversight mechanisms surrounding them. Critics have also pointed to the need for stronger safeguards for those who report abuse by intelligence sources — such as Beth — and greater transparency in how Britain’s secret services operate under the law.

Source: BBC

Follow us on: