Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.
The High Court has mandated a fresh and impartial investigation into how MI5 provided false evidence to multiple courts, having dismissed two official inquiries from the Security Service as seriously lacking. This decision comes after revelations from the BBC exposed MI5’s deceit to three courts regarding a case involving a neo-Nazi state agent who had mistreated women. A panel consisting of Lady Chief Justice Baroness Sue Carr, Mr. Justice Chamberlain, and President of the King’s Bench Division Dame Victoria Sharp refrained from initiating contempt of court proceedings against any individuals until the new investigation is concluded while commending the BBC for spotlighting these issues.
The two reviews, one of which was initiated by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, exculpated MI5 and its officers from deliberate misconduct. However, the ruling asserts that the investigations conducted by MI5 so far suffer from significant procedural shortcomings, rendering their conclusions unreliable. Lady Chief Justice Baroness Sue Carr, Dame Victoria Sharp, and Mr. Justice Chamberlain expressed hope that incidents like these would not recur. The new probe is directed to be overseen by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner Sir Brian Leveson, who supervises MI5’s surveillance activities. MI5 director general Sir Ken McCallum reiterated his full apology for the errors made during the proceedings and affirmed MI5’s cooperation with the investigation.
The case originated in 2022 when an effort was made to prevent the BBC from publishing a story about a neo-Nazi agent identified as X, evolving into a pivotal assessment of how courts perceive MI5 and the veracity of its evidence. MI5 testified to three courts that it had adhered to its core confidentiality policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) X’s status as a state agent. The BBC subsequently unveiled proof through notes and recorded phone calls with MI5 in February, demonstrating this claim as false. The High Court condemned the two official inquiries, labeling them as plagued by fundamental defects and lacking coherence in their terms of reference.
The ruling criticized the official reviews for failing to engage the BBC, despite its critical involvement in the events at hand. The judges acknowledged additional evidence submitted by the BBC and highlighted discrepancies in the accounts provided by MI5. The judgement underscored the need for a thorough investigation to rectify the misinformation and inadequacies in MI5’s explanations, emphasizing the importance of upholding court trust for national security
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.