Two Iranian men have been convicted of spying on people in Britain on behalf of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), following a six-week trial at Woolwich Crown Court. The case has raised fresh concerns about alleged attempts by foreign states to monitor and intimidate people living in the UK, particularly journalists who criticise their governments.
Mostafa Sepahvand, 41, and Farhad Javadi Manesh, 46, were found guilty on Thursday, 12 November 2026, of engaging in conduct likely to assist a foreign intelligence service under the National Security Act 2023. Sepahvand was also convicted of a separate offence involving surveillance and reconnaissance carried out with the intention of committing serious violence against a person in the UK.
The convictions are significant because Counter Terrorism Policing says they mark the first time Iranian nationals have been convicted under the National Security Act, legislation introduced to strengthen Britain’s response to threats from foreign states.
A third defendant, Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori, 57, was acquitted of all charges. The verdicts therefore reflect the individual findings against each defendant, rather than a finding that everyone accused was involved in the same criminal conduct.
Journalists critical of Iran were among the surveillance targets
The prosecution centred on surveillance carried out between August 2024 and March 2025. Investigators said the defendants gathered information about people in Britain who were considered opponents of the Iranian government.
The targets included journalists working for Iran International, a Persian-language television broadcaster known for its critical coverage of Iran’s authorities. Police also identified a lawyer and a media production professional among those targeted.
According to Counter Terrorism Policing, the surveillance involved gathering photographs, videos and other information about individuals and places connected to the targets. Investigators recovered briefing documents containing details such as addresses, workplaces, vehicles and other personal information.
Police said the investigation involved examining approximately 534 gigabytes of data, including messages, photographs, videos and voice recordings. Some of the material was in Farsi and had to be translated as investigators built their case.
The prosecution alleged that the information was being collected to assist Iranian intelligence and could be used to facilitate serious violence against people in Britain. The jury ultimately found Sepahvand guilty of the additional offence relating to surveillance and reconnaissance intended to facilitate serious violence.
Different verdicts for the two convicted men
Although Sepahvand and Manesh were both convicted of assisting a foreign intelligence service, the jury reached different conclusions on the additional allegation involving preparations for serious violence.
Sepahvand was found guilty of both offences. Manesh was convicted of assisting a foreign intelligence service but acquitted of the separate charge alleging that he carried out surveillance with the intention that serious violence would be committed by others.
Noori, the third defendant, was found not guilty of the charges against him.
Counter Terrorism Policing said Sepahvand had been directed by the IRGC or individuals acting as intermediaries for Iranian intelligence. Police also described evidence suggesting that he expected financial rewards in connection with the activity. The investigation and trial included messages and recordings that prosecutors relied on to establish the nature of his contacts and intentions.
The two convicted men are due to be sentenced at the Old Bailey on 17 December 2026. Their sentences have not yet been determined, and the court will consider the relevant offences and circumstances before deciding the penalties.
Police warn of growing threats linked to foreign states
Vicki Evans, Senior National Coordinator for Counter Terrorism Policing, said the convictions highlighted what authorities regard as a continuing and increasing threat from Iran.
Police have warned that hostile states may use intermediaries or individuals operating within the UK to carry out surveillance and other criminal activities. In this case, investigators said the alleged activity involved Iranian nationals living in Britain.
The Metropolitan Police has also described the case as the fourth in recent years involving a direct threat to Iran International journalists. That pattern has increased concern about the safety of media workers who report on political developments in countries where independent journalism is restricted or heavily criticised by the authorities.
The case also demonstrates how national security investigations can involve extensive digital evidence, including communications, location information and material gathered from online sources. Counter Terrorism Policing said the translation of thousands of messages and the analysis of mobile phone data were important parts of the investigation.
What the National Security Act means for foreign interference
The National Security Act 2023 was introduced to strengthen the UK’s ability to investigate and prosecute activities carried out on behalf of foreign powers that threaten national security. It provides offences covering conduct intended to assist foreign intelligence services, as well as other forms of espionage, sabotage and foreign interference.
The convictions are particularly notable because they demonstrate how the legislation can be used in cases involving alleged intelligence activity directed at people living in Britain. The law is not limited to activity taking place inside government buildings or military facilities. Conduct involving the surveillance of individuals can also fall within its scope where the legal requirements of the relevant offence are met.
The case comes amid wider concern among British security agencies about attempts by foreign states to use people and networks inside the country to gather information, intimidate opponents or support activities that could threaten public safety.
Iran has repeatedly denied involvement in espionage and similar activities. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi previously said he was disturbed by the arrests of Sepahvand and others in May 2025. The convictions represent the jury’s findings against the two men, rather than a separate criminal conviction of the Iranian government.
Why the case matters beyond the courtroom
The case has implications for the safety of journalists, political dissidents and other people who may face pressure because of their criticism of foreign governments. People who leave their home countries to live in Britain do not necessarily leave behind the political tensions or threats they experienced there.
For journalists working in exile, the ability to report freely depends not only on freedom of expression but also on being able to work, travel and live without intimidation. Surveillance of their homes, families or professional contacts can create fear that extends beyond the individuals directly targeted.
The convictions also underline the importance of distinguishing between the actions of a state or its alleged intelligence networks and the wider population of that country. Iranian nationals living in Britain should not be treated as collectively responsible for the actions attributed to individuals or foreign government institutions.
For British authorities, the challenge will be to protect people from foreign interference while ensuring that investigations and prosecutions remain grounded in evidence and the rule of law.
What this means for Nigerians and other diaspora communities in Britain
Although this case concerns alleged Iranian intelligence activity, the wider issue is relevant to Nigerians and other diaspora communities who have settled in Britain after leaving countries affected by political tension, insecurity or restrictions on free expression. Some people continue to campaign for political change, report on events back home, support opposition movements or speak publicly about human rights while living in the UK. For them, the right to express an opinion without intimidation is an important part of feeling safe in their adopted country.
The case is also a reminder that threats against people living in Britain should not automatically be dismissed as private disagreements or disputes connected to events overseas. Where someone believes they are being followed, threatened or targeted because of their journalism, political views or public activities, it is important to preserve relevant evidence and seek appropriate help. Serious threats or immediate danger should be reported to the police.
For Nigerian journalists, activists, community organisers and diaspora media platforms, the convictions reinforce the importance of protecting sources, handling sensitive information carefully and taking credible threats seriously. This does not mean that ordinary political disagreement or criticism should be treated as a security threat. It means that intimidation, surveillance and threats of violence must be recognised as matters that can affect people’s safety and freedom to participate in public life.
At Chijos News, we believe that people should be able to report, debate and express views about developments in their home countries without fear of being targeted for doing so in Britain. As the UK continues to strengthen its response to foreign interference, protecting that freedom must remain central to the safety and confidence of the country’s diverse diaspora communities.