Iranian Spying Convictions Highlight Hostile Surveillance and Personal Security Risks in the UK

Two men have been convicted of spying on journalists and other individuals in the United Kingdom on behalf of Iranian intelligence, highlighting the risks posed by hostile surveillance and the importance of protecting people facing credible security threats.

On 12 November 2026, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) confirmed that Mostafa Sepahvand, 41, and Farhad Javadi Manesh, 46, had been found guilty of assisting a foreign intelligence service under the National Security Act 2023.

The convictions followed an investigation by Counter Terrorism Policing London into surveillance and reconnaissance conducted against individuals based in the UK.

Among those targeted were journalists working for Iran International, a lawyer and a media production professional.

The case demonstrates how individuals can become targets of organised surveillance because of their professional activities, public profile or perceived political associations.

It also reinforces the importance of proportionate security assessments, early recognition of credible threats and appropriate protective measures.

What Happened in the Iranian Spying Investigation?

The Metropolitan Police confirmed that the two men carried out surveillance and reconnaissance between August 2024 and March 2025.

Their activities targeted individuals associated with organisations considered critical of the Iranian regime.

Investigators established that the defendants gathered information about their targets, including residential and workplace locations, vehicles and personal circumstances.

Evidence recovered from electronic devices included photographs, videos, communications and briefing documents.

The court heard that Sepahvand maintained contact with individuals linked to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), while Manesh assisted with surveillance activity.

Sepahvand was also convicted of preparatory conduct involving an intention that serious violence would be committed against a person in the UK.

Manesh was acquitted of that additional offence but convicted of assisting a foreign intelligence service.

A third defendant, Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori, was acquitted of all charges.

The convictions demonstrate the seriousness with which UK authorities are addressing hostile intelligence activity and threats directed towards individuals living and working in Britain.

How Hostile Surveillance Can Put Individuals at Risk

Surveillance is not inherently unlawful. Legitimate investigative and protective activities can involve observation conducted for lawful and proportionate purposes.

Hostile surveillance is different.

It involves gathering information about individuals, their movements or their surroundings to support intimidation, harassment, unlawful intelligence gathering or potentially more serious criminal activity.

In the Iranian spying case, prosecutors established that the defendants gathered information about the homes, workplaces and movements of their intended targets.

Such information can become significant when combined with other personal details.

Individuals whose work attracts public attention may face heightened exposure, particularly where their roles involve controversial issues, confidential information or disputes with powerful organisations.

Potentially affected groups can include:

• Journalists and media professionals.
• Senior corporate executives.
• Legal professionals involved in sensitive matters.
• Public figures and prominent individuals.
• High-net-worth individuals and their families.
• People facing credible threats, harassment or intimidation.

The level of risk will vary considerably between individuals and circumstances.

A public profile or sensitive occupation does not automatically mean that someone is being monitored.

However, where credible concerns exist, a structured assessment can help establish whether additional protective measures are appropriate.

Why Early Threat Assessment Matters

One of the principal challenges in personal security is distinguishing between ordinary activity, suspicious circumstances and evidence of a genuine threat.

Unfamiliar individuals, unexpected communications or unusual encounters do not necessarily indicate hostile surveillance.

Premature conclusions can create unnecessary concern and distract from more reliable indicators.

A professional threat assessment should consider the information available, the individual's circumstances, any previous incidents and whether concerns can be independently corroborated.

Depending on the situation, this may involve reviewing reported incidents, assessing relevant locations and identifying potential vulnerabilities affecting personal safety.

Where an immediate or credible threat of violence exists, the police and emergency services should be contacted.

Independent security specialists may provide additional support through proportionate protective assessments and practical recommendations.

The objective is to improve personal safety without creating unnecessary restrictions on an individual's professional or private activities.

The Role of Counter-Surveillance

Counter-Surveillance encompasses measures intended to identify, assess and reduce exposure to suspected hostile monitoring.

The appropriate response depends on the nature of the concern.

Physical surveillance, covert technical monitoring and unauthorised access to digital information present different challenges and may require different specialist capabilities.

Where there is evidence suggesting that an individual is being monitored, professional assessment can help determine whether further protective measures or investigative enquiries are justified.

Technical Surveillance Counter-Measures (TSCM) may be appropriate where there are specific concerns about hidden listening devices, unauthorised cameras or tracking equipment.

However, a technical examination does not establish whether someone has been followed or observed in public.

Our Counter-Surveillance and Bug Sweeps (TSCM) service focuses on assessing environments where covert technical monitoring may be suspected.

The distinction between physical and technical threats is important. Security measures should address the actual nature of the concern rather than assuming that every surveillance risk requires the same response.

Protecting Journalists, Executives and Other High-Profile Individuals

The convictions highlight why some individuals may require additional security support because of their professional responsibilities or public exposure.

Journalists, legal professionals and corporate executives may regularly attend meetings, travel internationally or work in environments where sensitive information is discussed.

Where credible threats have been identified, protective measures can help reduce avoidable exposure while allowing individuals to continue their normal activities.

Depending on the circumstances, support may include:

• Personal security and threat assessments.
• Residential and workplace security reviews.
• Journey planning and secure transport arrangements.
• Protective support during travel or public appearances.
• Assessment of security arrangements at meetings and events.
• Appropriate liaison with existing security teams.
• Periodic reassessment as threats or circumstances change.

Such measures should be proportionate to the actual level of risk.

Not every individual requires a visible protection team, and an appropriate security strategy should avoid unnecessary disruption.

Conflict International provides Security & Close Protection for individuals, families and organisations requiring discreet protective support in the UK and internationally.

The Importance of Digital Evidence in Surveillance Investigations

Another significant aspect of the case was the volume of electronic evidence examined by investigators.

Counter Terrorism Policing confirmed that officers reviewed approximately 534 gigabytes of data, including photographs, videos, messages and voice recordings.

Investigators also examined mobile phone location information and communications associated with the surveillance activity.

This evidence helped establish connections between individuals, reported activities and the instructions they received.

The investigation demonstrates how digital information can play an important role in establishing the circumstances surrounding suspected hostile activity.

However, electronic evidence must be examined carefully.

The presence of photographs, location information or communications does not necessarily establish criminal conduct without supporting context.

Where potential criminal activity is involved, evidence should be preserved appropriately and referred to the relevant authorities.

What Organisations Can Learn From the Convictions

Although the case concerned foreign intelligence activity, the wider security considerations extend beyond national security.

Businesses and professional organisations may encounter threats arising from commercial disputes, unwanted attention, harassment or attempts to obtain confidential information.

Senior personnel may also face risks associated with international travel, public appearances or sensitive business relationships.

Organisations should consider whether they have appropriate arrangements for identifying credible concerns and escalating them to those responsible for security.

This may include reviewing how threats are reported, assessing the exposure of senior personnel and ensuring protective measures reflect changing circumstances.

A coordinated approach between corporate security, Risk Management and relevant external specialists can help organisations respond without relying on speculation.

The objective is not to assume that every unusual incident represents hostile intelligence activity.

It is to establish a proportionate, evidence-led response when credible concerns emerge.

How Conflict International Can Assist

Conflict International provides specialist Counter-Surveillance, Security & Close Protection and Risk Management services to individuals, businesses and professional advisers in the UK and internationally.

Our capabilities can support clients facing credible surveillance concerns, unwanted attention or heightened personal-security risks.

Depending on the circumstances, assistance may include protective security assessments, discreet close protection, secure travel arrangements and specialist examination of environments where covert monitoring is suspected.

Through our international network, we can also coordinate appropriate security support for individuals operating across multiple jurisdictions.

Our approach focuses on understanding the specific circumstances, assessing available information and recommending proportionate protective measures.

The Iranian spying convictions demonstrate the potential seriousness of hostile surveillance and the importance of protecting individuals whose professional activities may expose them to targeted threats.

If you have concerns about personal security, suspected hostile surveillance or the protection of senior personnel, contact Conflict International to discuss your requirements in confidence.