Iran's intelligence services accused of targeting UK journalists in surveillance plot

Three Iranian nationals sat in a London courtroom this week, accused of conducting months of surveillance against journalists working for Iran International. Mostafa Sepahvand, Farhad Javadi Manesh, and Shapoor Qalehali Khani Noori face charges under Britain's National Security Act 2023—the first Iranians prosecuted under that statute since it took effect. Prosecutors told jurors the men were engaged in what amounted to spying, gathering intelligence on at least two reporters, Mojtaba Pourmohsen and Kambiz Hosseini, with the stated purpose of enabling serious violence against them.

The prosecution's case rests largely on digital evidence extracted from the defendants' phones after their arrest in May 2025. Sepahvand's device contained searches for Pourmohsen's home address, queries posed to ChatGPT asking for the journalist's location, and what prosecutors described as a targeting package—a document holding Pourmohsen's photograph alongside information about places connected to him. The package included the address of Volant Media, Iran International's parent company, and details about the Clayton Hotel on Chiswick High Road, where Pourmohsen had stayed around Christmas 2024 after becoming concerned about his security. Photographs and videos recovered from the phones showed Malthouse Court, a residential building where Pourmohsen had lived between 2019 and 2023, though prosecutors say the defendants did not realize he had moved.

Cell-site location data placed Sepahvand and Javadi Manesh near Malthouse Court on December 10, 2024. Data from a SIM card in Sepahvand's Mercedes placed the vehicle in the same area. Javadi Manesh later sent Sepahvand photographs and videos of the building, one beginning with a view of the river before panning toward the flats and zooming in. On December 16, location records placed Sepahvand and Noori in the same vicinity. The prosecution presented messages between Sepahvand and contacts identified as Mostafa Ghorbani and someone saved in his phone as Amin Mostafa's friend. In one exchange dated December 8, Sepahvand wrote that he had been sent information about a location and a person. "It's a tourist area, look," he wrote. "They got these from Iran, someone said he/she/it is here." The following day, he told Amin he would visit the location. Amin responded with "God willing you'll see him/her/it" and "it'll be sorted."

The three men have entered not guilty pleas and contest the prosecution's case in different ways. Sepahvand acknowledges carrying out surveillance and reconnaissance for the benefit of Iran but claims he acted under duress—that he feared consequences if he refused. He maintains he deliberately performed poorly so Iranian intelligence would not receive the assistance it sought. Prosecutors dispute this account, noting they found nothing in the messages that resembled a threat. Javadi Manesh and Noori acknowledge visiting locations and recording photographs and videos but say they did not know the activity was intended to assist Iranian intelligence services. The jury will have to decide whether they knew the purpose or whether the circumstances meant they reasonably should have known.

The surveillance extended beyond the two journalists. Material exchanged between Sepahvand and Javadi Manesh included information about Jonathan Turner, a founder of UK Lawyers for Israel. Two aerial images sent by Sepahvand in August 2024 showed addresses connected to the organization and Turner's barristers' chambers. Prosecutors say this material relates to another person who had attracted Iranian intelligence attention for different reasons.

The case is being heard by Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb and is expected to last six to eight weeks, with the prosecution spending roughly two weeks presenting its evidence. The digital trail—searches for addresses, photographs and videos of locations, location records, and messages discussing visits—forms the backbone of the prosecution's case. Prosecutors say the ultimate objective was that one or more targets would be subjected to serious violence, with Sepahvand intended to carry out the violence himself and the other two gathering information to assist in planning an attack. The jury will ultimately decide what the three men knew and whether prosecutors have proven their case beyond reasonable doubt.