Met Police Sergeant Charged With Perverting Justice After BBC Undercover Probe Into Charing Cross Custody Suite

A serving Metropolitan Police officer has been charged in connection with an attempt to obstruct an investigation that followed a BBC undercover documentary exposing alleged misconduct at a London custody suite. Sgt Sadiq Al-Hasani, 37, has been charged with perverting the course of justice and is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, according to the force.

The charge makes Al-Hasani the first person to face criminal proceedings as a direct result of the BBC Panorama programme "Undercover in the Police," which aired in October 2025. The documentary was filmed inside the custody suite at Charing Cross police station by a journalist working covertly alongside officers, and it secretly captured a number of officers making racist remarks and boasting about violence inflicted on suspects.

According to a statement issued by the Metropolitan Police, the charge relates to an allegation that Sgt Al-Hasani, who was attached to the Central West Command Unit, "deliberately sought to discourage another officer from making a statement to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)." The IOPC, which oversees complaints and serious misconduct allegations against police forces in England and Wales, opened its own investigation following the broadcast.

The police watchdog said it believes Al-Hasani approached a junior officer who had been identified as a potential key witness in the broader Charing Cross investigation, with the intention of obstructing or interfering with that inquiry. The charge dates to an alleged incident on 2 October 2025 — just one day after the programme was broadcast. Al-Hasani was formally charged on 13 August, and the Met confirmed that he remains suspended from duty.

The origins of the wider case trace back to a mandatory conduct referral made by the Metropolitan Police to the IOPC on 3 October 2025, two days after the documentary aired. The force is legally obliged to refer certain allegations of serious misconduct to the watchdog. As part of its work, the IOPC reviewed material gathered during the making of the programme that had not been broadcast, giving investigators access to evidence beyond what the public saw.

That investigation concluded in June this year, at which point the IOPC referred a file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service, which decides whether charges should be brought against individuals. The decision to charge Al-Hasani is the first criminal consequence to emerge from that referral, though further charging decisions could still follow as the process continues.

The IOPC also disclosed that 15 officers have been found to have committed gross misconduct in connection with the case. All but one — who is a former police constable — have been barred from policing, meaning they can no longer serve in any force in the country. The scale of those findings illustrates how far the fallout from the programme has spread across the force, touching not only the officers whose conduct was broadcast but also those accused of failing to report or act on what happened.

Beyond those 15 cases, investigations are still continuing into the conduct of a further 14 officers or members of police staff. That figure suggests the total number of individuals facing scrutiny could rise, and it leaves open the possibility of additional disciplinary hearings, dismissals, or criminal charges in the months ahead.

Perverting the course of justice is regarded as one of the most serious offences a police officer can face, because it strikes at the integrity of the justice system itself rather than at a single victim. Prosecutors must show that a defendant acted with the intention of frustrating or defeating the course of justice, and the offence carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, although sentences in practice vary widely according to the circumstances.

The case also raises questions about the culture of the custody environment at Charing Cross, one of London's busiest police stations. Custody suites are the point at which suspects are booked in, searched and held, and officers working there exercise significant power over people who are detained and often vulnerable. Allegations that staff boasted about violence toward suspects, alongside racist remarks, go to the heart of public confidence in how policing is delivered in the capital.

For the Metropolitan Police, the episode adds to a long list of challenges around standards and accountability. The force has faced repeated criticism over its handling of internal investigations and its treatment of whistleblowers, with critics arguing that officers who speak up about colleagues' behaviour can face pressure or ostracism. The allegation that a sergeant tried to stop a junior officer from giving a statement to the IOPC is likely to be cited as evidence of that wider problem.

The IOPC's role in the case highlights the importance of independent oversight. Because police forces cannot fully investigate themselves, serious allegations are referred to the watchdog, which has the power to interview officers under caution, compel evidence and recommend charges. The fact that this process was triggered by a television investigation — rather than by routine internal reporting — may intensify scrutiny of whether the force would have identified the problems on its own.

The undercover method used by Panorama also remains contentious. While secret filming can expose behaviour that would otherwise stay hidden, critics argue that covert reporting by journalists inside police stations raises ethical and legal issues. In this case, however, the material gathered appears to have proved central: not only did the broadcast prompt public outrage, but the unbroadcast footage reviewed by the IOPC fed directly into its evidence file.

Al-Hasani has not yet entered a plea, and he is scheduled to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday. Because the case is now before the courts, the Metropolitan Police and the IOPC are likely to limit further public comment. The hearing will be an early procedural step, and the matter is expected to be sent to a crown court given the seriousness of the charge. For the officers and staff still under investigation, and for the public watching the fallout, the case represents a significant test of whether the accountability system works as intended.