04, Feb. 2026 /Mpelembe Media/ — The 2026 release of the “Mandelson Files”—a cache of 3.5 million documents from the US Department of Justice—has triggered a terminal crisis for Peter Mandelson, resulting in his resignation from the Labour Party and the House of Lords, as well as a formal criminal investigation by the Metropolitan Police. The documents suggest that Mandelson provided the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein with a “brazen” inside track on market-sensitive UK government business during the 2008–2010 financial crisis.
Forensic Evidence of Market Leaks The core of the criminal probe into Misconduct in Public Office focuses on several specific breaches of confidentiality while Mandelson served as Business Secretary:
The £20bn Asset Sale (June 2009): Mandelson allegedly forwarded a confidential memo regarding the sale of state-held land and property to Epstein on the same day it was written. Epstein immediately inquired about specific “saleable assets,” suggesting an intent to profit from the advance notice.
The €500bn Eurozone Bailout (May 2010): Documents indicate Mandelson provided Epstein with advanced notice of a massive EU rescue package roughly 24 hours before its official announcement, messaging him: “Sd be announced tonight”.
Banking Lobbying and Bonuses: Emails reveal Mandelson coached JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon (via Epstein) to “mildly threaten” then-Chancellor Alistair Darling over proposed taxes on bankers’ bonuses.
Political Tip-offs: Hours before Gordon Brown’s public resignation in May 2010, Mandelson allegedly messaged Epstein: “Finally got him to go today”.
Financial Ties and Deception The files uncovered $75,000 in payments from Epstein-linked accounts to Mandelson between 2003 and 2004, as well as a £10,000 payment to Mandelson’s husband in 2009. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has accused Mandelson of having “lied repeatedly” during the 2024 vetting process for his appointment as US Ambassador by withholding the full extent of these financial ties. While the Cabinet Office reportedly “surfaced” the relationship during vetting, the appointment was allegedly pushed through by Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney as a political priority.
Unique Legal Sanctions The government is pursuing unprecedented measures to strip Mandelson of his remaining honours:
Forfeiture of Peerage Act 2026: Because peerages are permanent gifts from the Crown, the government is fast-tracking a bespoke Act of Parliament to “extinguish” his title—the first such move since 1917.
Privy Council Removal: The King has formally removed Mandelson from the Privy Council, stripping him of the “Right Honourable” prefix.
Metropolitan Police Probe: Commander Ella Marriott confirmed an investigation into Misconduct in Public Office, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Detectives are specifically scrutinising Mandelson’s use of a private BT email account to bypass official government servers and the Official Secrets Act.
Furthermore, the European Commission has launched an audit to determine if Mandelson used his tenure as EU Trade Commissioner (2004–2008) to share sensitive trade data, a breach that could result in the forfeiture of his EU pension.
The most sensitive market leaks discovered in the 2026 release of the “Mandelson Files” primarily concern confidential financial and political information shared during the 2008–2010 global financial crisis,. These disclosures, found within a massive cache of documents released by the US Department of Justice, have prompted a criminal investigation into potential “insider trading” and breaches of the Official Secrets Act,.
The most significant market-sensitive leaks identified in the files include:
The €500bn Eurozone Bailout (May 2010): Mandelson allegedly provided Jeffrey Epstein with advanced notice of a massive €500bn EU rescue package nearly 24 hours before its official announcement,. Emails show Mandelson confirming rumors to Epstein with messages such as “Sd be announced tonight” and “Sources tell me 500 b euro bailout,” which would have allowed Epstein or his associates at firms like JPMorgan to hedge or trade on the news before markets reacted,.
The £20bn Government Asset Sale (June 2009): Mandelson is accused of forwarding a confidential memo from Gordon Brown’s special adviser regarding plans to sell off £20bn in state land and property to reduce national debt,. Epstein’s immediate response—asking “What saleable assets?”—suggests a direct intent to profit from this non-public information,.
Confidential Tax and Treasury Briefings: In 2008, Mandelson allegedly forwarded a confidential tax policy document intended for Prime Minister Gordon Brown to Epstein. Additional files show he shared sensitive Treasury briefings, providing an “information edge” that could be used for financial speculation,.
Lobbying on Bankers’ Bonuses: Documents suggest Mandelson coached JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon (via Epstein) on how to lobby then-Chancellor Alistair Darling. Mandelson allegedly advised Dimon to “mildly threaten” the UK government over a proposed tax on bank bonuses, suggesting the bank might stop buying UK debt or cancel plans for its London headquarters,.
Gordon Brown’s Resignation (May 2010): Hours before the Prime Minister went public with his resignation, Mandelson allegedly tipped off Epstein with the message: “Finally got him to go today”. Analysts suggest this tip-off provided an advantage for currency or market speculation regarding the stability of the UK government.
The Metropolitan Police are currently investigating these leaks as part of a probe into Misconduct in Public Office, a charge that carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment,. Detectives are specifically scrutinising Mandelson’s use of a private BT internet email address to bypass official government servers, which they suspect was a deliberate attempt to keep this correspondence “off-grid” and evade the Official Secrets Act,,.
The failure of the 2024 vetting process to prevent Peter Mandelson’s appointment as US Ambassador is attributed to a combination of alleged deception by Mandelson and political prioritisation by senior government officials. According to the sources, the failure occurred across several key areas:
1. Ignored Cabinet Office Warnings
Internal reports from the Cabinet Office reveal that the vetting process did not actually fail to identify the risk; rather, the vetting team “surfaced” Mandelson’s relationship with Jeffrey Epstein during the 2024 appointment process. A specific memo sent to the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney, explicitly warned that the relationship constituted a “significant reputational and security risk”.
2. The Political “Waiver”
Despite these red flags, the appointment was pushed through as a “political priority”. Documents scheduled for release via a parliamentary “Humble Address” are expected to show that Morgan McSweeney and other high-ranking Downing Street figures “waved away” these security concerns to facilitate the appointment of a long-time party ally. The opposition, led by Kemi Badenoch, has accused the government of deliberately ignoring these warnings.
3. Allegations of Repeated Deception
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has defended the government’s actions by claiming that Mandelson “lied repeatedly” during the vetting process. While the Epstein relationship was known, the government maintains that Mandelson provided “not wholly truthful” declarations of interest, specifically withholding the full extent of his financial ties. Most notably, the vetting process failed to uncover $75,000 in payments from Epstein-linked accounts to Mandelson between 2003 and 2004.
4. Systematic Oversight Failures
The government’s current legal and political defence rests on the argument that they were defrauded by the appointee rather than being negligent. Starmer argued in Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) that the administration was “not in possession of the full facts” in 2024 because of Mandelson’s omissions on his “Conflict of Interest” form.
Current Investigative Focus
As a result of these failures, the “Mandelson-Epstein Inquiry” and a separate Whitehall inquiry are now investigating:
Whether Morgan McSweeney suppressed warnings from the Cabinet Office to secure Mandelson the job.
The exact content of the Conflict of Interest form Mandelson signed to determine if he committed a “serious breach of the ministerial code”.
Why the 2024 vetting did not trigger further scrutiny of Mandelson’s use of a private BT internet email address, which is now at the heart of a Metropolitan Police criminal probe into Misconduct in Public Office.
The legal process being used to strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage is described in the sources as “bespoke and brutal,” involving a combination of unique legislation, Royal action, and constitutional reform. Because a peerage is considered a permanent gift from the Crown, it cannot be removed simply through resignation.
The specific steps being taken include:
The Lord Mandelson (Forfeiture of Peerage) Act 2026: Since existing laws are insufficient, the government is fast-tracking a bespoke Act of Parliament to “extinguish” the title of Baron Mandelson of Foy. While Mandelson’s resignation from the House of Lords on 4 February 2026 removed his right to sit and vote, only an Act of Parliament can legally revoke the title itself.
The 1917 Precedent: This unique process draws on the Titles Deprivation Act 1917, which was originally used during the First World War to strip British titles from enemy royals. The 2026 legislation is considered a modern application of this rare precedent, cited on the grounds of “serious breach of the ministerial code” and “national security considerations”.
Removal from the Roll of the Peerage: Separately from the Act of Parliament, the government has utilised a Royal Warrant to remove Mandelson from the official Roll of the Peerage. This administrative action ensures he can no longer be addressed as “Lord Mandelson” in any official capacity.
Stripping of Privy Council Status: In a rare sanction, the King is formally removing Mandelson from the Privy Council. This strips him of the “Right Honourable” prefix, a title that is normally held for life.
Broader “Recall of Peers” Reform: Prime Minister Keir Starmer is using this specific case as a catalyst for a broader constitutional change. He is pushing for a permanent “Recall of Peers” mechanism, similar to the system used for MPs, so that future members can be removed for serious misconduct without requiring a bespoke Act of Parliament every time.
The legislation also includes a Public Inquiry Clause, which mandates an independent probe—the “Mandelson-Epstein Inquiry”—to investigate both Mandelson’s conduct and the vetting failures of the current administration.
