China Spy Case Collapses After UK Fails to Call Beijing a ‘National Security Threat’

A major espionage trial involving two men accused of spying for China collapsed last month because the UK government didn’t provide evidence that Beijing was a national security threat at the time of the alleged offences. The case was dropped by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) just weeks before trial.

What was the case?

Christopher Cash, 30, a former parliamentary researcher, and Christopher Berry, 33, a teacher from Oxfordshire, were both charged under the Official Secrets Act. They were accused of passing politically sensitive information to Chinese intelligence between December 2021 and February 2023 — allegations that both men have denied.

Why was it dropped?

In a letter to MPs, Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said the CPS had spent “many months” trying to obtain further evidence from the current Labour government. But despite multiple witness statements, none confirmed that China was considered a threat to UK national security during the time of the alleged offences — something that was required for the prosecutors to be able to prosecute Cash and Berry under the Official Secrets Act of 1911.

Parkinson explained that a previous ruling involving a group of Bulgarian nationals spying for Russia had set a new bar. That judgment made it clear that a country must be officially recognised as an “enemy” — meaning it posed a national security threat — at the time of the offence for a case to proceed under the Official Secrets Act.

“In light of that legal precedent, further evidence had to be sought. But by late August 2025, it became clear this evidence would not be forthcoming,” he wrote.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said that prosecutions must be based on the facts at the time of the offence — not updated government positions. “You can’t prosecute someone two years later in relation to a designation that wasn’t in place at the time,” he said, adding that “nothing changes that fundamental, whoever is in government.”

How has the government responded?

Critics, especially from the Conservative Party, claim Labour deliberately avoided calling China a threat to prevent diplomatic fallout. The Sunday Times reported that senior figures — including the national security adviser Jonathan Powell — had discussed the case before the charges were dropped.

Some senior figures have called the situation a "muddle." Former Attorney General Dominic Grieve said it appeared officials had not fully thought through what would be needed in court. “It may matter less how you describe it in official government documents if you are prepared to put the evidence forward at a court case to explain why a country in fact constitutes an enemy status,” he said.

Others are less forgiving. Former DPP Lord Macdonald said the public deserves a proper explanation. “You simply cannot have a serious national security case collapsing without some proper explanation being given to the public.” He also criticised what he described as briefings from No. 10 and the Home Office that seemed to place blame on the prosecutors.

Despite recent moves to reset UK-China relations — including a visit by Foreign Secretary David Lammy to Beijing and a quiet July trip by the UK’s national security adviser — many in Westminster believe the government has put diplomacy ahead of accountability. MI5 has previously warned about the scale of Chinese espionage, calling it a “sustained campaign” on a “pretty epic scale.” A 2023 Intelligence and Security Committee report said China had infiltrated "every sector" of the UK’s economy. But neither the current Labour government nor the previous Conservative one officially designated China as a national security threat at the time of the alleged spying. Without that, the trial couldn’t move forward.

For now, the two men walk free, and the public is left with questions — not just about national security, but also about transparency at the highest levels of government.