Spy case collapse blamed on failure to label China a security threat

Two men suspected of espionage for China died because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat, according to the UK's top prosecutor. Christopher Cash, 30, and Christopher Berry, 33, both deny the charges, were dismissed by prosecutors last month, sparking criticism from ministers and MPs alike. Stephen Parkinson, the director of public prosecutions (DPP) in a rare move, said the Crown Prosecution Service attempted to obtain further evidence from the government over many months, but witness statements did not meet the legal requirements to sue. According to Sir Keir Starmer, the government could only rely on the previous government's report, which dubbed China a "epoch-defining challenge.

Mr Parkinson said that although there was ample reason to sue at the time when charges were brought in April 2024, a precedent set by another spy case earlier this year, had then raised the threshold to convict people under the Official Secrets Act. At the time of the suspected offences by Mr Cash and Mr Berry, China would have been required to have been branded a

thoes to national security. The government has always said that it is

frustrated

the trial has ended, and Mr Parkinson's intervention comes after weeks of rumors that the prosecution will not proceed. According to Sir Keir, the government's description of China could not change retrospectively and had to be based on the position of the previous government.

Now that isn't a political to and fro, it's a matter of law.

You must indict people on the grounds of the suspected offence,

the prime minister told reporters.

All the attention needs to be on the Tory government's policies.

Lab deliberately sank the trial,

Labour leader Kemi Badenoch said in her address to a Conservative Party conference,

because the prime minister wants to suck up to Beijing. Mr Berry, a teacher from Witney in Oxfordshire, and Mr Cash, he parliamentary researcher from Whitechapel in London, were arrested in March 2023 as part of an investigation into counter-terrorism police. Between December 2021 and February 2023, theywere accused of gathering and delivering facts prejudicial to the state's safety and interests. Anyone suspected of espionage can only be charged under the Official Secrets Act if the information they obtained was useful to an enemy. Mr Parkinson wrote a letter last month that

the lawsuit will not proceed to trial if the evidence no longer meets the evidential test,

adding that he did not go into the reasons why. In his latest letter, sent to MPs, he said he was taking the unusual route of disclosing more details because government briefings have been sent commenting on the evidential situation. During a separate spying case involving six Bulgarian nationals espionage for Russia earlier this year, the need to characterize China as a threat to national security in order to sue arises. They were found guilty under the Official Secrets Act. According to the statute, a person is guilty of espionage if they act in a way that is

prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state

and obtained intelligence that could be

directly or indirectly beneficial to an enemy. In this case, Bulgarian nationals Mr Parkinson said that an enemy under the terms of the Official Secrets Act

includes a state that represents at the time of the offence, a threat to the UK's national security. This meant that further evidence should be obtained from the government in order to proceed with the trial, according to the prosecutor, but he did not say that the evidence was not forthcoming.Efforts to obtain the facts were delayed for many months,the author said,notwithstanding the fact that further witness testimony was released, none of these stated that China posed a threat to national security at the time of the offence.

When Parliament returns to explain what happened, former DPP Lord Macdonald ordered that Attorney General Lord Hermer, the government's chief legal advisor, appear before MPs to tell them what had happened.

You simply cannot have a serious national security case collapsing without any clear explanation being given to the public,

he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

What really surprised me about all of this was the willingness of Number 10 and the Home Office and others to brief against the prosecutors,

he said. Perhaps the DPP had been

a bit over-fussy here in requesting the government to make a statement in open court, which would be embarrassing in some ways to British national interests,

he said.

Of course China is a threat to the UK's national security,

he said.

One can understand why the trial was warranted and why the government may not want to announce it publicly, but the allegations may have shown it by recruiting British citizens as spies for China, and I don't know why they didn't do it.

There had been a sustained movement of Chinese espionage on apretty epic scale in 2023, according to Ken McCallum's lead. According to Anda's report, which was released in July 2023 by the Intelligence and Security Committee, China had penetrated every part of the UK's economy. As the trial began, former Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee and former Attorney General Dominic Grieve told the BBC that somebody just missed something because nobody, not someone was going to be concerned about whether China was going be classified as an enemy or not.

It's less important how you describe it in official government papers if you're able to present the facts in a court lawsuit to explain why a country in fact has the status of an enemy country.

My impression from reading what the DPP - and even Keir Starmer's - has said is that there seems to have been a muddle. There was a failure to get to grips with what might be required to be proved in court when this trial was underway. Extraordinary the trial had concluded just days before it was set to begin, according to BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera.

There had been a lot of apprehension about the prosecution.

I think there should be fireworks,he said.And this doesn't discredit the fact that the government didn't want fireworks around China.

Senior Whitehall officials had met with senior Whitehall executives to discuss the trial early last month, according to the Sunday Times, before the charges were dismissed.

The suggestion that the government withheld evidence, drew witnesses, or restricted the ability of a witness to draw on a specific piece of evidence are all untrue,

Number 10's press secretary said on Monday. Since last year's general election, Labour government has shown signs of wanting to re-establish links between the UK and China, and it has been conducting a cross-Whitehall audit of Britain's relations with the country. David Lammy became only the second foreign secretary in six years to visit China in October 2024, where he said Beijing and London should

find pragmatic solutions to difficult problems. Jonathan Powell, Sir Keir's top strategist and political associate, visited the country earlier this year. The trip, which took place in July, was not announced by the UK government, but it became public when the Chinese government revealed the particulars of a meeting between Mr Powell and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Mr Powell said in Beijing that

expressed Britain's willingness to expand dialogue and contact with China to help establish a long-term, productive and long-lasting relationship.