Collapse of China spy case was ‘shambolic — but not a cover-up’
The case against two men accused of spying for China collapsed at the 11th hour because of ‘systemic failures’ by prosecutors and government officials, a UK parliamentary inquiry has concluded.
The case against two men accused of spying for China collapsed at the 11th hour because of “systemic failures” by prosecutors and government officials, a parliamentary inquiry has concluded.
In a highly critical report the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy said the handling of the case against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry had been “beset by confusion” and was at times “shambolic”.
However, it cleared ministers of interfering in the prosecution to avoid antagonising China and said it found no evidence of a “co-ordinated high-level effort to bring about the collapse of the prosecution”.
It did question the decision to drop the charges, saying it was “surprised” that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) considered the evidence available “insufficient to put before the jury”.
Mr Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and Mr Berry, a business consultant, were accused of passing secrets to Beijing between 2021 and 2023. They both deny wrongdoing. Charges were dropped in September, when the CPS said it could not secure evidence from the government that China was viewed as a national security threat, prompting opposition accusations of a “cover-up”.
The committee launched an investigation into the collapsed case, taking evidence from ministers, prosecutors and senior Whitehall security officials. In its report, published on Wednesday, the cross-party group of MPs and peers blamed the collapse of the trial on a breakdown in communications between Whitehall officials and prosecutors.
Matt Collins, the government’s deputy national security adviser, had said he could not describe Beijing as a “threat” to national security, the threshold that prosecutors said was necessary to bring a prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.
The committee said it had found evidence of “misaligned expectations” that contributed to the decision to discontinue the case. Collins, it added, “said he was clear from the outset that he would only provide evidence in line with government policy, whereas the CPS told us it required evidence on matters of fact. This discrepancy was evidently a key factor in the collapse of the case. The significance was apparently not appreciated until the process was far advanced.”
It said that some of the “to and fro” between prosecutors and officials before the case collapsed looked “shambolic”, adding: “Overall it is clear that there were serious systemic failures and deficiencies in communications, co-ordination and decision-making.”
In its recommendations, the committee urged the Cabinet Office and security services to work with the CPS to formalise principles for handling sensitive cases within the next six months. It also recommended establishing a new rule for a formal case “conference” within 30 days of such charges being brought to avoid a “lack of clarity” over the evidence in future.
A CPS spokesman said: “We recognise the strong interest in this case. We will review the recommendations carefully and work with partners to identify where improvements can be made. Our decisions are made independently and based on law and evidence, and that principle remains at the heart of our work.”
A government spokesman added: “We welcome the committee’s report that makes clear that allegations about interference in this case were baseless and untrue. The decision to drop the case was taken independently by the CPS. We remain disappointed that this case did not reach trial.”
The Times
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout