The UK government is facing mounting pressure from opposition parties to disclose evidence from the collapsed spy case against two individuals accused of spying for China, following the Crown Prosecution Service’s indication that it would not block the release of the material.
The controversy stems from the unexpected collapse of the prosecution against Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry, who were charged under the Official Secrets Act for allegedly gathering and providing information prejudicial to UK national security between December 2021 and February 2023. Both men deny the allegations, and the case was dropped in September after prosecutors concluded they could not proceed without key evidence from the government.
The Crown Prosecution Service stated that the case foundered because it could not obtain necessary evidence confirming that China was considered a national security threat at the time of the alleged offences. This requirement emerged from a legal precedent set in another spying case earlier this year, highlighting significant gaps in the existing legislation and the government’s historical assessments of China.
In response, the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats have intensified calls for the Labour government to publish the witness statements and correspondence related to the case. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp argued that transparency is essential to address suspicions of a cover-up, while Liberal Democrat spokesperson Calum Miller emphasized that failure to release the documents would fuel concerns about the government’s stance on China and national security priorities.
The CPS has clarified that the evidence submitted by Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Collins is not its property and that the decision to release it rests solely with the government. This stance has shifted the focus onto ministers, who previously suggested that the CPS advised against publication, leading to accusations of obfuscation and lack of accountability from opposition figures and critics.
The collapse of the case has raised questions about the possibility of restarting prosecutions, but legal experts note that the principle of double jeopardy prevents retrial for offences under the Official Secrets Act. The Conservatives have inquired whether new evidence could revive the case, but the high legal bar makes this unlikely, as such protections have been a cornerstone of British law for centuries, ensuring fairness in judicial processes.
Security Minister Dan Jarvis defended the government’s actions, stating that all evidence provided was based on the previous Conservative government’s assessment of China and that ministers did not interfere. He attributed the case’s failure to “antiquated legislation” and highlighted that the new National Security Act of 2023 addresses such loopholes, though the political fallout continues to resonate in Westminster and beyond.
The dispute has escalated into a political battleground, with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accusing the government of appeasing China to secure economic ties, while Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces intense scrutiny during upcoming parliamentary sessions, including Prime Minister’s Questions. This affair underscores ongoing tensions in UK-China relations and may influence future policy on national security, foreign engagements, and governmental transparency.