Head of CPS faces cross-party pressure to explain China spy trial collapse | Espionage

The director of prosecutions has come under intense cross-party pressure to explain why the Chinese spying case collapsed as MI5 expressed disappointment with the decision and MPs launched a series of investigations into how the decision was made.

The chairs of the home affairs, foreign affairs, justice and national security committees wrote to Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) chief Stephen Parkinson on Thursday, urging him to make “a fuller statement on dropping the charges”.

They asked Parkinson “what steps have you taken to make ministers aware” that the case was at risk of collapse due to a change in case law requiring China to be designated as a “threat to the national security of the United Kingdom”.

Committee chairmen also asked whether a key government witness, Matthew Collins, one of Britain’s deputy national security advisers, had been warned that his evidence might be insufficient and “how much consideration was given to seeking evidence from other sources” about the level of security threats posed by China.

Parkinson is expected to appear before MPs to explain why the CPS dropped the charges against former parliamentary investigators Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry in September, a month before the trial was due to begin.

Earlier on Thursday, Ken McCallum, director general of MI5, said he was disappointed with the decision and revealed that the security services had foiled a threat from Beijing last week, even though it had nothing to do with parliament.

“I am of course disappointed that opportunities to prosecute activities that threaten national security are not pursued for whatever reason,” the spy chief said, stressing that he would “never shy away from confronting threats to the United Kingdom.”

McCallum added that Chinese state actors pose a national security threat “every day” and warned that the number of people investigated by the spy agency for state-based threats from all countries has increased by 35% in the past year.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer reiterated his disappointment at the dismissal of the case and stressed there was no government involvement in the decision. Downing Street argued it would be “frankly absurd” for the prime minister to intervene after being told just days in advance that the trial was on the verge of collapse.

The Conservative Party’s shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, also wrote to Parkinson, demanding that the CPS publish all correspondence it had shared with the government about the evidence.

The row concerns the decision by Conservative MPs Alicia Kearns and Tom Tugendhat to quash the case under the Official Secrets Act 1911 against former parliamentary investigator Christopher Cash and teacher Christopher Berry on 15 September.

The CPS had previously said it had dropped the case because the government had failed to provide sufficient evidence that China posed “a threat to the national security of the United Kingdom”; This definition was required by espionage legislation that was later repealed.

On Wednesday, Starmer released statements from three witnesses presented by Collins in a bid to rebut claims that the government had a hand in disrupting the trial.

But the prime minister still faces questions about why he did not intervene to prevent the case from being dropped on the content of the government’s evidence. Parkinson told committee chairmen at a special meeting on Wednesday that the evidence was only 5% lower than what was needed, saying prosecutors had tried “for months” to get what was needed.

Ministers also faced questions about why the final statement submitted by Collins reflected the Labor government’s policy towards China, despite Starmer’s insistence that the collapsed case was based on the previous Conservative government’s stance. Downing Street said Collins added the line on her own initiative to provide context about current government policy.

The joint committee on national security strategy (JCNSS) and the intelligence and security committee (ISC) will have the power to compel ministers, prosecutors, government and intelligence officials to testify and will conduct investigations into the matter.

Unlike select committees, the ISC has legal powers to compel witnesses. Its chairman, Lord Beamish, said they had “obtained the intelligence behind the case” and now planned to “investigate how this secret material was subsequently used”.

The government is still pursuing a reset in UK-China relations; Several high-level trips are planned this year, including by national security adviser Jonathan Powell. Plans are afoot for Starmer to make a bilateral visit to China next year.

China has said the espionage allegations in Collins’ evidence are unfounded and that it has never interfered in the internal affairs of other countries. An embassy spokesman added: “The so-called ‘witness statements’ released after the CPS dropped the case are full of false accusations against China. They are nothing more than made-up fabrications created out of thin air.”

A critical decision on whether to approve controversial proposals to establish a major Chinese embassy in east London has been postponed for the second time and will be taken on or before December 10.

The head of MI5 has signaled that he is relatively relaxed about the ambassadorship proposal; This could pave the way for ministers to approve the proposal despite fierce opposition from critics. “MI5 has more than a century of experience in dealing with national security risks arising from the presence of foreign embassies on British soil,” McCallum said.

He said MI5 and sister agency GCHQ had counter-espionage expertise and had advised ministers on how to handle the development. “You would expect us to give the government our best professional security advice and to keep that advice confidential,” he said.

But JCNSS chairman Matt Western wrote to the government on Monday, warning that approving the embassy was “not in the UK’s long-term interests”.

In a letter to Steve Reed, the housing secretary responsible for making the decision, Western said the outpost’s proposed location posed “peacetime eavesdropping risks and sabotage risks in a crisis” due to its proximity to fiber optic cables, data centers and telecommunications exchanges serving Canary Wharf and the City.

The Guardian reported last year that China was blocking the redevelopment of the UK’s embassy in Beijing while the fate of the proposed embassy was being determined. The renovation of the British embassy is becoming an increasingly urgent concern for some sections of the government.