Top lawyers rounding on chief prosecutor over China spy case collapse rebuked

Britain’s top prosecutor “got the law wrong” in dropping the China spying charges, a leading lawyer has told Parliament.

The accusation of “failure” against the director of public prosecutions was levelled at Westminster by independent crossbencher Lord Carlile of Berriew, a former terror law watchdog, whose wife is justice minister Baroness Levitt, a close ally of Sir Keir Starmer.

He was joined in his criticism by Labour peer and top barrister Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws who cast doubt on the legal competence of Stephen Parkinson.

But a CPS source has hit back and in a pointed rebuke said legal experts were entitled to offer an opinion “based on published documents and media reports”, while prosecutors made decisions “with full view of the facts”.

Pressure has been growing on Mr Parkinson over the collapse of the China espionage case, which he blamed on insufficient evidence being provided by the Government that Beijing represented a threat to the UK at the time of the alleged offences.

Two parliamentary inquiries will investigate the episode.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the case against Christopher Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and Christopher Berry in September, a month before a trial was due to take place.

Both men, who deny wrongdoing, had been accused of passing secrets to China.

Speaking in the upper chamber during the repeat of an urgent question on the row, Lord Carlile said: “Does the minister agree that the DPP simply got the law wrong in deciding to drop the case?”

“In particular, does she agree that he failed to appreciate that whether China represents a current threat to our national security is a question of fact for the jury, and that he failed to charge as an alternative attempted espionage, available on ample evidence…?”

Responding, Labour frontbencher Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent said: “Although the Government share the disappointment that the prosecution could not continue, the DPP’s decision is independent of the Government.”

She said the Government was committed to ensuring the UK has robust legal measures in place to combat foreign espionage and would keep legislation under review to ensure the security services “are equipped to respond to the evolving threat landscape”.

Lady Kennedy, who has been sanctioned by China for speaking out over its human rights record, pointed out the charges were brought under the dated Official Secrets Act, which had now been largely replaced.

She said: “Certainly in the beginning, that Act seemed to require that someone was an enemy of the United Kingdom, whereas it has evolved that, quite clearly, a nation can be a threat to national security without having to be publicly deemed an enemy.”

Referring to the witness statements sought from the Government by prosecutors, she said: “The repeated requests were being made by the director of public prosecutions, not someone well versed in jury trials from his experience, because he wanted someone to say that China was an enemy.

“This Government and the previous Government were unwilling to say that in the current climate, where, for all kinds of reasons, we are seeking to have some sort of partnership with China on certain issues.”

In reply, Lady Anderson said: “The legal position is a matter for the CPS, and I am not a lawyer – much to my mother’s disappointment.

“As to why we updated the Official Secrets Act, she is right that it required the definition of ‘enemy’.

“There was a reason why members of the House spent many hours debating the National Security Act and why we have new legislation.”

A CPS source said: “We recognise that eminent and respected legal experts are entitled to offer their opinion on the case, based on published documents and media reports.

“CPS prosecutors are ultimately responsible for making independent decisions with full view of the facts.”

They pointed out a professional assessment had been made by CPS lawyers experienced in prosecuting national security and espionage cases, overseen by a seasoned lead counsel.