Legal experts have questioned the Crown Prosecution Service's explanation for dropping charges against two Britons accused of spying for China, amid a political row over responsibility. Former Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald suggested the current DPP, Stephen Parkinson, may have been 'over-fussy' in seeking further government assurances that China posed a current threat to national security before the trial could proceed.
Christopher Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and his friend Christopher Berry had been due to stand trial this month under the 1911 Official Secrets Act. Both denied the charge of spying between 2021 and early 2023, when the Conservatives were in power. The CPS abandoned the prosecution last month after failing for months to obtain the required assurances.
Nick Vamos, a former CPS lawyer, said prosecutors likely 'messed up' either when charging the men in April 2024 or when dropping the case. He noted that the definition of 'an enemy' under the 1911 Act was clarified in a separate spying case involving Bulgarians accused of spying for Russia, where Dame Victoria Sharp ruled that an enemy could include a country representing a current threat to UK national security.
Macdonald said Sharp's ruling had lowered the bar for espionage prosecutions, while Vamos argued it expanded the definition. Spy chiefs, including MI5 chief Ken McCallum, have previously described China as a national security threat. However, Parkinson complained that the government would not state this in witness statements for the Cash and Berry case.
Gavin Millar KC suggested the government may have found it awkward to detail China's threat in open court. The political fallout saw Labour and Conservatives blame each other, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer expressing disappointment and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accusing Labour of collapsing the trial to appease Beijing.
