Tories seek to keep up pressure over collapsed China spy case

The Conservatives have asked the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) if it would be able to restart prosecutions against two men accused of spying for China.

Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry were both acquitted in court in September after prosecutors unexpectedly dropped the charges. Both men deny the allegations.

The Tories say they want to know if the prosecution could be restarted if new evidence is brought forward by the government declaring China a threat to national security.

But there is an exceptionally high bar to prosecuting someone for a second time after an acquittal in court - and it is not possible to do so for people charged under the Official Secrets Act.

Mr Cash, a former parliamentary researcher, and Mr Berry were charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024, when the Conservatives were in power.

They were accused of gathering and providing information prejudicial to the safety and interests of the state between December 2021 and February 2023.

Last week, the head of the CPS said the case collapsed because evidence could not be obtained from the government referring to China as a national security threat.

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Stephen Parkinson said while there was sufficient evidence when charges were originally brought against the two men in April 2024, a precedent set by another spying case earlier this year meant China would need to have been labelled a "threat to national security" at the time of the alleged offences.

On Tuesday, Tory shadow home secretary Chris Philp and shadow Cabinet Office minister Alex Burghart wrote to Mr Parkinson, asking him to confirm "if the government were to provide the evidence that the CPS had requested, this would enable you to restart the prosecution".

Mr Cash and Mr Berry were declared not guilty in court after the CPS told a senior judge there was no longer a case to put before a jury at a trial. That means they were acquitted.

To prosecute someone for a second time, there must be new and compelling evidence that could not have been available in the original case - and such a case can only be brought with the permission of the Court of Appeal.

But that rule is irrelevant to the two men, as it only applies to the most serious of offences, such as murder and rape.

Mr Cash and Mr Berry were charged under the Official Secrets Act, which is not one of the alleged crimes that can ever be prosecuted for a second time.

That protection against what is known as "double jeopardy" is a basic legal principle that has existed for 800 years.

Much of the pressure has focussed on the work of the government's national security adviser Jonathan Powell, whom the Conservatives say has "questions to answer" over his role in the collapse of the trial.

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted he has "full confidence" in his national security adviser, telling broadcasters: "He is doing an excellent job."

Speaking to MPs on Monday, Security Minister Dan Jarvis said Mr Powell made no decisions about the content of any evidence provided in the collapsed case.

He said it was deputy national security adviser Matthew Collins who provided a witness statement in December 2023, when the Conservatives were in power, with further witness statements requested and provided in February and July this year, under the new Labour government.

Mr Collins was given "full freedom to provide evidence without interference", said the minister, adding: "Ministers and special advisers did not take decisions about that evidence and they were not cited on the contents."

Jarvis said all the evidence provided was based on the law and the Tory government's position on China at the time of the alleged offences.

He added that the decision about whether to proceed with the prosecution was taken by the CPS, "who were hamstrung by antiquated legislation".

Downing Street said on Tuesday that neither the prime minister nor Mr Powell had seen the statements to the CPS, and it would be "inappropriate" for them to have done so.

The Official Secrets Act of 1911 has since been replaced by the 2023 National Security Act, which Jarvis said closed "the loopholes that have been exposed by this particular case".

"Suggestions that the government concealed evidence, withdrew witnesses, or restricted the ability of witnesses to draw on particular bits of evidence are all untrue," Dan Jarvis said in his Commons statement.

Jarvis sought to blame the previous Tory government for not classifying China as a threat to national security and being too "slow" to update national security laws.

Defending her party's record, Badenoch pointed to a number of examples where Tory ministers and government documents had described China as a "threat".

"The trial has collapsed because for months and months, the government has been refusing to give the CPS vital information," she said.

"This wasn't a mistake. This wasn't a misunderstanding. This looks like a deliberate decision to collapse the case and curry favour with the regime in China."

She added: "I suspect that [ministers] have decided that closer economic ties with China were more important than due process and our national security."

The Liberal Democrats have called on the government to "come clean on why this case fell apart" and publish all correspondence between the deputy national security adviser and the CPS.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.