Britain’s Chinese Spying Case Collapses Amid Controversy

The British government is facing criticism after a high-profile prosecution against two men accused of spying for China collapsed last month. Critics suggest the case may have been dropped to avoid upsetting Beijing, though officials reject these claims.

The case involved Christopher Cash, 30, a former director of the China Research Group think-tank, and Christopher Berry, 33, a researcher for a senior lawmaker. Both men were arrested in March 2023 on suspicion of passing sensitive political information to a Chinese intelligence agent known as “Alex.” In April 2024, they were formally charged under the 1911 Official Secrets Act (OSA). Both men denied any wrongdoing. China described the case as fabricated and a malicious slander.

In an unexpected development, Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the charges on September 15, a month before the trial was scheduled to begin. The CPS stated the case no longer met the evidential threshold required for prosecution.

Why the Case Collapsed

The collapse of the case has sparked controversy in the UK. Opponents of Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government argue that the prosecution was undermined to protect diplomatic and economic ties with China. Critics have particularly questioned the role of Britain’s National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, citing alleged ties to China. The government, however, maintains that the CPS acted independently. Starmer expressed disappointment that the trial did not proceed but emphasized that ministers did not influence the decision.

The issue largely revolves around the legal interpretation of the OSA. The law, created to address German espionage before World War I, makes it illegal to communicate documents that could benefit “an enemy.” At the time of the charges in 2024, China was not officially designated a threat, though the previous Conservative government described it as an “epoch-defining challenge.”

After a separate case in July 2024, the London Court of Appeal clarified that an “enemy” under the OSA is a country posing a current threat to UK national security. The CPS requested new evidence from the government to establish China as such a threat at the time of the alleged offences, but no statements explicitly confirmed this.

Ongoing Dispute and Criticism

Legal experts say both the government and the CPS may have struggled with interpreting the law correctly. Some argue that the Court of Appeal ruling should have simplified the case, making it easier to define China as an “enemy” under the OSA. Despite this, the lack of clear official statements led to the CPS dropping the charges.

The British government has indicated that the evidence provided to the CPS will be made public. Starmer stated that the disclosure of these statements could clarify the legal basis of the decision, though some experts caution it may not fully resolve debates over the government’s handling of the case.

The controversy highlights ongoing concerns about Chinese espionage in the UK. Lawmakers and intelligence agencies have repeatedly warned of China’s attempts to influence politicians, businesses, and academia, raising broader questions about national security and transparency.