Testimony in China spy case ‘more than adequate’, says ex-CPS head

England’s former Director of Public Prosecutions has said that witness statements drafted for the trial of two men over allegations they spied for China were “more than sufficient” to be used at trial.

Deputy National Security Adviser Matt Collins’ comments describing China as a threat to the UK’s economic interests went far enough to be put before a jury, Lord Ken MacDonald KC told the Financial Times on Thursday.

MacDonald, who was DPP from 2003 to 2008, said: “It is a self-evident principle of the law that economic security is a core aspect of national security, and so there is absolutely no doubt that Collins’ comments made it clear in the clearest terms that China represents a threat to our national security.”

He added: “The fact that China was willing to recruit spies shows that it poses a threat to national security. These statements were more than enough to proceed with prosecution in my view.”

Witness statements released by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on Wednesday from the collapsed prosecution have raised new questions about why the case cannot proceed to trial.

The CPS confirmed over the past month that it had been left with a hole in its case by three statements made by Collins over the course of nearly two years.

The Public Prosecution Service claims it met the minimum evidence to bring charges against the two men in April 2024, but insists this is no longer the case as of September this year, forcing it to drop the charges.

Christopher Cash, who was a parliamentary researcher and director of the China Terrorism Research Group, and Christopher Perry, who worked as a China researcher, denied any wrongdoing and were formally acquitted.

Statement of the first witness

Read the entire document

Collins filed a 12-page statement dated December 2023, four months before Cash and Berry were charged. This document supported the Public Prosecution’s decision to prosecute the two men.

The statement addresses information that was allegedly passed from Cash to Perry and then to a person named “Alex,” who CPS said provided it to a senior member of the Chinese Communist Party.

The men’s trial was based on evidence that the prosecution claimed showed that the Chinese state recruited Berry as an agent and used Cash as a “sub-source” due to his access to parliamentarians in his role at the CRG.

The statement alleges that in July 2022, Perry met with a senior Chinese Communist Party leader, which the second statement indicates was Kai Qi, now China’s No. 5 official. When Perry told Cash about the meeting, Cash said, “You’re in the spy zone now.”

“I would like to reiterate that I am completely innocent,” Cash said on Wednesday. “Not only because the case against me was dropped, but because at no time did I intentionally assist Chinese intelligence.”

Perry’s attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Perry previously said he had “never accessed or handled any classified information, and has never expressed or harbored… any pro-China political sympathies.”

The main purpose of Collins’ statement was to set out the Deputy National Security Adviser’s view on whether information Perry allegedly provided to Chinese intelligence from Cash was “harmful” to the UK.

“This statement sets out my assessment of whether providing information of the type that one of the suspects is alleged to have provided to Alex would have been prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state.”

This is a central test in the law the men were accused of breaching, the Official Secrets Act 1911 (OSA). The statement does not explicitly refer to another important test in the law, which is whether the information was given to the “enemy.” But Collins describes Britain’s view of China.

He added, “Chinese intelligence services are highly capable and carry out large-scale espionage operations against the United Kingdom and other international partners to advance the interests of the Chinese state and harm the interests and security of the United Kingdom.”

The “enemy” question was cited by Stephen Parkinson, DPP and head of the Crown Prosecution Service, as the crucial problem that subsequently proved fatal to meeting the evidentiary threshold.

A July 2024 Court of Appeal ruling in another espionage case – two months after Cash & Perry were charged – made clear that “enemy” could mean any country that posed a threat to the UK’s national security.

In that other case, involving Russia, the defense argued unsuccessfully that the “enemy” test was not met because there was no war, or possibility of war, between the UK and Russia.

The ruling requires CPS to obtain more evidence, Parkinson said. However, lawyers disputed this, highlighting that the ruling did not change the law, merely clarified it and, if anything, showed how broad the interpretation had been.

Statements of the second witness

Read the entire document

Collins’ second statement comes months later and after the change of government. Now it is the Labor Party that is in power, not the Conservatives. (It was dated February 2024, but the government said it was actually February 2025.)

The three-page witness statement begins with a warning that did not appear in the previous document.

“There are limits to what I can say in a public forum due to the need to protect sensitive information and, ultimately, the UK’s national security. However, I have endeavored to provide as much detail as possible.”

Collins then goes on to describe China as a “threat” but focused on the fact that this is related to “economic security.” He did not use the terms “enemy” or “national security” in relation to any threat posed by China.

“China is an authoritarian state, with different values ​​to the UK. This presents challenges for both the UK and our allies. Both China and the UK benefit from bilateral trade and investment, but China also represents the greatest state-level threat to the UK’s economic security.”

The Deputy National Security Adviser, a civil servant, then makes a pointed reference to the rapprochement with China that Starmer has sought since taking office.

“But it is important for me to stress that the government is committed to seeking a positive economic relationship with China. The government believes that the UK must continue to engage with international partners on trade and investment to grow our economy, while ensuring that our security and values ​​are not compromised.”

His first statement, under the Conservatives, had said only that the UK wanted “open, constructive and predictable relations” with Beijing.

The appeals court ruling in the other espionage case states that “friendly powers fall outside the scope” of the definition of “enemy” in the Foreign Security Act.

Callum Miller, the Lib Dem MP and the party’s foreign affairs spokesman, said after the witness statements were published: “Did the emphasis on the government’s desire for a positive relationship with China effectively collapse this trial?”

The government insisted that Collins was “given complete freedom to provide evidence without interference”, and Starmer repeatedly claimed that the evidence could only clarify the previous Conservative government’s position on China.

Testimony of the third witness

Read the entire document

Collins gave his third and final three-page witness statement, dated August 2025. The trial was scheduled to begin in October.

He repeated the disclaimer he had made in his second witness statement about the restrictions he faced in providing sensitive national security information to the UK.

Collins then goes on to describe the previous Conservative government’s positions on China, during the period when the alleged crimes were committed.

“Between 2021 and 2023, the UK government publicly expressed a number of concerns about the long-term strategic challenge that China poses to the UK under Chinese authorities, including the growing Chinese espionage threat that the UK faces.”

He also gave examples of the “malicious cyber activity” China has used to target the UK, saying Chinese espionage operations “threaten the UK’s economic prosperity, resilience and the integrity of our democratic institutions”.

“As I said in my first statement, Chinese intelligence services are highly capable and carry out large-scale espionage operations against the United Kingdom to advance the interests of the Chinese state and harm the interests and security of the United Kingdom. Chinese espionage operations threaten the United Kingdom’s economic prosperity and resilience and the integrity of our democratic institutions.”

Again, Collins does not specifically use the words “national security” or “enemy” in this context, and then repeats that the government wants a “positive relationship with China.”

“But it is important for me to stress that the UK government is committed to seeking a positive relationship with China to promote understanding, cooperation and stability. The government’s position is that we will cooperate where we can; compete where we need to; and challenge where we must, including on national security issues.”

The phrase “collaborate… compete… challenge” appears in Labour’s 2024 election manifesto, and was subsequently used by government ministers after Starmer took office.

Deputies and attorneys disputed the idea that Collins’ statements did not go far enough to allow the DPP to proceed with prosecution.

Emily Thornberry, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, said on Thursday that the SCP appeared to have taken the “nuclear option”.

“Given that all of the witness statements by the Deputy National Security Advisor pointed to China as a threat, I cannot understand why prosecutors took the nuclear option of collapsing this case rather than leaving it to the jury,” she said.

Additional reporting by David Shepard