Deputy National Security Adviser Expresses Surprise Over Case Drop

The case against former parliamentary researcher Christopher Cash and his colleague Christopher Berry has been abandoned due to insufficient evidence, prompting surprise from Matt Collins, the deputy national security adviser. On September 3, 2023, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) determined it could not secure a conviction, leading to renewed scrutiny in Westminster regarding the implications of Collins’ witness statements.

During a session with Parliament’s Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, Collins expressed his astonishment at the CPS’s decision to drop the case. He had been advised by external counsel throughout the proceedings and believed that he had provided adequate evidence. “I was advised throughout… whether we felt we had given enough. It was his advice that he thought we had,” Collins stated.

The core of the controversy lies in Collins’ reluctance to categorically describe China as a threat to national security, a stance he attributed to the policy of the then-Conservative government. He remarked, “I believe what they were asking me to say was to use the generic term that China is a threat, or China is an active threat, which is not in line with government policy at the time.”

Details of the Case Collapse

In his testimony, Stephen Parkinson, the director of public prosecutions, indicated that the evidence provided by Collins would have led to the dismissal of the case had it gone to court. He explained that Collins’ statements failed to establish that China was an “active threat” to national security as required by law. Parkinson emphasized, “The responsibility of prosecutors is to place cases before the court on the basis of sufficient evidence to secure a conviction.”

Initially, Collins had submitted a witness statement in 2024, which prompted the CPS to charge Cash and Berry. Following a legal ruling regarding the definition of an “enemy” under the Official Secrets Act, prosecutors requested Collins to provide further evidence that would explicitly label China as a threat. Although Collins submitted additional statements outlining various threats posed by China, he refrained from using the term “generic threat,” which ultimately led to the case’s downfall.

Parkinson clarified that the inclusion of language reflecting the current Labour government’s policy on maintaining a positive trading relationship with China did not undermine the prosecution’s position. He maintained that the crux of the issue was the insufficiency of the statements to prove the case.

Implications and Future Proceedings

Collins addressed questions regarding his decision to incorporate government policy into his witness statements, stating he was advised by counter-terrorism police to do so in order to prevent conflicts with the new government’s stance. He firmly denied discussing his witness statements with ministers or special advisers, highlighting that he was warned such discussions could “pervert the course of justice.”

The meeting on September 1, 2023, which included civil servants and national security adviser Jonathan Powell, has drawn significant attention and speculation. Collins and Cabinet Secretary Sir Chris Wormald both asserted that the discussion focused on various scenarios regarding UK’s relationship with China, rather than the evidence itself.

On Wednesday, the committee is set to hear from Attorney General Lord Hermer and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Darren Jones, which may provide further clarity on the implications of the case’s collapse and its impact on national security policy. The unfolding details continue to highlight the complexities of intelligence, national security, and the challenges faced when navigating diplomatic relationships.