Shortly before mid-morning on Monday, Tory parliamentarian Alicia Kearns was on the end of an unwelcome phone call. “I’m unsure how how to tell you this,” stated the law enforcement agent on the line. A short time later, the Old Bailey heard what Kearns had just learned. A highly anticipated trial of two men—an ex-staffer to Kearns, Christopher Cash, and an associate, Christopher Berry—charged with spying for China would be abandoned.
The trial had been expected to serve as a significant challenge of London’s already fraught relationship with Beijing. Set to begin at Woolwich Crown Court in the fall, it was projected to feature allegations that “politically sensitive” information was being transferred from Westminster to a member of China’s ruling politburo.
Unexpected Development of Events
Kearns, a central figure in the proceedings, had received no advance notice. Just a week earlier, police from the specialist counter-terrorism branch had contacted her to arrange a familiarisation visit. Now, she expressed disappointment, stating, “There seems very amiss. Should prosecutors possesses the evidence, why not present it in front of a jury and allow it to be judged?”
The Crown Prosecution Service indicated that the case had been “kept under continuous review.” Prosecutors announced that the “evidential standard” was “no longer met,” even though the same standard had been applied when the two men were formally accused in April 2024 for allegedly breaching the Official Secrets Act.
Background of the Accused
Cash and Berry, who had always maintained their innocence, now had no case to answer. Cash stated outside the court, “The last two and a half years have been a nightmare for me and my family.” Berry’s solicitor, John Armstrong, voiced frustration that his client had “not been given the satisfaction of knowing why the case was dropped.”
Cash, thirty, had initially served as an intern, then a researcher, and finally became the director of the China Research Group—a collective of Beijing-sceptic Conservative MPs formed in April 2020. Its first chair was Tom Tugendhat, and Cash assisted him on China-related matters. After Tugendhat was appointed security minister, Kearns took over from him as chair and took on Cash.
Kearns portrayed Cash as highly competent and a Mandarin speaker. She had asked him to obtain a parliamentary pass—a process requiring a degree of vetting—to make him more readily available, though he was normally based at a serviced office in Waterloo.
She noted that Cash “frequently described his love of China—but was always sharply dismissive of the Communist party.” He had assisted the MP lobby to insert national security provisions aimed at preventing Chinese companies from undercutting British rivals and reveal the presence of covert Chinese police stations in the UK.
Allegations and Counterclaims
The CPS had alleged a direct chain of communication from Cash to Beijing’s politburo. An individual deemed to be “a Chinese intelligence agent” was said to have requested at least 34 reports from Berry on subjects of political interest, some concepts for which were suggested by Berry. Subsequently, the CPS alleged, Berry acquired information for inclusion from Cash.
The two had known each other for several years, having both worked as teachers in Hangzhou between 2017 and 2019. Though the CPS claimed “the majority of the information” provided by Cash was solicited by Berry, it also stated that over time Cash shared “unrequested, ‘off the record’ information too.”
Meanwhile, the “Chinese agent” was alleged to have passed on “confidential information” obtained from Cash via Berry to a “high-ranking official of the Chinese Communist party.” This was deemed “prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK.”
China criticised the proceedings from the outset, with a spokesperson for the embassy labeling the allegations “entirely fabricated and malicious slander.”
Fallout and Rumors
Cash did not have to defend himself in court, but supporters say he was not compensated or coerced into assisting. He accepts that he passed on information to Berry in good faith, but insists it was openly available material or basic commentary—such as who might win the next election.
Berry’s legal team was expected to argue that he believed the 34 reports were written for a corporate client in China looking to expand in the UK. Armstrong, his lawyer, stated the reports were a “confection of open-source material,” with Berry “providing commentary on contemporary politics.” Any information from Cash, he said, was non-sensitive Westminster gossip.
Some have theorized that prosecutors were responding to external influence as Labour seeks to improve UK-China trade relations. Kearns accused Labour of a “supine approach” toward Beijing.
A Downing Street spokesperson remarked that it was “deeply regrettable that these individuals will not face trial.” Security minister Dan Jarvis echoed these sentiments, stressing that the decision to drop the case had been “made autonomously” by prosecutors.
Legal and Geopolitical Repercussions
Luke de Pulford, executive director of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, suggested that if the case had proceeded, the defendants might have tried to “litigate the question as to whether China was an enemy.” Such a designation is required under the 1911 Official Secrets Act but not under its replacement, the 2023 National Security Act.
Defining China as an enemy goes beyond normal government language and could have damaged diplomatic ties. In a recent strategic defence review, China was described as posing a “complex and ongoing challenge” to the UK.
Prosecutors deny that any outside pressure influenced their decision. The CPS concluded that the case was no longer strong enough, leaving two devastated lives in its wake. Armstrong noted that his client, now a self-employed financial analyst, was “attempting to pick up the pieces.”
Cash, for his part, expressed unhappiness that some MPs were still implying he had a case to answer. “My arrest has destroyed my life and the career I loved,” he said. “This further campaign to assert my guilt simply amplifies the injustice I have already faced.”
