Hermer to face questions on alleged China spy case intervention

Published: 21 October 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Lord Hermer, the UK Attorney General, is set to appear before Parliament next week to answer questions regarding his potential involvement in the high-profile espionage case involving Christopher Cash and Christopher Berry. The inquiry comes amid growing public scrutiny over the collapse of the case, which has been a political headache for the government.

The Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy has summoned Lord Hermer to provide evidence on whether he “intervened” in the handling of the espionage investigation, which involved allegations that Cash and Berry collected intelligence from Parliament and passed it to Chinese intelligence services between 2021 and 2023. Alongside Lord Hermer, Darren Jones, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, has also been called to give evidence, reflecting the committee’s interest in clarifying the government’s role in the controversial collapse.

The case against Cash and Berry, both of whom deny wrongdoing, collapsed unexpectedly earlier this month, prompting immediate questions about potential political or ministerial influence. The Government’s involvement—or lack thereof—was first reported by The Telegraph, which suggested that senior officials may have been aware of the case’s fragility before it formally ended.

In a letter sent to Lord Hermer, the committee’s chairman, Matt Western, outlined a series of detailed questions regarding the Attorney General’s potential role. These include whether Hermer had been made aware of difficulties in the case before it collapsed, whether he had been consulted on the decision to discontinue proceedings, and whether it would have been appropriate for him to intervene in the decision-making process. Lord Hermer has been asked to respond to the letter by Thursday, ahead of his public appearance next week.

Although the Government has repeatedly denied that any ministers or special advisers were involved in submitting evidence for the case, the spotlight remains on Sir Keir Starmer’s administration. Downing Street has confirmed that Starmer was informed two days before the trial’s collapse that the case was at risk, but he did not intervene to provide additional evidence. This disclosure has fuelled speculation over the degree to which the Labour government may have influenced or directed the proceedings.

Further controversy has arisen over witness statements prepared by Matthew Collins, the deputy national security adviser, who submitted evidence for the prosecution. Sir Keir agreed last week to publish Collins’ three witness statements, two of which were drafted while the Labour government was in office. While ministers have insisted the statements reflected policy positions of the previous Conservative government, portions describing Labour policy have prompted accusations of political influence. Labour ministers have vehemently denied these claims, dismissing them as “baseless.”

In addition to examining Lord Hermer’s potential involvement, the committee has raised questions for Darren Jones regarding the Labour government’s broader stance on China. Specifically, Mr Western asked whether ministers consider China a “direct threat to UK national security interests,” and whether any official or special adviser instructed government officials on the type or nature of evidence to be submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). These questions suggest that the inquiry is not solely focused on the collapse of the Cash and Berry case but also on the government’s approach to national security and international relations with China.

The appearance of two of Sir Keir’s closest political allies before the committee is likely to reignite public debate over the case, which has been closely followed by both media and political commentators. Reports first surfaced on October 3 indicating that Jonathan Powell, Starmer’s national security adviser, had chaired a meeting concerning the case shortly before it collapsed. While Downing Street denies that Powell influenced Collins’ witness statements, sources within Whitehall indicate that the meeting was convened to assess the potential “fallout” from the trial’s unexpected termination.

Concerns within the Foreign Office and Treasury reportedly influenced the handling of the espionage proceedings. Officials feared that prosecuting Cash and Berry could jeopardise the government’s ongoing efforts to “reset” diplomatic relations with China, which the Labour administration has prioritised since last year’s election. These internal dynamics have raised questions about whether national security decisions were driven by diplomatic considerations rather than purely legal or evidential factors.

The Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy is responsible for scrutinising the government’s handling of critical security issues, including espionage, intelligence, and foreign relations. The inquiry into the Cash and Berry case is expected to be thorough, with members seeking transparency regarding both procedural and political elements of the trial’s collapse. Observers have highlighted the importance of this investigation for public confidence in the rule of law and the impartiality of the UK justice system in cases involving national security.

Experts have noted that the inquiry may have broader implications for how the UK handles espionage investigations in the future. Questions about ministerial or senior official involvement, particularly in politically sensitive cases, could influence the design of internal safeguards, the role of the Attorney General, and procedures for submitting evidence in high-stakes prosecutions.

For Lord Hermer, the hearing represents a critical opportunity to clarify his position and address allegations of improper intervention. While the Government has officially denied any misconduct, the public scrutiny surrounding the case continues to grow. Legal analysts suggest that the answers provided by Hermer and Jones could either reassure or further alarm observers, depending on the clarity and completeness of their testimony.

The Cash and Berry espionage case underscores the complex interplay between law, national security, and politics. It also highlights the challenges faced by governments in balancing legal obligations with diplomatic priorities. The controversy has drawn attention from opposition parties, media outlets, and international observers, all of whom are closely monitoring how the UK addresses allegations of interference in legal proceedings.

As Lord Hermer prepares to appear before Parliament, political commentators predict intense questioning on both procedural and political fronts. The public and parliamentary members alike are keen to understand the degree to which the Labour government may have shaped or influenced the case, particularly given its potential impact on national security and international relations.

The inquiry’s outcome could have lasting consequences for government accountability, the independence of the CPS, and the credibility of espionage prosecutions in the UK. It also raises broader questions about transparency in cases involving foreign intelligence, the role of ministers in sensitive legal matters, and the mechanisms in place to prevent political interference in judicial processes.

While the investigation is still in its early stages, the upcoming appearances of Lord Hermer and Darren Jones are expected to shed light on the government’s actions and provide a clearer picture of the factors that contributed to the collapse of the Cash and Berry trial. Parliament, media, and the public will be watching closely as the inquiry unfolds over the coming weeks.