Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts

National Security Strategy (Joint Committee) Open Inquiry
Opened: 16 Oct 2025 Parliament page
9 Recommendations
12 Conclusions
1 Report
2 Oral sessions
19 Letters
2 Events
Activity timeline 23 events
12 Feb
2026
Report published
3 Dec
2025
Report published
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
1 Dec
2025
Correspondence
29 Oct
2025
Oral evidence
28 Oct
2025
Correspondence
Oral evidence sessions 2 sessions
29 Oct 2025
View on parliament.uk
Rt Hon Darren Jones MP · Duchy of Lancaster The Rt Hon. the Lord Hermer KC · Attorney General's Office
27 Oct 2025
View on parliament.uk
Matthew Collins · Cabinet Office Sir Chris Wormald · Department of Health and Social Care Stephen Parkinson · Crown Prosecution Service Tom Little KC (First Senior Treasury Counsel)
Title HC No. Published Items Response
2nd Report - Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts HC 1414 3 Dec 2025 21 Responded
Recommendations & Conclusions
12 results
Clear
3 Conclusion Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
The witness statements provided by DNSA were however clear that China posed a range of...
The witness statements provided by DNSA were however clear that China posed a range of threats to the United Kingdom’s national security. In our view it is plain that, taken together, these amounted to a more general active threat to … Read more
Government Response
The government concurred with the committee's assessment that the outdated Official Secrets Act 1911 was the root cause of the prosecution's failure, stating the National Security Act 2023 would have allowed the prosecution to proceed. They also acknowledged caution about remaining risks and reiterated the independent professional judgment of the CPS.
Cabinet Office
View details
4 Conclusion Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We are surprised that the Crown Prosecution Service considered the evidence available insufficient to survive...
We are surprised that the Crown Prosecution Service considered the evidence available insufficient to survive a submission of ‘no case to answer’ and to be put before the jury. (Conclusion, Paragraph 45)
Government Response
The government acknowledges the committee's findings and will develop new guidance for government departments on providing evidence in national security prosecutions, covering witness capacity, coordination with policing and the CPS, legal advice disclosure, and optimal statement approaches.
Cabinet Office
View details
5 Conclusion Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
It is regrettable that the prosecution hinged on the testimony of a Government witness who...
It is regrettable that the prosecution hinged on the testimony of a Government witness who would not state directly that China posed an active threat to national security at the material time. We acknowledge 48 however the arguments from the … Read more
Government Response
The government welcomed the committee's conclusion and, in response to the implied issues, committed to producing new guidance on government witnesses in national security prosecutions, covering witness capacity, coordination, legal advice disclosure, and statement formats.
Cabinet Office
View details
8 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We do not seek to unpick any of these professional judgements.
We do not seek to unpick any of these professional judgements. In future, however, it is essential that improved communications, common sense, clarity on strategic objectives and appropriate flexibility can be applied to ensure finely balanced judgements ultimately favour the … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts the need for improved communications and will conduct an internal exercise involving the AGO, CPS, and Cabinet Office to produce new guidance for government departments providing evidence in national security prosecutions, which will be shared with the Committee.
Cabinet Office
View details
11 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We recommend that timely acquisition and delivery of evidence should be made a priority in...
We recommend that timely acquisition and delivery of evidence should be made a priority in future. In response to this report the Government should confirm what steps it will take, and commit to implementation within six months. (Recommendation, paragraph 77) Read more
Government Response
The government agrees that timely evidence acquisition is a priority but disputes the Committee's conclusion of delays, providing a timeline to demonstrate that witness statements were produced in a timely manner despite complex reviews.
Cabinet Office
View details
12 Conclusion Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We remain uncertain about the capacity in which the DNSA was giving evidence, and the...
We remain uncertain about the capacity in which the DNSA was giving evidence, and the extent to which civil servants can act as witnesses of fact on matters that are not made explicit by government policy. (Conclusion, Paragraph 78)
Government Response
The government explained that the DNSA understood he was giving evidence as a witness of fact based on his experience and position. To provide clarity on this, the government committed to producing new guidance on the capacity of government witnesses in criminal proceedings.
Cabinet Office
View details
13 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We recommend the Government clarifies this issue in response to this report.
We recommend the Government clarifies this issue in response to this report. (Recommendation, paragraph 79) Questions of improper influence
Government Response
The government clarifies the DNSA's understanding of his role as a witness of fact providing evidence aligned with government policy, and commits to producing new guidance to provide future clarity on the capacity of government witnesses in national security prosecutions.
Cabinet Office
View details
17 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
As the international security environment worsens, we expect the number of national security prosecution cases...
As the international security environment worsens, we expect the number of national security prosecution cases to rise. We urge the Government to avoid characterising the failure of the Cash/Berry case as a one-off peculiarity created solely by outdated legislation: there … Read more
Government Response
The government heeds the Committee's caution regarding "structural parallels" in the National Security Act 2023, committing to carefully handle issues like diplomatic sensitivities and ensuring new, future-focused guidance for government witnesses addresses these challenges in future prosecutions.
Cabinet Office
View details
18 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
The Cabinet Office and Security Services must conduct an internal exercise to consider scenarios in...
The Cabinet Office and Security Services must conduct an internal exercise to consider scenarios in which the Government might be asked to provide diplomatically sensitive evidence under the National Security Act 2023. They must then work with legal partners, including … Read more
Government Response
The government commits to an internal exercise led by the AGO, CPS, and Cabinet Office to produce guidance for government departments on providing evidence in national security prosecutions, aiming to formalize principles and improve coordination for sensitive cases.
Cabinet Office
View details
19 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
The Cash/Berry case suggests there may be value in providing a degree of top-level support...
The Cash/Berry case suggests there may be value in providing a degree of top-level support to the Deputy National Security Advisers (DNSAs), particularly if they face significant public exposure. We suggest the Government uses the case conference recommended in paragraph … Read more
Government Response
The government accepted the recommendation to consider and review support mechanisms and line management structures for senior officials acting as witnesses in high-profile cases, committing to cover this in new guidance being produced by the AGO, CPS, and Cabinet Office.
Cabinet Office
View details
20 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
We acknowledge and commend the important work led by the National Security Adviser and his...
We acknowledge and commend the important work led by the National Security Adviser and his Deputies. We appreciate that there is deep experience and co-operation across the Cabinet Office leadership. We nevertheless recommend that the Government reviews the nature of … Read more
Government Response
The government welcomes the recommendation to review the support and line management structures for DNSAs and other bound witnesses in sensitive cases, confirming this will be specifically covered within the guidance product being developed by the AGO, CPS, and Cabinet Office.
Cabinet Office
View details
21 Recommendation Accepted
2nd Report - Espionage cases and t…
The Government should also review the adequacy of high-level support and advice which is made...
The Government should also review the adequacy of high-level support and advice which is made available to bound witnesses in sensitive national security cases. The Government should outline the findings of that review to the Committee within six months. (Recommendation, … Read more
Government Response
The government welcomes the recommendation to review support for bound witnesses in sensitive cases and will cover this specifically as part of the guidance product being developed by the AGO, CPS, and Cabinet Office.
Cabinet Office
View details
Government Response AI assessment · 21 of 9 classified
Accepted 12
Accepted in Part 1
Acknowledged 4
Not Addressed 3
Rejected 1
Total 9 recs + 12 conclusions
Correspondence 19 letters
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to Baroness Scotland (former AG) relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 11 November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to Sir Stephen Lovegrove (former NSA) relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 14 November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to Robert Courts KC (former Solicitor General) relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 19 November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to Rt Hon Sir Michael Ellis KC (former AG), relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response (dated 12 November 2025)
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to Dominic Grieve KC (former AG) relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Crown Prosecution Service relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 12 November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to the Deputy National Security Adviser relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 14 November 2025
Parliament page
1 Dec 2025 To committee Letter from the Chair to the Attorney General relating to the Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts inquiry, and the response, dated 12 November 2025
Parliament page
28 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from Lord Carlile of Berriew CBE KC relating to the dropped Chinese spy case, dated 20 October 2025
Parliament page
24 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from the Attorney General, relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 23 October
Parliament page
24 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions, Crown Prosecution Service to the Foreign Affairs Committee, Home Affairs Committee, Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy and Justice Committee, relating to Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts, dated 24 October 2025
Parliament page
24 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from the National Security Adviser and Deputy National Security Adviser, relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 23 October
Parliament page
24 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 23 October
Parliament page
24 Oct 2025 To committee Letter from the Cabinet Secretary, relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 23 October
Parliament page
21 Oct 2025 From committee Letter to Rt Hon Darren Jones MP, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 20 October 2025
Parliament page
21 Oct 2025 From committee Letter to Rt Hon Lord Hermer KC, Attorney General relating to the inquiry into ‘Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts’, dated 20 October 2025
Parliament page
17 Oct 2025 From committee Letter to the National Security Adviser and Deputy National Security Adviser, relating to espionage cases, dated 17 October 2025
Parliament page
17 Oct 2025 From committee Letter to the Cabinet Secretary, relating to espionage cases, dated 17 October 2025
Parliament page
16 Oct 2025 From committee Letter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Crown Prosecution Service from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Home Affairs Committee, Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy and Justice Committee relating to Espionage cases and the Official Secrets Acts, dated 16 October 2025
Parliament page