Recommendation 5

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 Crown Prosecution Service that, once the decision had been taken to rely on the Deputy National Security Adviser (DNSA), it would not have been feasible to seek another witness who would effectively contradict the DNSA’s position. (Conclusion, Paragraph 51) Were there issues with the provision of evidence?