Source · Select Committees · National Security Strategy (Joint Committee)
Recommendation 7
7
Acknowledged
We did not find evidence of deliberate efforts to obstruct the prosecution.
Conclusion
We did not find evidence of deliberate efforts to obstruct the prosecution. The sequence of events nevertheless raises some substantial questions of whether the Government officials and counsel working on the DNSA’s witness statements could have found an alternative formulation which remained in line with the government’s overarching position at the time. This would have made clear that China posed an active national security threat. We note that the Crown Prosecution Service made extensive and repeated efforts to obtain evidence to this effect. It also raises the question of whether the Crown Prosecution Service was right to conclude that the legal tests remained unmet. (Conclusion, Paragraph 73)
Government Response Summary
The government welcomed the committee's finding that there was no evidence of deliberate efforts to obstruct the prosecution and that the Attorney General acted with constitutional propriety, but did not address the committee's questions regarding alternative evidence formulations or the CPS's legal conclusions.
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
The Government welcomes the Committee’s finding that there was no evidence of improper influence or coordinated high-level effort to collapse the prosecution. We thank the committee for clarifying that there was no deliberate effort to obstruct the prosecution, despite characterisations of a 1 September meeting of senior officials. The Government is also pleased the Committee is satisfied that the Attorney General and Law Officers acted with constitutional propriety.