Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 2h

This was excellent, thanks.

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 8h

A Government that wanted to do "whatever it pleases" wouldn't stop at ditching the ECnHR.

1 2

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 10h

"Labour risk the hypocrisy charge as pre-election fury over the Electoral Commission’s independence amounts to … nowt."

www.politico.eu/newsletter/p...

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 11h

Former National Security Adviser.

Peter Ricketts @lordrickettsp.bsky.social · 12h

It’s striking what a professional job Matt Collins did in these witness statements. The first describes in forensic detail the threat from Chinese intelligence operations and how this was ‘prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state’. 1/2 www.gov.uk/government/p...

Witness statements in relation to alleged breach of Official Secrets Act on behalf of China

As the Prime Minister said in the House, he has carefully considered this matter and, following legal advice, the Prime Minister decided to disclose the witness statements in full.

www.gov.uk

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 11h

Yes, I agree with that. What looks irrelevant to me was the current Government's view of its *current attitude* to China, which is what appears at the end of statement 3.

1

Reposted by Public Sector Lawyer

Mark Elliott @profmarkelliott.bsky.social · 12h

New post, following publication of the Deputy National Security Adviser's witness statements in the China case:

No winners in the China espionage blame game: Six outstanding questions for prosecutors and ministers

publiclawforeveryone.com/2025/10/16/n...

No winners in the China espionage blame game: Six outstanding questions for prosecutors and ministers

Now-published Government witness statements submitted to prosecutors in the China espionage case cast only limited light on what happened. In this post, I outline six key questions that remain to b…

publiclawforeveryone.com

2 2 1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

What's less clear - even after the release of these statements - is what changed over the period to switch the decision from deciding to prosecute to dropping it.

Others no doubt will be commenting on this.

Ends/

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

FWIW I can understand why the CPS didn't proceed given these statements. You'd need to be confident of your witness's answer to the question "was China considered a threat to the national security of the UK", & if they're not prepared to give assurance on that, you've got a problem.

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

I would have thought that the DSA's role in providing these statements on the issue of whether China was an "enemy" would be simply to set out his understanding of what the Government's position was in 2022. Interweaving that with setting out the current position looks unhelpful.

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

As I understand it, the Deputy Security Advisers assist the National Security Adviser, but don't report to him (because he's a Spad), & instead to the Cabinet Secretary.

I don't know what role, if any, the NSA had on these witness statements. www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/na...

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

The National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, is a Special Adviser rather than a civil servant. He has no duty of impartiality, though he is supposed to avoid asking civil servants to do anything that might breach their Code. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/672b3d... he

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

The witness is a civil servant. As such, he serves the Government of the day, but also must act impartially.
www.gov.uk/government/p...

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

The reality here may not be much different between the 2 Govts - China is a sort of semi-enemy - but slight shifts may tip the balance, & the political rhetoric may vary over time.

The extract above sets out how the current Govt frames it, but doesn't IMV help address the position in 2022.

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

What may be an enemy to one Government, at one time, may not be an enemy to another, a few years later.

(More extreme examples: consider how this country viewed the Soviet Union & Germany at various points during the 1940s.)

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 12h

Intrigued by this part of the last witness statement.

The alleged criminal activity took place in 2022, under the last Government. What relevance does the current Government's views have?

www.gov.uk/government/p...

1 1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

Sorry if I misunderstood. But I think there is current legislation that would cover such an offence - the National Security Act 2023 - the problem is that the activity occurred prior to its application, & it couldn't have been an offence under the OSA (& perhaps under no other legislation).

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

I looks like he was charged under section 2 of the 1911 Act, which was repealed in 1989.

www.scottishlegal.com/articles/edi...

1 1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

I don't think there was another offence under that (very short) Act that could have been charged. (Not sure if any other offence was viable.) The limitation of that legislation to spying for an 'enemy' is one reason why it was repealed & replaced. www.gov.uk/government/p...

New espionage offences: factsheet

www.gov.uk

1 1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

An aspect of the Chinese Spy issue I'm unclear on: what's the basis for saying that the appeal case (www.casemine.com/judgement/uk...) broadened or narrowed the test in the OSA 1911?

Looked to me like it did neither, just rejected a narrower interpretation by the appellant.

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

I agree with your last post entirely, & this is something that seems to be a blind-spot for activists of various political persuasions.

2

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

I think this is a fair point (& the Govt's strongest argument). Just not convinced there's sufficient evidence (eg of the intended or likely result of significantly degrading that infrastructure) to warrant such draconian consequences.

1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 1d

I agree it's unhelpful (even though I don't agree on proscription), but this does appear to be, in part, what the Commissioner's there for. I suppose the state parties could always revisit that role or remit, if lots of them felt it was counter-productive.
www.coe.int/en/web/commi...

Mandate - Commissioner for Human Rights - www.coe.int

www.coe.int

1 2

Reposted by Public Sector Lawyer

Heather Green @votingrules.bsky.social · 2d

Q: Will Gov consider removing the Strategy and Policy Statement for the Electoral Commission? [To restore its independence, as urged by Labour in opposition]

A: The Tory authored version will indeed be removed & then replaced with one matching this Gov's priorities for the Commission.

2 1

Public Sector Lawyer @publicsectorlawyer.bsky.social · 2d

People shouldn’t call writers ‘overrated’ when what they really mean is ‘not to their taste’.

I can’t get on with Dickens, Conrad, Woolf, Lawrence & others, but that’s no more their fault than it’s the fault of tomatoes that I can’t stomach them.

bsky.app/profile/rach...

Rachel Feder @rachelfeder.bsky.social · 3d

Tell me your most unhinged literary opinion, as a little treat

6

Reposted by Public Sector Lawyer

Lawrence Freedman @ldfreedman.bsky.social · 2d

Despite the lack of military breakthroughs Putin still talks of Ukraine’s imminent defeat. On what basis does he do so? Latest post considers his theory of victory. (£/free trial) open.substack.com/pub/samf/p/p...?

Putin's theory of victory

The war between Russia and Ukraine is more likely to end with a negotiated ceasefire than with a sweeping military victory though neither seems close.

open.substack.com

7 24 76