Inquiry into espionage case raises concerns

In light of the recent announcement regarding a formal inquiry by MPs into the case collapse against two accused spies for China, Joanna Ludlam, Partner at Jenner & Block and Co-Chair of the firm’s Global Hearing Preparation and Global Crisis Management and Strategic Risk practices, provides a critical analysis of the situation. She stated, “It’s questionable whether the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy’s formal inquiry will get to the bottom of what happened.” Ludlam emphasised the limitations inherent in select committees, which serve as a platform for parliamentary accountability yet lack true independence since they are comprised of MPs. She remarked, “Select committees are a means for parliament to hold the government to account. But they’re made up of MPs, so aren’t truly independent. That’s especially problematic when both main political parties have questions to answer (as appears to be the case here).”

Furthermore, Ludlam pointed out that select committees do not possess the same enforceable powers as a court of law or a statutory public inquiry. This impacts their ability to ensure accountability among witnesses. She highlighted, “In contrast to a court of law or a statutory public inquiry, select committees also lack the enforcement powers needed to compel witness testimony and production of documents. There have been recent examples of witnesses simply refusing to engage without meaningful sanction.” Therefore, she concluded that the committee’s investigation may struggle to uncover the true reasons behind the prosecution's collapse, stating, “All this means that the Committee’s inquiry may be unable to establish the true reason underlying why the prosecution collapsed.”

Joanna Ludlam brings extensive experience to the table, advising clients in high-stakes public inquiries and navigating complex legal issues across various sectors, further reinforcing the significance of her insights in this ongoing situation.

Copyright & permissions