Woman, branded a Chinese agent, loses case against Britain’s MI5

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox

MI5 circulated an alert to lawmakers in January 2022 tagging lawyer Christine Lee as a spy for China.

An alert was circulated to lawmakers by the House of Commons Speaker, who said MI5 found lawyer Christine Lee “facilitated financial donations” to parliamentarians on behalf of foreign nationals.

PHOTO: AFP

Follow topic:

LONDON – A woman branded a Chinese spy by Britain’s MI5 has lost her case to sue the spy agency over an alert issued to politicians that said she was an agent working for Beijing.

Lawyer Christine Lee sued MI5 over the

alert issued in January 2022

in which it alleged she was “involved in political interference activities” in Britain on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party.

The warning was circulated to lawmakers by the House of Commons Speaker, who said MI5 found that Ms Lee “facilitated financial donations to serving and aspiring parliamentarians on behalf of foreign nationals based in Hong Kong and China”.

Ms Lee was born in Hong Kong and founded a firm providing consultancy services to Chinese migrants.

She helped set up a parliamentary committee, chaired by Mr Barry Gardiner, a lawmaker for the then opposition Labour Party, designed to discuss issues affecting the Chinese community in Britain.

Mr Gardiner said he received hundreds of thousands of pounds in donations from her, and her son worked in his office.

She denied the MI5 allegations and sued the spy agency for unspecified damages, arguing the agency acted unlawfully and unreasonably by labelling her a risk to the state without any prior finding of guilt.

In evidence given to the tribunal, Mr Gardiner queried whether the timing of the alert was

to divert attention

from former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s admission of an unlawful gathering at Downing Street during the first Covid-19 lockdown.

But the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) rejected the claim brought by Ms Lee and her son, saying MI5 was in its rights to issue the Interference Alert, and that it did not breach their human rights.

“The respondent’s (MI5) functions include protecting parliamentary democracy from actions intended to undermine it by ‘political, industrial or violent means’,” the IPT ruling said.

“While this may include means which are unlawful, and perhaps criminal, the implied powers of the Security Service are not confined to meeting only such unlawful means.”

The ruling came a day after a Chinese national, described in a ruling by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission as a “close confidant” of Prince Andrew and banned from Britain on national security grounds, waived his right to anonymity.

He has been named as Mr Yang Tengbo.

While British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has

sought to thaw ties

with China since taking office in July, London and Beijing have repeatedly traded spying accusations, with British security services warning of Chinese attempts to infiltrate political, business and academic spheres. REUTERS

See more on