Lawyer Christine Lee loses case against UK’s MI5 over Chinese spy alert
By Reuters
A lawyer has lost her case to sue Britain’s domestic spy agency MI5 after it issued an alert branding her a Chinese spy, a London tribunal ruled on Tuesday.
Lawyer Christine Lee had sued MI5 over the alert issued in January 2022 in which it alleged she was “involved in political interference activities” in the United Kingdom on behalf of China’s ruling Communist Party.
The warning was circulated to lawmakers by the House of Commons speaker, who said MI5 had found that Lee had “facilitated financial donations to serving and aspiring parliamentarians on behalf of foreign nationals based in Hong Kong and mainland China”.
It prompted Lee to sue the spy agency for unspecified damages, arguing the agency had acted unlawfully and unreasonably.
But the Investigatory Powers Tribunal rejected the claim brought by Lee and her son, saying MI5 was in its rights to issue the Interference Alert (IA) and that it had not breached their human rights.
“The implied powers of the Respondent (MI5) are not confined to meeting only actions intended to undermine Parliamentary democracy by unlawful, perhaps criminal, means; the Respondent is able to take steps to protect Parliamentary democracy in advance and not only after criminal acts have occurred,” the judgment said.
via SCMP Full Text Feed
By Reuters
A lawyer has lost her case to sue Britain’s domestic spy agency MI5 after it issued an alert branding her a Chinese spy, a London tribunal ruled on Tuesday.
Lawyer Christine Lee had sued MI5 over the alert issued in January 2022 in which it alleged she was “involved in political interference activities” in the United Kingdom on behalf of China’s ruling Communist Party.
The warning was circulated to lawmakers by the House of Commons speaker, who said MI5 had found that Lee had “facilitated financial donations to serving and aspiring parliamentarians on behalf of foreign nationals based in Hong Kong and mainland China”.
It prompted Lee to sue the spy agency for unspecified damages, arguing the agency had acted unlawfully and unreasonably.
But the Investigatory Powers Tribunal rejected the claim brought by Lee and her son, saying MI5 was in its rights to issue the Interference Alert (IA) and that it had not breached their human rights.
“The implied powers of the Respondent (MI5) are not confined to meeting only actions intended to undermine Parliamentary democracy by unlawful, perhaps criminal, means; the Respondent is able to take steps to protect Parliamentary democracy in advance and not only after criminal acts have occurred,” the judgment said.
via SCMP Full Text Feed
