🔗 Share this article

Per a top UK planning lawyer, approving a China's super-embassy in east London could violate legal standards if government officials provided Chinese authorities with prior commitments about the project.

Potential Judicial Breaches

If PM Keir Starmer or his team made commitments to the government of China, it could constitute "actual or seeming predetermination" of the development proposal, according to the expert analysis by Lord Banner.

This analysis was commissioned by a coalition of local inhabitants against the planned Chinese embassy near Tower Bridge, which has attracted strong resistance due to security, human rights and planning issues.

Ministerial Pressure

Government officials now are under pressure to clarify whether they privately assured Chinese officials they would progress the application after it had stalled under the previous Conservative government.

China reapplied for development approval weeks after Labour took power last year, and Leader Xi Jinping raised the issue directly with Starmer during their initial call in August 2024.

International Exchanges

Starmer allegedly told the Chinese president during the G20 summit in November 2024: "Your government raised the Chinese embassy building in London when we spoke on the telephone. We have since acted by referring that application."

Opponents of the planned complex, which would cover 20,000 square metres to become the largest embassy in Europe, are getting ready to seek a judicial review if the approval is granted.

Mark Nygate, financial officer of the Royal Mint Court Residents Association, stated they were gathering funds to contest the decision.

Legal Requirements

The matter is quasi-judicial, meaning the secretary responsible – currently the housing secretary – must make his decision objectively under the law and with an open mind.

In his opinion, Banner stressed that "for now there has been no disclosure or formal evidence as to whether any 'assurances' have been given" or what the nature of such assurances might be.

Possible Ramifications

However, he wrote that if the PM had made a promise to Beijing, that "would appear by the reasonable and informed observer to generate a real possibility that the secretary of state had a predetermined position."

He said it was of "vital importance" that any pertinent written evidence, including any records indicating that assurances were given, must be retained by the government, which would be required to reveal them if a legal challenge occurs.

International Tensions

Recently, China expressed "grave concern and strong dissatisfaction" after ministers delayed their ruling on the embassy until 10 December.

A representative for the Chinese foreign ministry stated China had acted with "the utmost sincerity and patience" over the issue and the UK should "promptly fulfil its obligations and honour its commitments, otherwise the British side shall bear all consequences."

Official Statements

Downing Street stated it did not "accept any claims of commitments or assurances" over the embassy application.

Luke de Pulford, executive director of the International Parliamentary Alliance on China, commented: "Lord Banner has established a marker. If the rumours are proven true and illegal assurances were given to Beijing, the government could face a catastrophic judicial review."

Related Developments

On Sunday, the government absolutely denied any political interference in the ruling to drop charges against two men, including a ex parliamentary researcher, alleged of spying for China.

A government spokesperson declared "there had been absolutely no political interference with the evidence provided in this case" and rejected reports that the official who drafted the evidence confidentially acknowledged it was influenced by political considerations.

News outlets indicated that one of the two men charged with espionage was carrying £4,000 in cash when detained by police under terrorism laws after arriving at Heathrow from China in February 2023. Both defendants deny any wrongdoing.

A police spokesperson stated at the time: "A man in his 30s was subject to a stop at Heathrow airport under Schedule 3 of the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019. He was not arrested and enquiries continued."