🔗 Share this article

Per a top UK planning lawyer, authorizing a Chinese super-embassy in London's eastern district could violate legal standards if ministers provided Chinese authorities with advance commitments about the project.

Possible Legal Violations

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

This opinion was commissioned by a coalition of local inhabitants opposed to the planned Chinese embassy near Tower Bridge, which has attracted fierce resistance due to safety, human rights and planning concerns.

Ministerial Pressure

Ministers now are under pressure to explain whether they confidentially assured Chinese officials they would advance the proposal after it had halted under the former Tory government.

China reapplied for planning permission a short time after Labour took power last year, and Leader Xi Jinping raised the matter personally with Starmer during their first call in August 2024.

Diplomatic Communications

Starmer reportedly 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 calling in that application."

Critics of the proposed complex, which would span 20,000 square metres to become the largest embassy in Europe, are preparing to seek a judicial review if the decision is granted.

Mark Nygate, treasurer of the Royal Mint Court Residents Association, stated they were raising funds to contest the decision.

Legal Obligations

The matter is quasi-judicial, meaning the secretary responsible – currently the housing secretary – must make his ruling impartially under the law and with an unbiased perspective.

In his opinion, Banner emphasized 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.

Potential Consequences

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

He said it was of "vital importance" that any relevant documentary evidence, including any documents indicating that promises were given, must be retained by the government, which would be obliged to disclose them if a judicial review occurs.

International Disagreements

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

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

Government Statements

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

Luke de Pulford, executive director of the International Parliamentary Alliance on China, remarked: "Lord Banner has laid down a marker. If the rumours are demonstrated true and unlawful assurances were given to Beijing, the government could face a devastating judicial review."

Additional Events

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

A government representative stated "there had been absolutely no political interference with the evidence provided in this case" and rejected reports that the civil servant who drafted the evidence privately 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 accused individuals 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."