🔗 Share this article

According to a prominent UK planning lawyer, authorizing a China's super-embassy in east London could violate legal requirements if ministers provided Beijing with advance assurances about the development.

Possible Legal Breaches

Should Prime Minister Keir Starmer or his team made commitments to the Chinese government, it could constitute "actual or seeming predetermination" of the planning application, according to the expert analysis by Lord Banner.

The analysis was requested by a group of residents against the proposed Chinese embassy near Tower Bridge, which has attracted strong resistance due to safety, human rights and development issues.

Ministerial Scrutiny

Ministers now face pressure to explain whether they privately assured Chinese officials they would progress the proposal after it had stalled under the former Tory government.

China submitted a new application for planning permission a short time after Labour took power last year, and President Xi Jinping raised the issue directly with Starmer during their first 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."

Critics 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 decision is authorized.

Mark Nygate, treasurer of the Royal Mint Court Residents Association, stated they were gathering funds to challenge the approval.

Judicial Obligations

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

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

Possible Ramifications

However, he stated 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 declared it was of "critical importance" that any relevant written evidence, including any records indicating that assurances were given, must be retained by the government, which would be obliged to reveal them if a judicial review occurs.

Diplomatic Disagreements

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

A representative for the Chinese foreign ministry claimed China had acted with "the greatest 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."

Official Responses

The Prime Minister's office said 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, commented: "Lord Banner has laid down a marker. If the allegations are demonstrated true and illegal assurances were given to Beijing, the government could face a devastating judicial review."

Related Events

Recently, the government absolutely denied any government influence in the ruling to drop charges against two men, including a former parliamentary researcher, accused of spying for China.

A government representative stated "there was absolutely no political interference with the evidence provided in this case" and denied 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 commented 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."