🔗 Share this article Legal Opinion Suggests UK Diplomatic Complex Authorization Could Be Unlawful If Ministers Gave Advance Assurances As stated by a prominent UK development lawyer, approving a Chinese super-embassy in east London could breach judicial requirements if government officials provided Beijing with advance commitments about the development. Possible Judicial Violations Should Prime Minister Keir Starmer or his administration made commitments to the government of China, it could represent "actual or apparent predetermination" of the planning application, according to the legal opinion by Lord Banner. This opinion was commissioned by a group of residents against the planned Chinese embassy near Tower Bridge, which has generated strong resistance due to security, human rights and planning concerns. Ministerial Scrutiny Government officials now are under demands to clarify whether they confidentially assured Chinese officials they would advance the application after it had stalled under the previous Conservative government. The Chinese government reapplied for development approval a short time after Labour took power last year, and Leader Xi Jinping mentioned the issue personally with Starmer during their first call in August 2024. International Communications Starmer reportedly told the Chinese president during the G20 summit in November 2024: "You 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 span 20,000 square metres to become the biggest embassy in Europe, are getting ready to seek a legal challenge if the approval is authorized. Mark Nygate, financial officer of the Royal Mint Court Residents Association, stated they were gathering funds to challenge the approval. Legal Obligations The case is semi-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 emphasized that "for now there has been no revelation or formal evidence as to whether any 'assurances' have been given" or what the content of such commitments might be. Potential Consequences However, he stated that if the PM had made a commitment to Beijing, that "would be seen by the reasonable and informed observer to generate a genuine risk that the secretary of state had a closed mind." He said it was of "critical importance" that any pertinent written evidence, including any documents indicating that assurances were given, must be retained by the government, which would be obliged to reveal them if a legal challenge occurs. Diplomatic Tensions Last week, China voiced "serious worry and deep displeasure" after ministers delayed their ruling on the embassy until 10 December. A representative for the Chinese foreign ministry claimed China had acted with "the utmost sincerity and patience" over the issue 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, commented: "Lord Banner has established a marker. If the allegations are proven 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, accused 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 privately acknowledged it was influenced by political considerations. Media reports indicated that one of the two men charged with espionage was carrying £4,000 in cash when stopped 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."