UK Residents and Campaigners Move to Seek Judicial Review Against China’s New Embassy Decision

Opposition to the UK government’s decision to approve plans for a new Chinese mega‑embassy in London has rapidly escalated from protests and political criticism to a formal legal challenge. Local residents, supported by advocacy groups and some political figures, are preparing to seek a judicial review of the decision, arguing that the approval process was flawed, lacked transparency, and imposed unacceptable risks to security, privacy, and community wellbeing. �

The Star +1

The controversial decision—formally granted on January 20, 2026—allows the People’s Republic of China to redevelop the historic Royal Mint Court site near the Tower of London into what is expected to be China’s largest embassy in Europe. South of the City’s financial district and close to sensitive data infrastructure, the site has become a focal point for concerns ranging from national security to residents’ rights. �

AP News

Crowdfunded Legal Action: Residents Prepare for Court

Immediately following the government’s approval, the Royal Mint Court Residents’ Association, representing about 200 households living within the proposed site, announced it had hit its fundraising target — raising significantly more than the initial goal of £145,000 needed to launch a judicial review. Within hours of the announcement, more than £176,000 was contributed, reflecting broad support and urgency among local residents and campaigners to pursue legal action. �

The Week

Residents fear the decision could lead to eviction, loss of privacy, and severe disruption from protests and security operations around the embassy. Many have voiced concerns that they were effectively excluded from proper planning procedures after the UK government “called in” the planning application and took control of the decision away from Tower Hamlets Council, which had rejected earlier proposals over safety worries. �

The Star

“Our homes were sold in a secretive deal years ago, and we now face displacement and loss of community,” said Mark Nygate, treasurer of the residents’ association. He warned that every possible legal ground would be explored to stop the embassy project and protect local families’ rights. “We won’t waste a single penny in ensuring that this embassy plan crashes on the solid rock of our judicial system.” �

The Week

Legal Grounds and Broader Support

The forthcoming judicial review is expected to challenge the government’s decision on several legal bases. Opponents argue that ministers may have had a predetermined view on the project before the formal planning process concluded, potentially undermining the fairness and legality of the approval. There are also questions about whether detailed plans were fully disclosed, and whether public safety concerns were adequately considered. �

The Star

The campaign has won backing from wider advocacy groups, including the Inter‑Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), which supports efforts to hold China accountable on democratic and human rights issues. IPAC representatives highlighted the extraordinary speed at which funds were raised, calling it a clear indicator of public opposition to the embassy project. �

The Week

Conservative politicians, including Kemi Badenoch, have also criticized the government’s handling of the issue, describing the approval as a failure to protect national security interests and a “disgraceful act of cowardice.” �

ABC

Security Concerns and Government Response

Protesters and critics have repeatedly pointed to the site’s proximity to critical infrastructure — especially fiber‑optic cables that carry financial and internet data — as a potential vulnerability. While the government insists that no national security bodies, such as MI5 or GCHQ, formally objected to the proposal, internal correspondence revealed intelligence officials acknowledge it is not realistic to eliminate every potential risk associated with such a large foreign diplomatic presence. �

The Standard

Despite these warnings, the government has emphasized that it developed mitigation measures to manage the risks and that consolidating China’s diplomatic footprint into a single, secure location could actually enhance oversight and safety. Officials also assert the planning process was quasi‑judicial, independent, and free from private assurances to Beijing. �

ITVX

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has framed the approval as part of a broader strategy to maintain diplomatic engagement with China while attempting to protect UK interests. Nevertheless, the decision has fueled political tensions, with some viewing it as undermining the rule of law and national security. �

Reuters

Public Reaction and Ongoing Debate

Public and activist reactions have been intense. Demonstrations at Royal Mint Court in recent months drew diverse groups, including local residents, Chinese dissidents, Hong Kong pro‑democracy supporters, and politicians from across party lines. Protesters argue the embassy could become a base for spying, surveillance, and even intimidation of dissidents within the UK. �

Wikipedia

International critics, including some U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates, have also expressed alarm about the project, warning it sets a troubling precedent for Western engagement with Beijing. �

Reddit

As legal preparations accelerate, all eyes will now be on the courts. Opponents hope the judicial review will force the government to reconsider the project — or at least subject the decision to intense judicial scrutiny. The legal battle is likely to be lengthy, complex, and high‑stakes, touching on themes of sovereignty, security, community rights, and international diplomacy.

In the meantime, the government maintains that the embassy’s construction will proceed unless successfully challenged in court — a scenario that could reshape UK planning law and diplomatic practice for years to come. �

The Star