I wrote earlier that Hong Kong BNO holders would face challenges in the Year of the Snake, and indeed, bad news has been coming in waves. A friend recently sent me a message about representatives from several Hong Kong organizations in the UK going to Geneva file a complaint with a United Nations committee. This time, however, they weren't protesting against the Hong Kong government's “human rights violations”, but rather alleging discrimination in the UK. What infuriates them most is that Hong Kong people with BNO visas are prohibited from becoming professional athletes or full-time coaches, forcing them to switch to low-paying jobs, leaving many emotionally distressed and resentful.
Beyond the sports industry, a recent think tank study indicated that many professional qualifications held by people from Hong Kong who moved to the UK are not recognized. To enter their relevant fields, they must retake certification exams, which are costly. As a result, many have no choice but to accept lower-status, non-professional "handyman" jobs, leading to significant frustration. The UK government's priority is to protect employment for its citizens, and Hong Kong people's complaints to the UN are unlikely to have any effect.
A few years ago, when a large number of Hong Kong residents moved to the UK, many of them envisioned the UK as a "human rights paradise." However, after living there for several years, they've realized that the "equality" they imagined is far from reality. This time, when several "yellow" organizations went to Geneva to voice their grievances, Kwok Tsz-kin, founder of "Scottish Hongkongers," angrily pointed out that the current British Nationality Act "systematically discriminates" against HK BNO holders, creating barriers in employment, education, and other areas.
He specifically highlighted a clause in the BNO visa that prohibits visa holders from working as professional athletes or coaches for five years, and even restricts them from roles in sports management and refereeing. According to data, about 5,400 of the approximately 150,000 Hong Kong people residing in the UK on BNO visas are affected by this clause.
Unable to enter their fields, these Hong Kong people are forced to take other low-paying jobs. For example, Mr. Wong, who arrived in the UK in April last year with coaching qualifications in a certain sport, was prohibited from coaching due to visa restrictions and had to seek other positions. Additionally, E, a 39-year-old Hong Kong elite athlete and coach who holds Hong Kong records, is neither allowed to participate in sports competitions in the UK nor permitted to coach, leading to depression and even suicidal tendencies.
In Geneva, Kwok Tsz-kin proposed to the "UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights" that the UK government should remove this clause, allowing Hong Kong BNO holders to freely choose sports-related work and integrate into the UK sports community without discrimination. A friend familiar with the UK situation told me this is wishful thinking. The UK government has from the start viewed BNO holders as "outsiders" who cannot enjoy citizens' rights, so the possibility of removing the aforementioned clause is practically "zero." If they want to excel in sports competitions, they might as well return to Hong Kong to seek opportunities.
My friend pointed out that the discrimination against Hong Kong people’s professional qualifications extends far beyond athletes and coaches. Recently, the Financial Times interviewed a group of Hong Kong people who moved to the UK. A surveyor with experience managing large contracts arrived in the UK in mid-2023 but had no job offers after six months of searching. He had to take a temporary job sorting mail to make ends meet. After much effort, he finally secured a position as an administrative officer in a public institution, but at a much lower level than his position in Hong Kong.
A report by the British think tank "Britain's Future" published last October also interviewed a Hong Kong group of people with professional qualifications. Most couldn't find professional positions after arriving in the UK. An accountant had to work in a restaurant kitchen, an IT professional and insurance industry practitioner became warehouse worker, and a teacher took a job as a caregiver in a nursing home.
The report indicates that most people's original professional qualifications are not recognized by local organizations. They are required to retake certification exams. However, this is expensive, with some professional qualifications costing £15,000. Those who came to the UK from Hong Kong with limited savings can't afford this and have to give up.
Financial professionals also struggle to find work. The report notes that some banks' HR departments reject Hong Kong job seekers, citing "lack of UK experience." Some have no choice but to reluctantly seek other "non-professional" positions.
Under this "systemic discrimination," Hong Kong people who moved to the UK find themselves in dire straits, not only with significantly reduced incomes but also, most unbearably, with a sense of "humiliation." The UK has always been a class-conscious society, with discriminatory attitudes deeply embedded. It's just that they were initially too simple and naive, blinded by passion, choosing not to see it.
Lai Ting Yiu
What Say You?
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
The verdict is in for Jimmy Lai. Convicted of collusion with foreign forces, the high-profile case hits the mitigation phase on January 12, as it races toward a final sentence. But the legal process isn't the only thing moving; the political pressure from London and Washington is reaching a fever pitch.
Former UK Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith is leading the charge, penning articles that demand sanctions against the three judges handling the Lai case. This isn't his first time in the fray. Since the 2019 Black Riots, he has been a fixture in the anti-China circuit, meeting with activists and visiting Taiwan to align with independence advocates.
British MP Iain Duncan Smith is playing hardball, pushing for sanctions against judges on the Lai case while maintaining deep ties with Taiwan independence groups.
The US isn't sitting on the sidelines either. Several hawkish senators are baring their teeth, ready to deploy the "Hong Kong Judiciary Sanctions Act" as a tool of intimidation. The bullets are chambered and ready to fire. Yet, despite the threats, Hong Kong’s judges are showing some serious backbone, standing their ground against external heat.
Duncan Smith’s drumbeat for sanctions looks like a last-ditch effort to squeeze out political leverage as the case concludes. He’s rallying the usual suspects—former Governor Chris Patten and Hong Kong Watch founder Benedict Rogers—to ramp up the pressure on National Security Law judges. It’s an attempt to flip the script at the eleventh hour.
Foreign Pressure Meets Judicial Steel
Legal insiders have dug up the receipts on Duncan Smith. Court revelations show he was a key figure behind the scenes during the 2019 Black Riots, communicating with IPAC founder Luke de Pulford about using the Magnitsky Act to sanction then-Chief Executive Carrie Lam. It’s a clear pattern of interference that dates back years.
While the prosecution also states that Lai has known Duncan Smith since 2020, seeking his help to lobby for foreign sanctions, the British politician flatly denied even knowing him in media interviews. A bold claim, one that doesn't seem to square with the evidence presented in court.
On top of that, Duncan Smith did not just sit in Westminster and commentate. During the 2019 Black Riots period, he repeatedly met Hong Kong opposition figures and “movement participants” under the banner of policy research, while in reality fanning the flames from behind the scenes. The exact part he played in that unrest may never be fully spelled out, but the pattern is clear – he was not a neutral observer, he was an active political player in a foreign city’s turmoil.
Taiwan, Sanctions and a Political Script
Legal-sector contacts add another layer: Duncan Smith is not only a steady hand in Hong Kong destabilization, he is also tightly wired into Taiwan “independence” circles.
Last August, Smith personally flew to Taiwan to attend an IPAC “cross-national parliamentarians” symposium in support of Taiwan. Headlined a “Stand with Taiwan: Freedom Night”, the event portrayed the mainland “authoritarian regime” as an ever-closer threat that would “destroy your independent status,” language tailor-made to cheer a “Taiwan independence” audience.
In the room, independence leader Louise Hsiao Bi-khim – now Lai Ching-te’s deputy and the number-two figure in the administration – responded with enthusiastic applause and public thanks, and Smith’s pro-“Taiwan independence” stance was on full display throughout the event.
Seen in that light, his demand to sanction Hong Kong judges is not about law; it is about politics, and hard-edged anti-China politics at that. Dressing it up as concern over supposed “judicial injustice” toward Jimmy Lai is just verbal smoke – rhetoric hiding a clear strategic aim to pressure and delegitimize Hong Kong’s courts.
Washington Hawks Load a New Weapon
Duncan Smith and his allies in London are not acting alone.
In May last year, three US senators introduced the “Hong Kong Judicial Sanctions Act,” a bill that, if acted on, would put a long list of Hong Kong judges and prosecutors – including Court of Final Appeal Chief Justice Andrew Cheung and Director of Public Prosecutions Maggie Yang – in the crosshairs of potential sanctions, turning legal professionals into political targets.
At the same time, Mark Clifford – a core member of Jimmy Lai’s inner circle and head of the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation – rolled out a report smearing Hong Kong’s judiciary, echoing these Senate hawks point for point and keeping the spotlight on Hong Kong judges and prosecutors, with the pressure dial constantly turned up.
A seasoned political insider put it bluntly: this camp is already at daggers drawn, just waiting for sentencing in Lai’s case as the trigger. When the court hands down its decision, they are expected to move again, this time with heavier blows aimed squarely at Hong Kong’s judicial sector through new attacks and lobbying.
That said, one big variable hangs over their plan – Trump. Even if Congress pushes the bill forward, whether it actually bites still depends on Trump’s calculation: if he decides he does not want to pick a fresh fight with China over Jimmy Lai, especially with a future China visit on his calendar, he can simply refuse to sign the act and leave it on the shelf.
Judges Hold Their Nerve
Whatever happens in Washington or London, one thing seems certain: the threats from US and UK hawks will keep escalating, and the pressure on Hong Kong’s judicial personnel will only grow.
Yet, as former Director of Public Prosecutions Grenville Cross has stressed: in the face of various intimidations, judges have remained unmoved throughout, dutifully performing their responsibilities and crushing anti-China forces’ schemes to obstruct judicial justice. That resilience showcases the strength and superiority of Hong Kong’s common law system rather than its weakness.
Legal friends strongly echo Cross’s view: Hong Kong judges really have stood their ground against external forces and proven themselves “resolute” in practice – a rare quality, because being put on a sanctions list is no small personal or professional burden.
Another important signal is coming from Hong Kong’s foreign judges, who have publicly backed the independence and fairness of the city’s judicial system. Court of Appeal Vice President Andrew Colin Macrae recently told a Bar Association forum that he has never seen Hong Kong judges take instructions from anyone, stressing that when they adjudicate cases, they maintain independence and fairness, and the public has reason to feel reassured by that track record.
In recent years, anti-China politicians across the UK, US, Australia and other Western countries have been leaning hard on Hong Kong’s foreign judges, trying to force them to toe a political line. Against that backdrop, Macrae’s willingness to take the heat, speak plainly and defend Hong Kong’s courts in public is all the more commendable. Clearly knowing that the blowback will come, he still chooses to speak up anyway.
Facing a storm of international pressure, Hong Kong’s judges are refusing to buckle, upholding the city’s legal integrity.
Ultimately, the judges’ resolve is anchored in the principles at the heart of Hong Kong’s judicial system. With the law on their side and the standards clear, they can meet every challenge openly and without apology—and no amount of noise or intimidation from outside forces will dislodge that foundation. They will press on, calmly and firmly, with the same quiet determination they have shown all along.
Lai Ting-yiu
