🇬🇧Britons In Hong Kong🇬🇧 UK/BN(O) Front [Official Channel]

The UK’s new safe routes must carefully assess Hong Kong political prosecution cases. 英國新難民安全路徑 應確保香港政治檢控個案獲審慎評估 - Scroll down for English - 英國內政部於2026年6月27日公布新難民安全合法入境路徑，計劃透過社群、大學及日後僱主擔保，讓合資格難民經審批及規管抵達英國。 我等歡迎英國政府承認，若要減少危險及非正常入境路徑，不能只靠阻截、遣返及收緊規則；政府亦須提供可行的人道入境渠道。 然而，對部分遭政治檢控的港人而言，新政策方向仍須回應一個核心問題：英國移民及庇護制度，如何分辨一般刑事罪行與香港政治案件？ 英國本身亦有暴動、公眾秩序、集會管制、國家安全及外國干預等相關罪行。正因如此，英國決策者不應只按控罪名稱、定罪紀錄或刑期判斷個案性質。 罪名相近，不代表案件性質相同。 自2019年以來，不少港人因參與民主運動、和平示威、新聞工作、人權倡議、工會工作或公民社會活動，被控「暴動」、「非法集結」、「公眾秩序罪行」、「國安法」或「煽動」等罪名。 在香港今日的政治現實下，這些案件往往不能脫離政治打壓、選擇性執法、審訊公正及公民自由受壓的背景理解。部分人即使已刑滿出獄，仍可能面對監管、定期報到、就業及離境限制、滋擾，甚至再次被捕或檢控的風險。 我們強調，這不是要求英國政府自動否定香港法院判決，亦不是要求為港人設立不經審查的特權通道。我們要求的是一套更嚴謹、更符合人道保護原則的個案審查機制。 英國政府在設計新 safe and legal routes 時，應加入清晰的香港個案指引及保護轉介機制，審視檢控背景、案件性質、審訊是否公平、刑罰是否相稱，以及當事人離港後是否仍面對實際風險。 安全路徑不應只為「背景清白」的人而設。真正有效的人道保護，必須能辨認刑事法律在不同政治環境下如何被使用。 英國新制度應確保遭政治檢控的港人，不會因刑事紀錄的表面標籤而被機械排除。 參考資料： AP有關英國新 refugee sponsorship routes 報道 https://apnews.com/article/71c403ff344e5d23109636e0a5770ab4 On 27 June 2026, the UK Home Office announced plans for new safe and legal routes for refugees, including sponsorship pathways involving communities, universities and, in future, employers. Eligible refugees would be able to arrive in the UK through a regulated and screened process. We welcome the UK Government’s recognition that reducing unsafe and irregular journeys cannot rely on deterrence, removals and tighter rules alone. The Government must also provide practical humanitarian routes. For some Hongkongers facing politically motivated prosecution, however, the new policy direction still needs to address one core question: how can the UK immigration and asylum system distinguish ordinary criminality from political cases in Hong Kong? The UK itself has offences relating to riot, public order, assemblies, national security and foreign interference. Precisely for that reason, UK decision-makers should not assess cases solely by offence labels, convictions or sentence length. Similar offence labels do not mean similar case realities. Since 2019, many Hongkongers have faced charges such as “riot”, “unlawful assembly”, public order offences, national security offences or sedition-related allegations because of their participation in the pro-democracy movement, peaceful protest, journalism, human rights advocacy, trade union work or civil society activity. In Hong Kong’s current political context, these cases often cannot be understood without reference to political repression, selective enforcement, trial fairness and the shrinking of civil liberties. Some people have served their sentences, yet may still face supervision, reporting requirements, restrictions on work and travel, harassment, and renewed risk of arrest or prosecution. We stress that this is not a call for the UK Government to automatically reject Hong Kong court judgments, nor for an unchecked privilege for Hongkongers. We are calling for a rigorous case-by-case assessment grounded in humanitarian protection principles. As the UK designs its new safe and legal routes, it should include clear guidance and referral mechanisms for Hong Kong cases. Decision-makers should consider the context of prosecution, the nature of the case, whether the trial was fair, whether the sentence was proportionate, and whether the person concerned continues to face real risk after leaving Hong Kong. Safe routes must not be designed only for people with a “clean background”. A meaningful humanitarian protection system must be able to recognise how criminal law can be used differently under different political conditions. The UK’s new framework should ensure that Hongkongers facing politically motivated prosecution are not mechanically excluded because of the surface label of a criminal record. Reference: AP report on the UK’s new refugee sponsorship routes https://apnews.com/article/71c403ff344e5d23109636e0a5770ab4