UK failing to investigate cotton imports from Uyghur labour camps, court told

China has previously strongly denied international claims about human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims.

Lawyers and representatives from the World Uyghur Congress and members of the Uyghur community in the UK standing outside the High Court in London (Tom Pilgrim/PA) (PA Wire)

The UK Government’s refusal to investigate the import of cotton products allegedly linked to Uyghur forced labour camps in north-western China is “unlawful”, the High Court has been told.

The World Uyghur Congress (WUC) claims there is an ongoing failure by British authorities to launch a criminal probe into the sale of goods sourced from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR).

The Munich-based non-governmental organisation says the region’s factory labourers are subjected to “detention and coercion” amid concerns over alleged human rights violations against the minority Uyghur people.

China has previously strongly denied international claims about human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims, amid reports indicating more than a million people have been arbitrarily detained and allegations of torture and forced sterilisation.

In a legal challenge brought against the Home Secretary, HMRC and the National Crime Agency (NCA), the WUC warned there was a “high risk” that cotton products sourced from some Chinese businesses by UK companies could be produced by “prison or forced labour”.

The UK Government says China’s efforts to “silence and repress” Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang is “appalling”, with the picture emerging from the region deemed “harrowing”.

But its lawyers argue the WUC has brought a “hypothetical” case based on “generalised” evidence, with the NCA currently concluding there was “insufficient material from which to develop any line of inquiry or criminal investigation”.

At a hearing in London on Tuesday, Jenni Richards KC, for WUC, told the court there had been a legal “misunderstanding or misdirection” by the Government, claiming it had “resolutely declined to engage” in evidence collated since 2020 over the “horrors” allegedly perpetrated against Uyghur people.

In written submissions, she said there had been a failure to investigate potential breaches of the Foreign Prison-made Goods Act and launch a money laundering probe or start civil confiscation processes under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA).

Ms Richards said “any property that represents a benefit from forced labour in XUAR, in whole or in part, is criminal property”.

She added that “any cotton products in the UK generated by forced labour and funds flowing from their sale are recoverable”, and such products and funds are property obtained through “gross human rights abuse” or “money laundering”.

She said WUC had identified four “implicated Chinese companies” involved in the large-scale growing of cotton and manufacture of products in XUAR.

Ms Richards said it could be “reasonably inferred from the evidence that the vast majority of the cotton manufacturing done in facilities operated by these companies in the XUAR is carried out by labourers subject to conditions of detention and forced labour”.

She added: “Accordingly, if a UK company sources any cotton products from one of the implicated Chinese companies, there is a high risk that the product in question was produced, wholly or partly, by prison and forced labour.”

Publicly available information indicated that companies trading in the UK source from three of the Chinese companies, Ms Richards said, while shipping data indicated 489 UK-bound shipments from the fourth.

Ms Richards said about 85% of cotton grown in China comes from XUAR, with production having “boomed” since the introduction of the Chinese government’s “minority control measures” from 2014.

She said these seek to “gain effective social control” over Uyghur and other Turkic people and include the creation of at least 380 internment camps in Xinjiang that authorities label as “education” centres to help tackle the “threat of religious extremism”.

Ms Richards said: “As is well documented and widely acknowledged, torture, rape, inhumane treatment, including appalling living conditions, indoctrination and forced labour are widespread in the camps.

“More than 100 such camps have recently erected factories in their grounds or directly adjacent, encompassing millions of square feet.”

Ms Richards said people are placed in camps for having a beard, wearing a veil, having relatives abroad, applying for a passport, praying, downloading messaging app WhatsApp and having too many children.

She said “vast” industrial parks use “cheap labour” from the camps, with workers not allowed to leave.

Ms Richards later told the court there was “overwhelming” evidence of “coercive criminal acts”, that Chinese companies were closely involved with Beijing policies “designed to be forced labour and detention programmes”, and that it was “inevitable” that UK companies were sourcing cotton from these businesses produced under such conditions.

In written submissions, Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Government, said it was committed to working internationally to help end China’s alleged “human rights violations”.

He said it was “seriously concerned” about the situation in XUAR, with condemnations coming from the foreign secretary and ambassadors and economic sanctions placed on Chinese officials.

He told the court on Tuesday that British authorities “are not and have never been condoning or perpetuating” abuses of the Uyghur people by an alleged failure to take appropriate steps.

But Sir James added in written arguments that there had been “no error of law” over the discretion to launch criminal investigations.

He said the WUC was not able to “particularise any coherent or precise allegation nor does it identify any perpetrator of any specific crime”, adding that “at best” its case was that there is “a compelling inference of a chance that a crime has been committed but it is unable to identify how, by whom, when, or where such an offence took place”.

Sir James said the law required specific property to be identified in connection with a “concrete occurrence of criminal conduct”, but said the WUC’s case relied on “speculation and assumption, derived from a generalised evidential picture”.

He argued it would be wrong for British authorities to “engage in wholesale seizures or embark on investigations which are incapable of effective resolution and which risk exposing (them) to claims of high-handed conduct and abuse of power”.

He said the NCA continues to assess intelligence over the XUAR cotton industry and may launch an investigation “should circumstances change”, but no offences arose under POCA “on the evidence currently available”.

The hearing before Mr Justice Dove is due to conclude on Wednesday, with a ruling expected at a later date.