Research Raises Legal Concerns About Operations of Confucius Institutes in UK

China's then-Vice President Xi Jinping (now Chinese leader) unveils a plaque at the opening of Australia's first Chinese Medicine Confucius Institute at the RMIT University in Melbourne on June 20, 2010. William West/AFP/Getty Images

The legality of Confucius Institutes in the UK was brought into question as research showed CI teachers were hired in a “highly discriminatory way” and are required to undermine free speech.

The research, published on Tuesday by UK-China Transparency, a newly founded charity focusing on Sino-British ties, also said British Universities and the Home Office have been “systematically enabling” the practice by breaching their legal obligations.

Sam Dunning, director of UK-China Transparency, who co-authored the summary of the documents, said universities “must choose” between keeping the institutes open and fulfilling their legal obligations.

The Confucius Institutes (CIs), are purportedly teaching centres that aim to promote Chinese language and culture.

While the British co-directors and administrative staff of the CIs are recruited by hosting British universities, the Chinese co-directors and teachers are hired by the Chinese partner entity, often a Chinese university.

British universities are hosting 30 CIs, the highest number in the world.

But according to a previous report, also authored by Dunning, most of the CIs in the UK were engaged in activities beyond their remit of “language and culture,” including “cooperating with UK organisations that work with the United Front Work Department, a [Chinese Communist Party (CCP)] agency the interference activities of which were recently highlighted by MI5.”

‘Discriminatory’ Hiring Process

The new report said that after examining application forms and hiring notices posted in China that were available online, the authors found CI staff are hired “in a highly discriminatory way that is illegal under UK law.

One of the forms, filled by all applicants, asked candidates to provide information on their “political characteristics,” “ethnicity,” and family members. It also required the applicants to promise they or their spouses won’t have children while working abroad, and their current employer in China had to evaluate their “political attitude.”

The report said a number of the universities excluded applicants from minority religious groups persecuted in China while some others discriminated against candidates outside of a certain age range.

In one of the examples given, a recruitment notice for a Chinese co-director stated that the successful candidate must be under 58, abide by Chinese law while abroad, and “agree to ‘proactively resist any speech or behaviour that brings harm to friendly collaboration between China and the foreign country’ and to ’maintain close communication with the Chinese Embassy or Consulates’ in the foreign country.”

Another hiring notice, also for a co-director, stated that a government order dictated that the university “should prioritise the ‘ideological-political qualities’ of candidates, ’strictly control the selection of candidates in political terms,’ only recommend candidates who are ‘loyal to the ancestor-land,’ who possess ‘political firmness, and who are between 35 and 55 years old.”

The notice also said applicants must be members of the CCP and that the recruitment process would be led by the CCP Committee of the university, according to the report.

Legal Status Unclear

The researchers also filed Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to hosting universities asking them whether Chinese law applies to Chinese CI staff and about their legal status.

The responses indicated that the universities were not aware that Chinese staff had pledged to abide by Chinese law in the UK and had not sought legal advice on the legal employment status of the staff.

In an email to The Epoch Times, Dunning said the research has shown that “Confucius Institute staff are being recruited on the basis of their ability to conduct transnational repression in the UK and obliged to enforce ‘Party discipline’ on campus.”

Dunning said British universities “have legal obligations to protect academic freedom and free speech, and to prevent harassment, and ”must choose“ to ”either fulfill their legal obligations and respect their own values,“ or to ”keep their Confucius Institutes open.”

“If universities will not fulfill their legal responsibilities, then it is up to regulators such as the Office for Students to intervene,” he said.

‘Unlawful Dedicated Visa Route’

The report also called into question a Home Office visa route that it said was dedicated to the China-UK Mandarin Teachers’ Scheme.

In response to an FOI request, the Home Office told UK-China Transparency that “UK employment and equality law applies” to employment under the scheme.

But none of the British universities considered themselves the employer of the Chinese teachers who use this visa scheme, making their legal rights unclear.

The report disputed the legality of the visa scheme, saying while its requirement stated sponsors for a job must ensure the role “is over and above any normal staffing requirement and does not fill a vacancy,” the role of a Chinese co-director is fundamental to a Confucius Institute.”

“Those who fulfil the role are therefore likely to be filling a vacancy, calling into question the legality of Home Office’s authorisation of the visa scheme,” the report said.

The Home Office didn’t respond to a request for comment from The Epoch Times.

During his leadership campaign last year, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak vowed to close all 30 CIs, saying almost all UK government spending on Mandarin language teaching at school was channelled through CIs “thereby promoting Chinese soft power.”

However, the government so far hasn’t published any plan to close the institutes.

In a written answer to Labour Peer Lord Leong’s question last month, parliamentary under-secretary for the Department for Education (DfE) Baroness Barran said education providers “have a responsibility to ensure their partnerships with countries overseas are managed appropriately” and “ensuring the right due diligence is in place,” and encouraged “any providers with concerns to contact the government.”

She also told Leong that the DfE was not monitoring the level of funding spent on Mandarin teaching in schools through Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms at the time.