The court has sided against Nottingham City Council. It must reconsider releasing documents relating to its link with Ningbo.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10a21/10a2172756629cd09fd5383aedfc6294d6d9f744" alt="Court Rules Against Council Over China City Ningbo Documents Court Rules Against Council Over China City Ningbo Documents"
Reagan Yip, a 23-year-old journalist, asked for the papers linked to the petition rejection using a Freedom of Information request; however, the council said no, claiming it was an informal Labour group meeting.
The University of Nottingham made an impact assessment showing the effects of ending the Ningbo link, but the council blocked this assessment as well, claiming it would hurt the university’s business.
The court now disagrees with the council’s reasons and has given the council 35 days to act by either giving the information or refusing again with new reasons, with a requirement to clearly explain their refusal.
Nottingham and Ningbo have been linked since 2004, and the University of Nottingham has a campus in Ningbo; however, after China passed a national security law in Hong Kong, some people now want to review the Ningbo link.
The petition, started by Nottingham Stands with Hong Kong, got over 1,500 signatures, and while the council said it reviewed everything, they believe keeping the Ningbo link is important.
Some UK cities, including Newport and Newcastle, ended their China links, and Yip wants transparency over this decision, focusing on how the council made their choice.
The court disagreed with the council’s reasoning, stating that it wasn’t only a Labour group decision because considering the council wrote to the Chinese Ambassador, the court thinks it was not truly just party business, rather, it involved official council action.
The court also spoke about the university assessment and suggested rivals could not steal students and that releasing this document would not harm the university; Furthermore, Nottingham Stands with Hong Kong welcomed the court ruling.
They think the council acted against the public good because releasing the documents would inform everyone, and would allow people to see why the link persists; it’s important to note also that the council rejected a public consultation idea earlier.
This shows a lack of openness and that they did not value public opinion.
Nottingham City Council did not comment further, and they have not yet confirmed if they will share the information.