The alleged Chinese spy at the heart of a scandal about access to Prince Andrew can now be named as Yang Tengbo, a High Court judge has ruled.
The 50-year-old became a “close confidant” of the Duke of York before being banned from the UK over national security fears that he could compromise the Royal.
Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman took the decision to bar the businessman, who has close ties to the Chinese State, from the UK in March 2023.
The scandal emerged late last week, when a tribunal ruling revealed that an unnamed man - known only by the alias H6 - with suspected close ties to the Chinese state had lost his appeal against the immigration ban.
He has now been publicly named and issued a statement insisting that allegations he is a spy are “entirely untrue”.
At the High Court on Monday, a judge lifted reporting restrictions to allow Mr Yang to be named, after he himself asked for the order to be withdrawn.
He had been widely identified online outside the UK over the weekend, but a reporting restriction remained in place on British media outlets.
“There has been an enormous amount of media reporting in relation to this story, and particularly in relation to the relationship between my client, H6, and Prince Andrew, as well as a huge amount of speculation about the identity of my client”, said Guy Vassall-Adams KC, representing Mr Yang.
“In addition, there has been some publication of the identity of my client on social media and threats emanating from various quarters to name my client in public in this jurisdiction through using Parliamentary Privilege.
“Having reflected on these matters my client wishes to make a public statement and is applying for last Wednesday’s order to be discharged.”
In a statement issued on his behalf, Mr Yang said he had done “nothing wrong or unlawful”.
“Due to the high level of speculation and misreporting in the media and elsewhere, I have asked my legal team to disclose my identity”, he said. “I have done nothing wrong or unlawful and the concerns raised by the Home Office against me are ill-founded. The widespread description of me as a ‘spy’ is entirely untrue.
“This is why I applied for a review of the Home Office decision in the first place, and why I am seeking permission to appeal the SIAC decision. It is also why an order extending my anonymity up to the point of determination of the appeal process was granted.
“I have been excluded from seeing most of the evidence that was used against me under a process which is widely acknowledged by SIAC practitioners as inherently unfair: decisions are made based on secret evidence and closed proceedings, which has been described as ‘taking blind shots at a hidden target’.
“On their own fact finding, even the three judges in this case concluded that there was ‘not an abundance of evidence’ against me, their decision was ‘finely balanced’, and there could be an ‘innocent explanation’ for my activities. This has not been reported in the media.
“The political climate has changed, and unfortunately, I have fallen victim to this. When relations are good, and Chinese investment is sought, I am welcome in the UK. When relations sour, an anti-China stance is taken, and I am excluded.
“I am an independent self-made entrepreneur and I have always aimed to foster partnerships and build bridges between East and West. I have dedicated my professional life in the UK to building links between British and Chinese businesses. My activities have played a part in bringing hundreds of millions of pounds of investment into the UK.
“I built my private life in the UK over two decades and love the country as my second home. I would never do anything to harm the interests of the UK.”
Mr Yang is a director of the consultancy Hampton Group International, and had made no secret of his close ties to Andrew in the past. The 50-year-old was previously pictured with the Duke of York.
The matter was discussed in Parliament this afternoon, amid suggestions that MPs would name him despite the court order.
Prince Andrew has reportedly decided to not join the Royal family for Christmas at Sandringham amid the ongoing fallout from the furore.
While Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer admitted in light of the tribunal ruling that he is “concerned about the challenge that China poses”.
The tribunal ruling revealed how Prince Andrew struck up an “unusually” close relationship with Mr Yang and agreed to business dealings, at a time when he was under intense international pressure over his links to Jeffrey Epstein.
The businessman was allowed to act as a go-between for Prince Andrew, and was invited to the Royal’s 2020 birthday party.
He was also suspected of circumventing the Duke’s Private Secretaries, and smuggling people unnoticed in and out of Andrew’s residence in Windsor.
In a briefing to Mrs Braverman in July 2023, officials claimed Mr Yang had been in a position to generate relationships between prominent UK figures and senior Chinese officials “that could be leveraged for political interference purposes”.
They also said that he had downplayed his relationship with the Chinese state, which combined with his relationship with Andrew, represented a threat to national security.
In the ruling, Mr Justice Bourne, Judge Stephen Smith and Sir Stewart Eldon, dismissed the appeal against Mr Yang’s ban from entering the UK.
“The Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that the applicant represented a risk to the national security of the United Kingdom, and that she was entitled to conclude that his exclusion was justified and proportionate”, they said.
The reason for his exclusion was a suspicion he had engaged in “covert and deceptive activity” on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that he likely posed a threat to national security.
The judges said the Home Secretary had a “rational basis for the conclusion that (H6) had been in a position to generate relationships with prominent UK figures which could be leveraged for political interference purposes by the CCP or the Chinese State.
Dominic Hampshire, a senior aide to Prince Andrew, wrote about the businessman’s relationship with the Royal, which judges said had helped to “justify the conclusion that (he) won a significant degree, one could say an unusual degree, of trust from a senior member of the Royal Family who was prepared to enter into business activities with him.”
In a reference to the Epstein scandal, they said the relationship was struck up when “the Duke was under considerable pressure and could be expected to value (his) loyal support.
“It is obvious that the pressures on the Duke could make him vulnerable to the misuse of that sort of influence.”
The Home Secretary concluded there was potential for “leveraging” such a relationship, especially by a person who had sought to minimise his links with the Chinese State.
The judges added: “References in Mr Hampshire’s letter of 30 March 2020 to ‘obsessive confidentiality’, to ‘navigating around the Duke’s Private Secretaries’ and to getting people ‘unnoticed in and out of the house in Windsor’ may genuinely have had the innocent explanations which have been put forward, but the Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that they did not.
In his legal action, Mr Yang argued at a tribunal in London that the decision had been unlawful. He said he avoids getting involved in politics, and only had limited links to the Chinese state.
His lawyers also argued that there was evidence that it was difficult for a Chinese national involved in business to avoid any contact with the CCP and that material related to his relationship with Andrew had to be read in the context of an advisor writing to someone who had been loyal to the Duke in difficult times.
However Home Office lawyers argued that Mr Yang had downplayed his links to an arm of the CCP, and that his relationship with Andrew could be used for political interference.
The three judges said that Mr Yang had enjoyed a private life in the UK, which had been described as the businessman’s “second home”, adding: “He has settled status, a home and extensive business interests in the United Kingdom. He was regarded as a close confidant of the Duke.”
“Whilst excluding the applicant would not necessarily halt his activities, it would significantly hinder them”, added the tribunal.
“Cultivating relationships with prominent UK individuals would logically be much more difficult if no meetings could take place in the UK.”
Prince Andrew, who was formerly a trade envoy for the UK, was branded a “useful idiot” in 2022 over a string of trips to China as a guest of an organisation closely tied to the government.
He was forced to step down from frontline Royal duties as a result of the Epstein scandal.
