The term “the empire on which the sun never sets” is not merely rhetorical; it is a historical fact. At its peak in the early 20th century, the British Empire governed approximately 24% of the world’s land area and accounted for about 23% of the global population, making it the largest empire in human history. The operation of the empire was quite straightforward: it integrated people scattered across the globe into a single political system through a set of legal identities. The history of British identity for Hongkongers is a microcosm of how the colonial power gradually withdrew its responsibilities as the empire receded.
Before the emergence of modern nationality systems, there was no concept of “nationality” as we understand it today within the empire. From the 19th century to the early 20th century, the basic legal status was that of a British subject, centered on loyalty to the Crown rather than residence or immigration rights. The post-war British Nationality Act of 1948 institutionalized this imperial subject relationship, creating Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies (CUKC). Within this framework, Hongkongers and British residents were nominally part of the same nationality; at least at the outset, there was no deliberate distinction between the rights of “home” and “colonial” subjects.
The real turning point occurred in the 1960s. With an increase in immigration from colonies and the Commonwealth, domestic political pressure in the UK surged. The government did not outright deny imperial nationality but chose to gradually sever the link between “nationality” and “right of abode” through immigration law. The Commonwealth Immigrants Act of 1962 was the first to impose work and entry restrictions on Commonwealth and colonial citizens; the Commonwealth Immigrants Act of 1968 further established birth or blood ties to the UK as substantive thresholds; finally, the Immigration Act of 1971 formally introduced the concept of right of abode, restricting it to a very small number of individuals with “close ties to the UK.”
These three pieces of legislation collectively achieved a critical severance. While the identity of CUKC still existed, it no longer came with the right to settle in the UK for the majority of colonial residents. Hongkongers did not suddenly lose their right of abode on a specific day; rather, they were gradually excluded at three key junctures: 1962, 1968, and 1971.
The British Nationality Act of 1981 provided a systematic summary of this reality. It was not a repair but a rewrite, formally ending CUKC and establishing a tiered nationality structure, the core principle of which was to concentrate the right of abode within the narrowest category of British citizens. The six types of British nationality recognized under British law thereafter were gradually organized and supplemented within this framework, including the later-established British National (Overseas) (BN(O)) specifically for Hongkongers.
Under this system, the most complete identity is that of a British citizen, which generally comes with the right of abode. The other five types are historical remnants or transitional identities, including British Overseas Territories Citizen (BOTC), British Overseas Citizen (BOC), British subject, British National (Overseas) (BN(O)), and British protected person. All six belong to the British nationality system, but there are significant differences in rights; most of the latter do not automatically confer the right of abode.
The British Nationality Act of 1981 established British Dependent Territories Citizen (BDTC) as a new status for colonial residents. Subsequently, BDTC was renamed British Overseas Territories Citizen (BOTC) in line with the political and legal terminology adjustment as colonies were referred to as “overseas territories.” Today, BOTC primarily consists of residents from overseas territories still under British sovereignty, such as Gibraltar, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and the British Virgin Islands. After 2002, the UK allowed most BOTCs to also become British citizens, so many overseas territory residents today effectively hold the right of abode.
British Overseas Citizen (BOC) represents a “residual status” in the decolonization process. These individuals were often originally CUKC but, after 1981, neither belonged to the UK nor any overseas territory, such as certain East African Asian communities. Legally, they still hold British nationality, but in practice, they have no place to settle. As for British subject and British protected person, only a very small number remain today, mostly remnants of early imperial arrangements, with almost no new additions, resembling historical traces that have not been fully cleared from the legal framework.
The transition of Hongkongers’ identity falls precisely within this tiered system. After 1981, Hong Kong residents automatically became BDTC from their original CUKC status. With the arrangements for the transfer of sovereignty confirmed, the UK established a specific export applicable only to Hong Kong: BN(O), or British National (Overseas). Through registration, eligible Hong Kong BDTCs could obtain BN(O) status. The two could coexist before 1997; however, with the transfer of sovereignty, the BDTC status linked to Hong Kong was terminated in 1997, while those who had registered retained their BN(O) status. Some individuals who might have become stateless were converted to BOC to avoid a legal vacuum.
Beyond this main narrative, the UK also made a one-time limited exception. The British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act of 1990 established a so-called right of abode scheme, capped at 50,000 individuals, including their spouses and minor children, affecting approximately 220,000 people in total. This was not a universal arrangement but a highly selective political solution. The selected individuals primarily came from the government, disciplined forces, professional sectors, and those deemed to hold “key positions,” aimed at stabilizing the administrative and economic systems before 1997. In these families, the first generation directly obtained British citizenship, and their spouses and minor children could register together; subsequent generations born later depended on whether their parents’ status could be inherited; otherwise, they would still need to follow normal residency, settlement, and naturalization procedures.
For the vast majority of Hongkongers, the real turning point came in 2021. The introduction of the BN(O) visa clarified the system for the first time: BN(O) is no longer merely “passport holders without residency rights” but a pathway to gradually obtain permanent residency and British citizenship through a period of residence and compliance with the law. This is not a return of old imperial rights but a clear, accumulative, and achievable transition pathway under a modern immigration system.
When viewed together, the logic is remarkably consistent. The UK first incorporated people through imperial nationality, then gradually withdrew the right of abode through immigration law; by the British Nationality Act of 1981, the tiered outcome was solidified; for Hong Kong, it transitioned first through BDTC and then BN(O), with the right of abode scheme serving as an exception only in very limited circumstances; it was not until 2021 that the BN(O) visa provided a systematic pathway for a portion of individuals to regain residency rights and citizenship. This is not an emotional story but a calm and clear institutional history.
