---

Mr. Patten : Before I turn to that, I shall give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall) and then my hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Mr. Arnold).

Mr. John Marshall : Does my right hon. Friend agree that if anyone in the United Kingdom had had one shred of evidence that a former Japanese war criminal was resident in the United Kingdom he would have produced that evidence at the time of the inquiry?

Mr. Patten : I agree with what my hon. Friend says, as I agree with what he said in his speech.

Mr. Jacques Arnold : Is my right hon. Friend confident that the term

"Germany or under German occupation"

is sufficiently wide? Concern was expressed in Committee about the probability of crimes having been committed in the Ukraine and elsewhere in Russia.

11.15 pm

Mr. Patten : I shall deal with that point later.

The nub of the argument is that, despite all the publicity about the war crimes issue in the last few years there has been no suggestion that there are any alleged war criminals, other than those who committed their alleged crimes in German or German-controlled territory, living within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. That point was made forcefully by my hon. Friends the Members for Hendon, South, for Lancashire, West (Mr. Hind) and for Elmet (Mr. Batiste). We do not wish this country to be a

---

Column 441

haven for any criminal, of whatever sort. We seek to legislate to deal with an identifiable mischief rather than with a hypothetical future event.

As the inquiry report shows--it was a careful inquiry--the arrival in this country in the years immediately following the second world war of some men and women who may have committed crimes in Germany or in German-occupied territory reflects the nature of the conditions in post-war Europe. Thousands and thousands of people in post-war Europe had been displaced from their former homes and were seeking new homes and work, sometimes in this country. The Bill deals with the possibility that some of the people who came to settle in this country from Germany or from countries that had been occupied by the Germans may have committed war crimes.

After the termination of hostilities in the Soviet Union, there was no mass migration from the Soviet Union to western Europe. Moreover, there is no evidence of any mass migration, or even mini-migration of people after the cessation of hostilities in the far east that led to people from Japan settling in this country.

Mr. Cormack : My right hon. Friend must admit that it is not fanciful to say that migration from Hong Kong is a possibility. As there is a provision to extend the legislation to include the colonies, and as Hong Kong is by far our largest and most important colony, why does my right hon. Friend set his face against that possibility?

Mr. Patten : Because we take the view--I personally do so--that we should seek to legislate to deal with identifiable mischiefs rather than with mischiefs that may arise at some future date. That is narrowly what we are seeking to do in the Bill.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop : The argument is about identifiable mischiefs, not about identifiable persons. My amendment covers the mischief. To try to constrain it constrains it to persons rather than to the whole mischief.

Mr. Patten : The identifiable mischief is the fact that people who are now living within this jurisdiction may have committed murder or may have attempted murder in Germany or in German-occupied territory. In no sense at all does the legislation refer ad hominem to any persons named. The mischief is that some persons--all persons have names--may in the past have committed such alleged crimes. I now turn to the important point about territory raised by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central and reflected in the remarks of my hon. Friends the Members for Torbay (Mr. Allason) and for Pembroke. We have a pretty clear view about what is German and German- occupied territory. My hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke asked about Vichy France. Actions by Vichy France against Frenchmen would not be war crimes, and would therefore be outside the scope of international law at the time ; they would be acts of homicide or crimes against humanity. Actions by puppet regimes against their own citizens in their own territory would fall outside the definition of war crime at any stage since the Hague convention of 1907. They would not be war crimes by that or by any other definition in international law, as far as I am aware, although they might certainly be caught under a number of crimes against humanity.

---

Column 442

Sir John Stokes (Halesowen and Stourbridge) : The French connection is a difficult issue. I was involved with the French for quite a long time. I fought the Vichy French and very nearly fought the free French. After the 1941 invasion of Vichy Syria, many British officers and soldiers were taken back to France where they were treated quite abominably for several weeks and under the armistice it was very hard to get them back. That will not be helped by the Bill.

Mr. Patten : I do not believe that that will be covered by the legislation. I should be happy to learn more about those matters from my hon. Friend. I should be particularly interested to learn how he narrowly avoided fighting the free French. Perhaps at some stage my hon. Friend will tell me how that happy chance came about. I must deal with the point raised by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central reflecting some correspondence sent to me by the former Home Secretary the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Rees) about the terms in which the Bill is drafted and whether they are adequate to catch war crimes in what might have been termed puppet regimes or the territories of puppet regimes sympathetic to the German cause. The matter was raised in Committee and I have reflected on it since. Since then we have benefited from the advice of the right hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South and some very detailed papers which I received towards the end of last week. I am studying them carefully, and if we conclude that as a result there is indeed a gap such as that alluded to by my hon. Friend the Member for Pembroke, we shall certainly be willing to table the necessary amendments to be debated in Committee in another place.

However, it is fair and important for me to repeat that, as with Vichy France, my preliminary assessment is to doubt whether the events described in the papers that the right hon. Gentleman was good enough to send me fall within the definition of a war crime. The events described were undoubtedly terrible, but given the circumstances in which they took place, it appears that they might have been crimes against humanity rather than war crimes and would therefore lie outside the scope of the Bill, whatever territorial extent is applied.

The third point that I put before my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton, who I know feels very strongly about the Japanese issue, is that it is obvious that we can give our courts the power to try only cases involving people who live within our jurisdiction. The Bill does not provide the power to try alleged war criminals, whatever offences they may have committed, if they have not come to live here.

Supposing that, on behalf of the Government, I accepted my hon. Friend's amendment and we could extend the scope of the Bill to Japan, Russia and elsewhere, I fear that we would be conveying a misleading signal to a number of people whose fathers, husbands or relations might have suffered terribly at the hands of the Japanese during the war. It might lead people to think that something could be done when, as far as I know, there has never been an allegation that anyone living within British jurisdiction might have committed such crimes. It would therefore be a mistake for the House to raise people's hopes that something might be done to right past terrible deeds when it was not in our power so to do.

---

Column 443

Mr. Alan Willians (Swansea, West) : The Minister's point would be more valid if the proposition struck at a specific date, such as March 1990, as in the Bill. The Bill, however, goes on to use the words "or subsequently". I understand from my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Warley, West (Mr. Archer) that "or subsequently" refers to the future as well as the present. Evidence of what happened in the past is not conclusive in regard to the jurisdiction ; the Bill allows for what could happen in the future.

Mr. Patten : The Bill refers to whether a person is resident in this country from that date.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop : My hon. Friend asked what comfort the extension would bring if there were no Japanese war criminals now living in Britain, the Channel islands, the Isle of Man or a British colony. Obviously thousands of Japanese war criminals are still alive. The comfort that such an extension would bring is this : people who had lost fathers or husbands would know that those responsible would not dare to come to this country. If the amendment is not passed, however, they will be able to come here with impunity.

Mr. Patten : There has never been any evidence that anyone alleged to be guilty of such crimes has ever come to this country. I feel that the amendment would provide scant help for those who grieve for the people who were so badly harmed during the Japanese conflict, although I appreciate that my hon. Friend would like to enable such mischief to be blocked in the future. I do not think that it is right in principle for us to legislate in that way, and I hope that, having heard my three reasons for not wishing to accept the amendment, my hon. Friend will feel inclined to withdraw it.

Question put, That the amendment be made :--

The House divided : Ayes 22, Noes 151.

Division No. 180] [11.26 pm

AYES

Allason, Rupert

Beaumont-Dark, Anthony

Beith, A. J.

Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)

Buck, Sir Antony

Butcher, John

Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

Cormack, Patrick

Glyn, Dr Sir Alan

Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

Hughes, Simon (Southwark)

Kennedy, Charles

Mans, Keith

Skinner, Dennis

Stanbrook, Ivor

Stokes, Sir John

Summerson, Hugo

Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

Townsend, Cyril D. (B'heath)

Wallace, James

Williams, Rt Hon Alan

Winterton, Mrs Ann

Tellers for the Ayes :

Mr. Robin Maxwell-Hyslop

and Mr. Nicholas Winterton.

NOES

Abbott, Ms Diane

Amess, David

Arbuthnot, James

Archer, Rt Hon Peter

Armstrong, Hilary

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Ashby, David

Atkins, Robert

Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)

Baldry, Tony

Batiste, Spencer

Battle, John

Beggs, Roy

Bendall, Vivian

Benn, Rt Hon Tony

Bermingham, Gerald

Boateng, Paul

Boswell, Tim

Bradley, Keith

Brandon-Bravo, Martin

Bright, Graham

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Brown, Michael (Brigg & Cl't's)

Burns, Simon

Burt, Alistair

Butterfill, John

Caborn, Richard

Carlile, Alex (Mont'g)

Carrington, Matthew

Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda

Chope, Christopher

Conway, Derek

Cook, Robin (Livingston)

Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

---

Column 444

Cryer, Bob

Cunliffe, Lawrence

Currie, Mrs Edwina

Dalyell, Tam

Darling, Alistair

Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

Dixon, Don

Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James

Dunnachie, Jimmy

Durant, Tony

Eggar, Tim

Evans, John (St Helens N)

Fallon, Michael

Fearn, Ronald

Fields, Terry (L'pool B G'n)

Foot, Rt Hon Michael

Foster, Derek

Freeman, Roger

Garel-Jones, Tristan

Golding, Mrs Llin

Gordon, Mildred

Graham, Thomas

Hanley, Jeremy

Hardy, Peter

Harris, David

Haynes, Frank

Hind, Kenneth

Hood, Jimmy

Howard, Rt Hon Michael

Howells, Dr. Kim (Pontypridd)

Hunt, David (Wirral W)

Illsley, Eric

Jack, Michael

Janner, Greville

Jessel, Toby

Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)

Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S W)

Kilfedder, James

King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)

Kirkhope, Timothy

Lang, Ian

Lawrence, Ivan

Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)

Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

Livingstone, Ken

Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)

Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)

Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

McAvoy, Thomas

MacGregor, Rt Hon John

McKay, Allen (Barnsley West)

MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)

Maclean, David

Maclennan, Robert

McLoughlin, Patrick

Mahon, Mrs Alice

Maples, John

Marshall, John (Hendon S)

Mawhinney, Dr Brian

Meale, Alan

Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Montgomery, Sir Fergus

Moonie, Dr Lewis

Morley, Elliot

Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)

Morrison, Rt Hon P (Chester)

Moynihan, Hon Colin

Neubert, Michael

Nicholls, Patrick

Nicholson, David (Taunton)

Norris, Steve

Oppenheim, Phillip

Paice, James

Parkinson, Rt Hon Cecil

Patchett, Terry

Patten, Rt Hon John

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Pike, Peter L.

Portillo, Michael

Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

Prescott, John

Redwood, John

Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn

Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas

Roberts, Wyn (Conwy)

Roe, Mrs Marion

Rogers, Allan

Ross, William (Londonderry E)

Rowlands, Ted

Scott, Rt Hon Nicholas

Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)

Smyth, Rev Martin (Belfast S)

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Steen, Anthony

Steinberg, Gerry

Stevens, Lewis

Stewart, Andy (Sherwood)

Sumberg, David

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)

Thorne, Neil

Trippier, David

Vaz, Keith

Walker, Bill (T'side North)

Waller, Gary

Walley, Joan

Wareing, Robert N.

Watson, Mike (Glasgow, C)

Welsh, Michael (Doncaster N)

Wheeler, Sir John

Widdecombe, Ann

Wilson, Brian

Winnick, David

Wood, Timothy

Yeo, Tim

Tellers for the Noes :

Mr. Sydney Chapman and

Mr. Irvine Patnick.

Question accordingly negatived.

Order for Third Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Bill be now read the Third time.-- [Mr. John Patten.]

11.37 pm

---