Letter to the Committee Specialist from
Head, Parliamentary Relations Team, Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Thank you for your letter of 12 May containing
a number of follow-up questions to Lord Malloch-Brown's 7 May
appearance before the Foreign Affairs Committee.
Lord Malloch-Brown has replied separately to
the Chairman of the Committee on points raised during the hearing.
Does the Government accept that the Convention
Against Torture obligation of non-refoulement is absolute and
that there should never be a balancing exercise with national
security when there is a risk of torture?
Article 3.1 of the Convention Against Torture
is quite clear that no State Party shall expel, return ("refouler")
or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial
grounds for believing that he/she would be in danger of being
subjected to torture, and the Committee established by Article
17 has made it equally clear that, where this is the case, no
other considerations can be taken into account.
Whether or not there are substantial grounds
for believing that a person would be in danger of being subjected
to torture is a judgement that has to be made on the basis of
the circumstances of the individual case, including any specific
information and any assurances provided by the receiving State.
The Government has made it clear that, if there
is a real danger that an individual will be subject to torture
on return, we will not deport them, even if we have a framework
agreement on assurances in place.
Does the Government accept the claim that the
UK is not providing equipment needed for the UN-AU hybrid mission
in Darfur to deploy as quickly and effectively as possible?
On 19 March, the Prime Minister announced a
contribution of £4m towards pre-deployment training and equipping
for African countries contributing troops to the UN-African Union
joint peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID). This money is for
essential equipment including armoured personnel carriers and
communications kit. The money is being channelled through the
"Friends of UNAMID" forum in New York—a group
of donors including the USA, Canada, Netherlands and France working
closely with the UN Department for Peacekeeping Operations to
ensure African troop contributors receive the training and equipment
required for deploying to Darfur.
We continue to work in support of the UN, African
Union and international partners for the earliest possible deployment
of an effective UNAMID. It is however disappointing that more
offers have not been forthcoming from those with spare capacity
to meet the need for helicopters.
Why are issues relating to women's human rights
not explicitly included in the FCO's policy goals?
The promotion of all human rights—including
women's rights—and good governance are, and will remain,
a vital part of this Government's international agenda. The new
policy goals do not downgrade their importance. Human rights are
essential to achieving all the new policy goals, for example,
in countering the risk of violent extremism and in preventing
and resolving conflict.
Our gender commitments include: tackling all
forms of gender based violence; full implementation of UN Security
Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security; encouraging
ratification of UN human rights instruments to which we are party,
including Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination
Against Women; achievement of all the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) including MDG 3 (promoting gender equality and empowerment
of women) and MDG 5 (improving maternal health).
Does the Government support the introduction of
mandatory mechanisms to ensure international businesses protect
human rights?
The UK does not support the introduction of
specific mandatory mechanisms to ensure businesses protect human
rights. We believe that, at present, voluntary mechanisms and
other non-legal approaches have more to offer in this field. States
have an obligation to protect their populations from human rights
abuses, which is why HMG is keen to mobilise international opinion
to support practical political initiatives and encourage private
sector good practice. We have supported initiatives bringing together
governments, NGOs and businesses to facilitate the promotion of
human rights, since we believe this to be the most effective way
to address this important issue. For example, we led the development
of the Kimberley Process, an international initiative with 48
participants designed to stop the world wide trade in illicit/conflict
diamonds.
What legal advice has the Government taken with
regard to its obligations in relation to flights that may be on
the way to, or from, a rendition but without a detainee on board?
Please could the Committee be provided with this advice?
Legal advice given to the Government is confidential
and we are therefore unable to disclose the contents of any such
advice.
Does the M85 sub-munition fall outside the Government's
definition of "dumb" cluster munitions given its self-destruct
mechanism?
The UK variant of the M85 sub-munition does
fall outside the Government's definition of a basic or "dumb"
cluster munition because of its self-destruct mechanism.
Final negotiations on a text of an international
Convention on cluster munitions are taking place in Dublin (19-30
May). I will write to you again after the Diplomatic Conference
in Dublin to let you know the outcome of these negotiations.
Lord Malloch-Brown told the Committee the Government
supports the work of the UNHCR in Syria and Jordan in aiding Iraqi
refugees. In its response to the Committee's Report on Global
Security: The Middle East, the Government noted the UK contributed
US$52 million to support the work of UNHCR worldwide in 2006.
How much money did the Government earmark specifically for UNHCR's
work in Syria and Jordan in 2006 and 2007?
The DFID Iraq programme contributed £3
million to UNHCR's 2007 Iraq Situation Supplementary Appeal. This
appeal covered Iraq, Syria, Jordan and other countries in the
region hosting Iraqi refugees. We did not earmark our contribution
for specific areas/countries within that appeal. We contributed
another £3 million for UNHCR's 2008 Iraq Situation Supplementary
Appeal. Again, we did not earmark our contribution. We did not
give a direct contribution to UNHCR's 2006 Iraq appeal.
28 May 2008
| 
