(1 day, 15 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for human rights in Jammu and Kashmir.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I am very pleased to have secured this important debate on the Government’s support for human rights in Jammu and Kashmir, and I would like to thank parliamentary colleagues who have joined me to contribute to the debate. The complex issues faced in the region were last debated here back in 2021, so it is vital that we have this opportunity to highlight the challenges faced by those living in Jammu and Kashmir.
I am proud that we now have a Labour Government who have returned the UK to its rightful place on the world stage, advocating and working for the protection of human rights across the globe. I therefore welcome the opportunity to ask the Minister about that work and how it relates to the now union territories of Jammu and Kashmir.
When our TV screens are sadly filled with images of conflict from around the world, other international issues often fail to get the exposure they perhaps should, and I see part of my role as a Member of Parliament as being to highlight areas of international concern that we should not neglect to bring attention to as we continue to support our international partners in reaching a just solution.
Let us not forget that this troubled region is one of the most militarised places in the world, and ordinary Kashmiris have lived through decades of conflict and widespread abuse at the hands of state and non-state actors. The population of Kashmir remains divided between three countries, and though it is welcome that elections have now been held after a 10-year hiatus, the Indian authorities have failed as yet to provide a timeline for fully restoring Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. After years of delay, I applaud Jammu and Kashmir for partaking in the democratic process, despite, I am sure, feeling alienated and disempowered after decades of impasse. I want to acknowledge the large Kashmiri diaspora here in Britain, including in Hyndburn and Haslingden, and their aspirations for a just settlement.
As the Minister will know, human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as the United Nations, continue to highlight human rights concerns such as the repression of the media and freedom of speech in Jammu and Kashmir and the widespread use of detention before trial.
Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that the United Kingdom occupies a very special position, given our historical connections with the region? Does she also agree it is imperative that, in all trade discussions, the issues of observing human rights and the right to self-determination are consistently progressed by our Government?
Sarah Smith
I do agree—that is very important—and I will get to that shortly.
Human Rights Watch has stated that the Indian Government have not fully restored freedom of speech and association since the revocation of article 370 of the constitution in Jammu and Kashmir. It said in its July 2024 report:
“The Indian security forces continue to carry out repressive policies including arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killings, and other serious abuses.”
Many of these violations are enabled by legislation such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967, the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act 1990 and the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978, which obstruct the normal course of law, impede accountability and jeopardise the right to remedy for victims of human rights violations.
Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
My hon. Friend’s constituents and mine will recognise well the title of Amnesty International’s report: “Five years of silence and struggle in Kashmir”. Does she agree we are making it very clear that this Government and the MPs present today will not allow that to be the case for human rights in Kashmir?
Sarah Smith
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. It is encouraging to see so many Labour Members in the Chamber who share the responsibility for ensuring that we do not stay silent on the issues that matter the most.
The Armed Forces Special Powers Act remains hugely concerning, given that it gives the Indian security forces de facto legal immunity from prosecution for any human rights violation. Amnesty said:
“There is almost total impunity for enforced disappearance with little movement towards credibly investigating complaints”.
Mary Lawlor, the UN special rapporteur, said:
“The state must respect its human rights obligations and be held accountable where it violates them.”
Amnesty has reviewed the habeas corpus petitions filed to challenge detentions under the Public Safety Act before the High Court for the periods 2014 to 2019 and 2019 to 2024. It found a sevenfold increase in the number of cases filed under the PSA after 2019, with Muslim-dominated Srinagar consistently recording more PSA cases than Hindu-dominated Jammu.
As Pakistan and India work towards a bilateral resolution for peace, I want to ask the Government how the UK is supporting that aspiration. UN Security Council resolution 47 states that the future of Jammu and Kashmir should be decided by its own people
“through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite”.
How will the UK Government encourage the implementation of that resolution, and how will they encourage the Indian authorities to comply with the Indian Supreme Court’s mandate for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir?
Given the evidence of ongoing human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir, will the UK Government agree to raise their concerns in ongoing trade talks and other diplomatic negotiations with India? As part of any future UK-India trade negotiations, will the UK Government support the call for the release of journalists, and press for an open media environment that can function in a more meaningful way to promote a healthy democratic process?
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office last published an annual report on its activities to promote human rights abroad in 2023, and the previous Government unfortunately did not address Kashmir directly. Do this Government have plans to publish an annual report with reference to the Foreign Office’s activities regarding Kashmir?
I thank the Minister for her time today. The Kashmiri community in my constituency of Hyndburn make an invaluable contribution to the life of our community, but many live with anxiety about the future for their relatives in the region. I share their hope that Jammu and Kashmir will enjoy improved social and political conditions following a return to statehood, that the authorities will adopt a more humane approach to political prisoners, and that the appeal of militancy is reduced as Kashmir moves towards a peaceful resolution.
Several hon. Members rose—
Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)
Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called.
Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this timely and important debate.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that, for more than 70 years, the people of Kashmir have suffered persecution, oppression and injustice. Their calls for justice have gone unanswered, their fundamental human rights have been violated, and their right to self-determination has been repeatedly denied. They have faced enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and the largest military occupation in the world. Even today, mothers wait in vain for sons who never return and wives live in perpetual uncertainty—so much so that the term “half-widows” has tragically entered our lexicon.
That injustice has been facilitated by laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, which even the Supreme Court of India describes as “lawless law”. Those laws grant military personnel extraordinary powers to detain, arrest and even take lives without fear of prosecution. They have been weaponised against human rights defenders, journalists and political activists. Today, Yasin Malik, Khurram Parvez, Asiya Andrabi and Irfan Mehraj, as well as hundreds of others, remain imprisoned as a result of those draconian and illegal laws. Not one of them has been allowed the right to a fair trial. We must be clear in this House and call it what it is. It is not the rule of law; it is state-sponsored persecution and oppression, used over seven decades to try to silence the voice of the Kashmiris.
In August 2019 the Indian Government took the unprecedented and unconstitutional step of unilaterally revoking articles 370 and 35A, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special status. That action was not only a direct violation of international law, the commitments made to the Kashmiri people and decades of United Nations resolutions; it was, let us be clear, a blatant attempt by the right-wing Modi Government to quash the Kashmiri struggle once and for all. The consequences were devastating: a 150-day communications blackout, mass detentions, violent crackdowns and the transformation of the region into an open-air prison. Families were separated, businesses destroyed, young people denied education and basic rights trampled upon. Yet the Kashmiri people have shown remarkable resilience in the face of such adversity.
In the elections of September 2024, held after a decade of political repression, voter turnout reached 63%. It was not merely an election; it was a referendum in which large numbers of Kashmiris took part, and the voice of the Kashmiri people unequivocally rejected the revocation of articles 370 and 35A, and demanded the restoration of the region’s special status. Indeed, the first act of the democratically elected Assembly was to pass a resolution to that effect.
The question that is central to today’s debate is: where has the international community been? Despite the overwhelming evidence of human rights abuses, the response from the international community has been deafening. Although United Nations human rights organisations and Governments worldwide have issued statements of concern, statements alone are insufficient. Action is required.
The silence is not merely inaction; it sends a dangerous message that nations can suppress, oppress and brutalise without any consequences. We have a moral and historic duty to act, particularly given this Parliament’s role in shaping the region’s legacy—a point we can never forget. We have a duty beyond that of other nations, so today I press the Government and the Minister, who is a dear friend of mine. Over the last decade, she and I have discussed this issue on many occasions.
We must start by moving away from the decades-old policy in this area—the policy that has been adopted by Governments of all stripes. The central point is that this is not a bilateral issue. We have to be absolutely clear: this is not an issue for India or Pakistan to determine. There is a central voice here, and that is the voice of the Kashmiri people. That voice has been ignored for far too long, so I urge the Minister to listen. I sincerely think she will, and I hope she responds to that point.
Although I support trade agreements with the region, we cannot in good conscience enter into a clear agreement with India, as talks now begin, without addressing the human rights abuses in Kashmir. Trade must not come at the expense of human rights. Any future trade deal with India must be conditional on tangible actions to end these violations, which include repealing repressive laws such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Public Safety Act; restoring Kashmir’s special status; and upholding the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination. I hope the Minister will address these important points on the UK Government’s position and on the trade deal.
Finally, the voices of the hundreds of thousands of Kashmiris in this country will be heard on this important issue. I am a proud British Kashmiri, and Kashmiris stand tall and proud, and will never bow or beg in the face of oppression and injustice. Our voices will be heard, and we will continue to raise our voices loud and clear until our birthright of self-determination is granted.
Several hon. Members rose—
Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)
Order. As so many Members wish to speak, I suggest that we stick to four-minute speeches where possible, please.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate and for her persuasive and articulate speech. I also thank the hon. Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain).
Britain has long been a beacon of justice—a nation that has stood as the gold standard for the rule of law, a pillar of fairness to which the world looked in times of darkness. Our legal system has been revered globally and trusted so profoundly that even international contracts choose English courts as the final arbiters of truth. That is the legacy that we inherited, a legacy of unwavering integrity and of standing for what is right, no matter the cost, but I fear that that legacy has been somehow slipping in these times. In recent years, we have seen the principles that once defined us compromised by political expediency. The fair and equal application of justice has been tarnished by the weight of economic interests, and our moral compass has wavered in the face of convenience.
How can we claim to champion human rights when we turn a blind eye to atrocities that violate the very essence of international law? Kashmir, a region bound by United Nations Security Council resolutions, has been abandoned to decades of suffering. The people of Kashmir endure a brutal occupation, with their voices silenced and their rights stripped away, while we—the nation that helped shape modern international law—remain silent. In Gaza, civilians are caught in an unrelenting cycle of violence and despair, yet our actions remain hesitant and inconsistent. Contrast this with our swift and justified response to Russian aggression!
Why do we pick and choose when to stand for justice? Why do we let economic interests decide who is held accountable and who is ignored? This is not the Britain that we aspire to be. If we are to reclaim our moral authority and restore our standing as the defender of justice, we must hold all violators of international law to the same standard. That means taking a stance even when it is difficult. It means considering sanctions against nations such as India for the ongoing abuses in Kashmir. It means standing resolute, not for profit or political gain, but for the fundamental human rights of every individual, no matter where they live or who they are.
Justice must not be selective. Human rights are not negotiable. Let us be the nation that places international law above all else. I ask the Minister: given the United Nations Security Council resolutions that have been ignored, what sanctions will this Government now impose to remain consistent in our legal and moral obligations?
Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)
It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate. I pay tribute to the work that my constituents in Sheffield Central have done on this really important issue: they have campaigned for many years to raise awareness of the plight of Kashmiris.
Amnesty International has documented the repression of dissent in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly after the revocation of its special autonomous status in 2019. Quite recently, the case of Farkhunda Rehman, a British Kashmiri woman who was harassed and exploited, was not investigated appropriately. This is not an isolated case. Human Rights Watch has also reported on the ongoing repression, arbitrary detentions, extrajudicial killings and restrictions on freedom of speech and of assembly. Its findings emphasise the use of counter-terrorism laws to target journalists, activists and political leaders. Journalists in Kashmir face extreme levels of harassment by security forces, including interrogation, raids and threats.
For many years, people have relayed to me their constant concerns that the Indian authorities have routinely restricted and blocked internet in Kashmir and prohibited the rights of human rights defenders and impartial independent observers. We must work hard to make sure that all political parties put their candidates up for election and facilitate free and fair participation, regardless of their political beliefs, for the determination of the future of a free and fair Kashmir.
These are my questions to the Minister. Given the scale of human rights abuses, when will we move from condemnation to action? When will we recognise that this is not a bilateral issue? When will we hear the voice of Kashmiris and ensure that their voice is heard in the international arena?
Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Tahir Ali
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall today.
In January 1948, India went to the United Nations to ask that the issue of Kashmir be noted. Subsequently, resolution 47 determined the outcome for a plebiscite. To this day—76 years on, and into the 77th year—that resolution has not been implemented. The people of Kashmir are now asking the international community: what has to happen to them before their voices are heard? When articles 370 and 35A were revoked back in August 2019 by the Modi-led BJP Government, there was a deafening silence from the international community. The United Nations failed to act.
Earlier this week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, expressed concerns over human rights violations in India and particularly in illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir, but the response from the Indian high commissioner to the United Nations was that he should take
“a long and hard look in the mirror”.
That is nothing but a complete disregard for the United Nations.
India calls itself the largest democracy. That raises the question: if it is the largest democracy, why would it not let international observers into Kashmir, with unfettered access to observe what is happening on the ground? Why are extrajudicial killings happening on the international community’s watch? India is getting away with atrocities against women, rape, torture and even the pelleting of children who are making their way to school. What threat can they be? This is all very well documented.
It is a blatant two fingers up to the international community to shout the loudest and say, “We are the largest democracy. Nothing is happening in Kashmir. We will continue to do what we are doing. What has been happening for the last 76 years will continue, and we will take no notice.”
Kashmir is not a bilateral issue. It is not an issue between Pakistan and India. It is an issue for the Kashmiri people, who have a right to self-determination. It is for the international community to come together to make that happen. If it does not happen now, in the midst of the global turbulence that is happening in all regions, when is the time for the international community to come together? Peace is needed. Peace has to happen in the region. Two nuclear states cannot allow Kashmir to become the hanging fireball in the region that could explode or ignite at any time.
This is unfinished business from the UK Labour Government in 1947. We have a Labour Government now. Perhaps it is up to the UK’s Labour Government to take a leading role and make sure that that unfinished business is dealt with properly once and for all, without putting any more lives at risk and without risking any more atrocities, given the genocide that is taking place in India-occupied Kashmir. Why would a country not even allow its own politicians access to the region of conflict? Why will it not allow its own journalists access, if there is nothing to hide?
Back in 2020, a delegation from the all-party parliamentary group on Kashmir went to Kashmir. All of us were denied a visa to the India-occupied region. The then chair managed to get to Delhi, but she was returned to Dubai because she was not allowed any further access. When we ended up on the Pakistan side, the then PTI Government allowed us unfettered access to any areas we wanted to visit, without any hindrance. We had to ask for it, but we got access. In fact, we changed the schedules to make sure that we saw parts of the Kashmir region that had perhaps not been seen by politicians before.
On one side, Pakistan allows international access; on the other side, India is hesitant. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to work out where the problem is. My plea to the UK Government is that unfinished business cannot remain unfinished. It has to be dealt with now. Will the Government take all steps to make sure that the right of self-determination is granted to the people of Kashmir?
Several hon. Members rose—
Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (in the Chair)
Order. I remind hon. Members that because so many want to speak in this important debate, we need to stick to four-minute speeches and keep interventions to a minimum.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate. I have many Kashmiris in my constituency of Dewsbury and Batley, and one of the pledges I made to them during my election campaign was that I promised to stand up for peace, justice and human rights anywhere around the world. Kashmir is their homeland and very close to their hearts and my heart.
A report issued by Amnesty International last year captures the reality of the repression to which the Kashmiri population are subjected. It describes a clampdown on freedom of expression via the use of restrictive travel bans and arbitrary detentions to intimidate critical dissenting voices into not speaking out. It describes how those subject to detention under stringent anti-terror laws are now being detained for much longer without trial than before: the average was 269 days between 2014 and 2019, and about 330 days from 2019 to 2024. This is, in effect, a form of internment. We know from the experience of internment in Northern Ireland in the 1970s that it did nothing more than act as a recruiting agent for paramilitary organisations. Add to that the extrajudicial killings, the police and army abuses, the Indian Government’s decision to strip Kashmir of its autonomy and statehood, and the draconian crackdown that followed in its wake, and it is not surprising that the region is in constant ferment.
What is surprising is how little is known in this country about the state of affairs in Kashmir, especially considering the British Government’s historical role in the creation of Kashmir, the partition of India, and all the chaos that came in its wake. The UK has a historic responsibility for the current situation. It has a responsibility to put rhetoric about upholding human rights into practice and to use governmental pressure on India to that end.
I have no illusions about the difficulties in making the British Government act. As the plight of the Palestinians illustrates, the UK’s commitment to human rights exists more in theory than in practice. Nevertheless, thanks to public campaigning, the issue of Palestine will not leave this Government alone—it is like a stone in their shoe. For those of us concerned about the issue of human rights and self-determination for Kashmir, the challenge is to make it the stone in the other shoe. The Government must take responsibility and a leadership role as a peacemaker and enforcer of international law.
What will the Government do to remove the impunity they provide the Indian Government for their many breaches of international and humanitarian law? What specific steps will the Government take to enforce the UN resolutions that have already been mentioned? What diplomatic engagement is the UK using to seek a peaceful resolution for the Kashmiri people and the right to self-determination? What action are the UK Government taking to enforce human rights in Kashmir? What humanitarian aid are the UK Government providing to Kashmir, and how will that be impacted by the decision to reduce foreign aid by 40%?
Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate.
This is a personal issue for my constituents and for me, as my great-grandparents come from Jammu and Kashmir, which is now occupied by India. The United Kingdom has a historic responsibility for this issue: it was during the British Raj when the statehoods of India and Pakistan were created. The principality of Kashmir was predominantly a Muslim area and, from the beginning, there were problems regarding who would run it.
In 1948, the Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, went to the UN and asked for UN Security Council resolution 47, which guaranteed that all Kashmiris had the right to choose their future through a democratic vote. That still has not happened 76 years later. Instead, a very right-wing Hindutva-led Prime Minister, Mr Modi—Hindutva is the concept that India is for Hindus first—is in power. Since his Government have been in power, things have got worse for the people of Kashmir.
One of the first things the Indian Government did, in 2019, was revoke article 370, meaning the situation has gone from bad to worse. The revocation of that article, and some others, split occupied Kashmir into three different areas. The revocations have also allowed people who are not from Kashmir to settle there. Thousands of acres of land have been grabbed, apparently for development purposes. Yet the rule in Kashmir is that Kashmiris should be able to settle there. This is a deliberate ploy to change the demographics on the ground so that if ever there was a plebiscite, Kashmir would probably be kept with India.
Apart from that, there have been human rights abuses such as pellet guns being aimed at children. There was a 500-day period when there was no internet for the entire area. People have been arrested and incarcerated without due process under the law if they are critical of the Indian Government.
India is supposed to be the largest democracy in the world—we are told—yet in Kashmir the Assembly has been dissolved. People in Kashmir have no right to vote. The Prime Minister has recently done great work on Ukraine; I ask him and our Foreign Office to get involved in this issue, stop treating it as a bilateral issue—it is not—and for once ensure that the people of Kashmir have the right to decide their destiny as to where they want to be. As so many people have already said, we talk about human rights and we talk about the rule of law; it is about time that people in Kashmir were given their human rights, and one of the fundamental human rights is the right of self-determination.
Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate.
Many of my constituents in Stoke-on-Trent South care deeply about the conflict in Jammu and Kashmir and have family there, as do many British Asians of Jammu and Kashmiri descent. I have had the honour of attending several meetings in Stoke-on-Trent to discuss the ongoing conflict and human rights abuses occurring in Kashmir. In particular, I am grateful to Raja Najabat Hussain and Tamoor Shafique of the Jammu and Kashmir Self-Determination Movement International for their regular engagement with me since my election. I also thank Councillor Majid Khan and Councillor Amjid Wazir for hosting the meetings, and also Bagh Ali, who first raised Kashmir with me, highlighting the ongoing issues.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
I echo the comments of my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour about Majid Khan and Amjid Wazir. Many of my constituents in Stoke-on-Trent North have deep ties with Kashmir. Does my hon. Friend agree that the work that Majid Khan, Amjid Wazir and others do locally to raise awareness of the terrible ongoing human rights violations is incredibly important? Too often, there is not enough understanding among our wider constituents of the ongoing human rights violations.
Dr Gardner
I of course agree with my hon. Friend.
I am of course aware that we are speaking during the holy month of Ramadan. This is a time of deep reflection when it is very apt that we discuss the need for peace and resolution. It is, of course, the role of India and Pakistan to seek a diplomatic and political resolution and an end to the human rights abuses, and so find a sustainable peace and self-determination for the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but I ask the British Government to take an active role in mediation.
Crucially, the negotiations must include the voices of the Kashmiri people and, in acknowledgment of International Women’s Day next week, they must include the voices of women. Academics, human rights organisations and the UN rightly point out that it is often women who are frequently the most severely affected emotionally, physically and economically. Of greatest concern is the use of sexual violence and rape, which is so often used as an instrument of war in any conflict. This has been used to intimidate and silence women and communities. The fear instilled in women means that their day-to-day existence, safety, security and mobility are curtailed.
Enhanced security protocols and militarisation have an enormous negative impact on the lives of women, even reducing their access to education and, crucially, healthcare. Conflict results in the loss of husbands, either by extrajudicial killings or imprisonment, which often means women have to work to support their families. We need to support the economic empowerment of women as well as their physical security in Jammu and Kashmir. For peace to be secured and for resolution to be reached, the voices of women must be heard in the dialogues and mediation in respect of the Kashmiri conflict.
I urge the Minister, in the light of our global reputation for mediation, to do all that can be done to help to secure peace, democracy and self-determination in Jammu and Kashmir for all Kashmiri people—men women and children.
Mr James Frith (Bury North) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate.
This topic is close to the hearts of hundreds of my constituents, and therefore close to my heart. On the doorsteps during the election campaign, and during my time in the House, I have promised to involve myself in it and continue to fight for it. Earlier this year I was proud to host the first Labour Friends of Kashmir event in Bury North, which brought together friends and colleagues from across my community and further afield to discuss the important issues that we seek to address and highlight today.
I am grateful in particular to Raja Najabat Hussain and Tamoor Shafique of the Jammu and Kashmir Self-Determination Movement International for engaging with me since my election; Lord Wajid Khan, who is a Minister and a long-time friend to me and Bury; and our wonderful Pakistan-Kashmiri diaspora. I also thank Councillors Tamoor Tariq, Babar Ibrahim and Tahir Rafiq for their counsel on this issue. Their interactions have deepened my understanding and commitment to advocating for the rights and dignity of the people in this contested region.
These global issues have local resonance. Bury North is home to a proud south Asian community, and many continue to have familial ties to Jammu and Kashmir. Their stories, hopes and concerns resonate deeply with our community, and it is our duty to ensure that their voices are heard. We must not just stand in solidarity with them in these challenging times, but call out injustices. We must also move things along and make progress for them—not to constantly rehearse the objections and assessments but, now that we are in government, to see progress.
As we speak, we are mindful that it is the holy month of Ramadan—a time dedicated to peace, reflection and charity. It is a period when we are reminded of our shared humanity and the importance of supporting those in need. The principles of Ramadan, as with so many of the values of our Abrahamic faiths, inspire us to advocate for justice and compassion—values that are essential in our discussion of human rights. This conflict is taking place thousands of miles away, but we must not, cannot and should not turn away from the human rights abuses, the stifling of democracy and free speech, the ongoing struggle for self-determination, the historic injustices, the need for reconciliation and, as with so many of these contentious issues, the UK’s role originally and our role in resolving it.
Restrictions on free speech in the region have led to the detention of journalists, activists and political leaders under anti-terror laws. These measures supress dissent and limit public discourse. Laws such as the Public Safety Act and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act enable authorities to detain individuals for extended periods without trial, and often without formal charges, raising concerns about legal abuses and arbitrary detention.
Extended lockdowns have had severe consequences for civilians, restricting access to essential services such as healthcare, education and employment. These measures have disproportionately affected vulnerable populations and exacerbated their hardship. Additionally, religious minorities and migrant workers have faced targeted violence and repression, further marginalising already at-risk communities.
It is fundamentally a matter for the Kashmiri people to be given and to execute their self-determination, but it is a matter for the UK to involve itself with Pakistan and India. We have a global role and reputation, as well as leadership that can inspire the change we wish to see. There are verified reports on human rights violations from credible organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. The human impact of the restrictions, and the testimony we have seen and heard from affected individuals, highlight the real-life injustices and consequences.
In closing, I urge the Minister to consider what more the Government can do—not simply to rehearse the assessment we understand, but to progress to resolution. The direction of this ongoing conflict must be towards achieving peace and democracy in the region, and justice for the Jammu and Kashmiri people through self-determination. Will the Minister confirm the Government’s objectives in this Parliament for this historical and current conflict? The remarkable resilience of the Jammu and Kashmiri people demands action and a resolution.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for setting the scene so well, and all those who have made incredible contributions. We have seen the new Parliament engage on this issue, including the all-parties Kashmir conference held in the House of Commons. That is an indication of the strength of feeling. I have spoken on the issue on the Floor of the House many times. It is vital that such dialogue translates into meaningful action.
I state an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on international freedom of religion or belief. I speak up for those with Christian faith, other faiths and no faith. I have deep concern for the rights of all communities affected by the ongoing tensions in the region. I acknowledge the deeply troubling reports of press suppression, and obviously the tensions and human rights concerns in India-administered Jammu and Kashmir.
The situation for journalists in particular remains alarming. Reports suggest that some 90% of journalists working in the region have been summoned for questioning at least once—some repeatedly—often under intimidation from authorities demonstrating detailed knowledge of their personal lives and family members. These activities create a chilling effect, deterring independent reporting and limiting the free flow of information. It remains concerning that despite multiple calls for transparency, the regional administration has failed abysmally to provide satisfactory responses. The climate of fear for journalists directly undermines press freedom, which is an essential pillar of democracy, as others have said.
The right to freedom of expression is fundamental to any democratic society, and it is deeply concerning that the ability of the press to operate freely in Jammu and Kashmir remains under significant threat. Beyond press restrictions, we must also consider the broader security situation. Since 2021, Jammu has seen at least 33 militant-related attacks, and in just the first half of 2024, 12 civilians were killed, matching the total number of civilian deaths in the previous year. I believe those statistics underscore a worrying escalation in violence, despite claims that peace has been restored. The Indian Government’s revocation of article 370 in 2019 fundamentally altered the status of Jammu and Kashmir. While officials may claim that that move was to increase development and integration, reports from international rights organisations tell a different story.
The arbitrary arrests, the surveillance and the oppressive environment in which journalists work are clear violations of press freedom. The BBC has documented numerous instances where citizens, particularly journalists, have been detained or harassed for merely exercising their fundamental rights and doing their job. One example is the case of Muneeb ul Islam, a 29-year-old photojournalist who had worked in Kashmir for five years. His career halted in August 2019. For over 150 days the region was left without internet access, making it India’s longest ever communications blackout. Such acts of repression have only intensified since the revocation of article 370 in 2019, which has further suppressed independent journalism.
I will turn to Pakistan, because there are two countries involved in this. We cannot ignore the serious human rights concerns in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The 2018 amendments to the interim constitution, which restrict religious freedoms for the Ahmadiyya community, remain a cause for concern. Reports from human rights groups suggest that enforced disappearances continue. Freedom of expression remains under threat, with journalists facing harassment and restrictions in both Pakistan-administered and India-administered Kashmir.
As I often do in these types of debates, I will quote a biblical text. Proverbs 31:9 says:
“Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and the needy.”
In the discussions to continue, I urge the United Kingdom Government, and specifically the Minister who is here today, to engage proactively with their counterparts to seek assurances that human rights will be protected. The international community, including the UK, must use its diplomatic channels to encourage both Governments to uphold fundamental freedoms, allow independent monitoring by UN bodies and ensure justice for those affected by violence and repression.
The people of Jammu and Kashmir deserve a future free from violence, repression and discrimination. It is our duty in this House to stand in solidarity with them and to ensure that their rights are upheld. So, let us continue to push for justice, for accountability and for lasting peace in this region.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I give huge thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate.
As other colleagues have said, in 2019 India made the unilateral move to downgrade Jammu and Kashmir to two union territories, revoking article 370 of its constitution. That was a huge move that India made unilaterally and it has had a huge impact on the Kashmiri people. As other Members have said, there was a complete communication lockdown in the immediate aftermath; there continue to be sporadic internet shutdowns to this day.
As has been said, the Unlawful Activity (Prevention) Act has been used particularly against civil society activists and journalists. I especially mention Khurram Parvez and journalist Irfan Mehraj, who have been detained without trial under the UAPA.
I have spent some time working on Kashmir with colleagues who are present for today’s debate. We have spoken directly with both civil society activists and non-governmental organisations in the region. Consequently, we know that, for example, Amnesty International India had its bank accounts frozen by the Indian Government. We also know that the BBC had to split its news operations to meet the laws that were put in place, and there were serious concerns about the moves that the BBC had to take at the time.
Land laws in Indian-administered Kashmir have been amended or repealed, resulting in evictions, destruction of property and land confiscation. Just this week, there have been reports of books being seized by police, and of bookshop owners trying to go about their daily business but having books seized—a horrific example of what is going on in Indian-administered Kashmir.
I must mention Gilgit Baltistan. The situation in Pakistan-administered Kashmir is far more open. As my hon. Friends the Members for Bradford East (Imran Hussain) and for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) mentioned, I joined them on a delegation to Azad Kashmir. We had quite a lot of access, not only to Government officials but to journalists and civil society activists, so we were able to speak to a large group of people. However, there is little or no representation for Gilgit Baltistan in Pakistan’s National Assembly or Senate, and there have been some concerns for journalists in the region. Also, we know that there are projects such as the China-Pakistan economic corridor, which has been seen as a beacon of progress by some in the region, but which has led to some land seizures without proper consultation.
We must ensure that the Kashmiri people and Kashmiri citizens are put at the front of any moves involving their region. The right to self-determination exists under United Nations Security Council resolution 47, and we must do everything we can to support the Kashmiri people. As other Members have said, this is not a bilateral issue; this is an issue for the international community to be involved with.
Finally, will the Minister tell us about the discussions that the Government are having with the Indian Government on trade agreements and human rights?
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) on securing the debate. I think that it is the first substantive debate on this issue in this Parliament. Given that we are now seven months into this Parliament, that is probably something we should all reflect on, and consider whether we have given due attention to this pressing international issue.
I will begin, much like my hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) and Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner), by paying tribute to Councillors Amjid Wazir, Majid Khan and Javid Najmi, as well as former Lord Mayor Bagh Ali. When I was first elected to this place in 2017, they were the first group of people to come and see me to talk about what was going on in Jammu and Kashmir. They told me about the challenges faced by their families in 2017; issues escalated significantly during that Parliament with the revocation of article 370, the suspension of basic human rights, the curfews, the discontinuation of telephone services and the suspension of the internet.
The fact that today, in 2025, we stand in Parliament having this debate again means that in many ways we have failed them. We have failed those people I spoke to seven years ago. We failed people like Raja Najabat Hussain of the Jammu and Kashmir Self-Determination Movement International, because we are still only talking about this issue. What are we doing about this issue? What are the actions that we can say have happened, since I was first elected seven years ago, that will make this issue better for the people living in Jammu and Kashmir.
With my hand on my heart, I cannot honestly say that the discussions that we are having today and the passionate arguments that I have heard from my hon. Friends and other hon. Members in Westminster Hall are any different from those that I listened to seven years ago. If we are still having this conversation in seven years’ time, it will be a catastrophe for the people in Jammu and Kashmir. It would be a dereliction of the responsibility of any Government of any political party to allow an issue of this significance to continue in the way it has without some form of intervention.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Frith) has, I am afraid, temporarily left. He said in his speech that the UK has a global role and a global reputation. He said that wonderfully, but the UK also has a global responsibility; if we do not take our responsibility seriously, if we do not say that now is the time for action, if we do not go beyond the conversations, the debates, the words, the petitions, the conferences we all attend in Portcullis House where we rehearse the same arguments and we hear the passionate cry for assistance from the people of Jammu and Kashmir, then we will have failed to do what we, as legislators in one of the most powerful Parliaments in the world, can do.
Minister, we all know of Security Council resolution 47 from 1948 and we know of the 77-year wait that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have had for the right to self-determination. There is a generation of people who are ageing, and they would like to see some action on this before it is too late for them. These are people who have lived their entire life in hope for the land that they and their families have come from, with which they still have a deep bond and connection.
I know the Minister well. She is a thoughtful, diligent member of the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office team and I know that these matters weigh heavily on her shoulders. Can she give us some indication of what we in this House can look forward to? What can we say to our constituents in, for example, Stoke-on-Trent, Bradford, Birmingham or even Strangford, when they ask what action we are now taking to deliver the self-determination and human rights that have been denied to the people of Kashmir for the last 77 years?
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this vital and overdue debate. As has been said already, while the world rightly focuses on the plight of the Palestinian people and the UN resolutions frequently broken by Israel, all too often there is too little attention on the plight of the Kashmiri people and the repeated violations of UN resolutions by India. From repeated denials of their self-determination to frequent attacks on their human rights, the Kashmiris are truly the Palestinians of south Asia.
Seventy-eight years after Kashmiris were nominally granted autonomy by the creation of Jammu and Kashmir in India and Azad Kashmir in Pakistan, many are still crying out for the self-determination they deserve. We need to vigorously support the United Nations resolutions not just of 1948, but of 1949 and 1960, which upheld the right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination through a UN-supervised plebiscite. As has already been said, we the British owe the Kashmiri people an historic debt of honour. We need to fulfil the explicit commitment by Lord Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India, to a direct say for the Kashmiri people over their own future.
It is India’s most recent, ongoing breaches of UN resolutions that concern many of us today. Human rights groups have highlighted the repression of the media and freedom of speech in Jammu and Kashmir, the widespread use of detention without trial, and internet shutdowns—all of which have been criticised by the high courts in India itself. As a former journalist, I am appalled by the Indian crackdown on a free press. In September ’23, the BBC reported that journalists in Kashmir felt that the Indian Government were running a
“sinister and systematic campaign to intimidate and silence the press in the region.”
Only last month, police in Kashmir disgracefully raided dozens of bookshops and seized more than 650 books, many of them by Islamic scholars. I know that the UK Government’s position is that Kashmir is a bilateral matter for peaceful resolution by India and Pakistan, and obviously there needs to be diplomacy and a long-lasting peaceful solution, but the voices of Kashmiris themselves should be supported by the UK and the international community. The UK must do much more to call out the most egregious abuses of human rights in Kashmir. We must demand full investigations, real action and real justice.
I stand in solidarity with the people of Kashmir in both India and Pakistan and pay tribute to their amazing resilience, but there is more we can do in the UK to help British Kashmiris. Research by the University of Manchester puts Rochdale’s Kashmiri population at nearly 15,000, but they are almost invisible in public policy terms, because they are not recorded separately in the census and are classed as Pakistani.
We need to recognise the Kashmiri languages and ethnicity in the census. That would allow public services and other services to be properly directed to areas of need. Pahari, the mother tongue of many Rochdale Kashmiris, is not recognised on par with other community languages used by public bodies. Many in the community feel that this is one of the key factors that has led to their marginalisation. There is a democratic deficit too. Although we have many councillors and some MPs of Kashmiri descent—some are here today—not a single Member of the House of Lords is a Kashmiri.
I pay tribute to Councillor Daalat Ali, the founding member of Rochdale’s Kashmir Youth Project and of the Kashmir Broadcasting Corporation, which caters for Indo-Aryan languages in the UK. He has repeatedly raised the issue of human rights abuses back in his homeland. The Kashmir Youth Project in Rochdale was founded in 1979, and every day it helps women and men, young and old, with crucial services. It shows the best of Rochdale and the best of our Kashmiri community.
We should strive to improve the lot of Kashmiris in India and Pakistan and call out human rights abuses, but we also need to do much more here at home to help the Kashmiri community.
Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for bringing forward this important debate.
The Liberal Democrats are deeply concerned about the ongoing tension between India and Pakistan over Jammu and Kashmir. This is not a new conflict; it has been a long and oppressive one. It affects many in the UK, particularly those in communities with strong personal ties to the region. We are concerned by the ongoing tension between India and Pakistan, two nuclear powers, and we want the UK Government, with the international community, to play an active role in advocating for peace and reconciliation between India and Pakistan in this troubled area, and in recognising the human rights of the residents of Jammu and Kashmir. But it is up to the Governments of India and Pakistan to undertake to engage in a peace process that delivers a sustainable, just and lasting settlement. Our Government must play their part to help find the best way forward.
We are profoundly concerned by the Indian Government’s abolition in 2019 of Kashmir’s special status under article 370 of the constitution of India, along with the continuing unrest and human rights abuses. We believe that the UK must use its influence to support UN inspections and engagement in Kashmir. The Liberal Democrats believe in defending human rights and equality across the globe and think that UK foreign policy should promote these values internationally.
The UK must also reverse cuts to official development assistance and ensure that aid focuses on poverty reduction and protecting human rights in places such as Kashmir, where an estimated 655,000 people are living below the poverty line, with about 47% of the population living without adequate sanitation. The UK’s international development spending must be used effectively, with a primary focus on poverty reduction as we reverse the ODA cuts and get back to 0.7% GNI, putting the United Nations sustainable development goals—including access to clean water, sanitation and health and to quality education, and achieving food security—at the heart of our international development policy.
The Kashmir crisis is a long-standing issue that cannot be ignored. The UK Government must use their diplomatic channels to promote peace, hold human rights violators to account and support those affected by the conflict. We stand for a peaceful, just and humanitarian approach to resolving the situation and helping to build a better, more prosperous future for the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) on securing this important debate on human rights in Jammu and Kashmir, which has clearly attracted a lot of interest from colleagues in the House. This is a deeply sensitive and complex issue that has persisted for decades and requires careful and measured discussion, and it is fair to say that we have seen that in Westminster Hall today.
Naturally, given our history in the region and the role that the United Kingdom played in the partition of these territories, many look to us to mediate. It was not the policy of the last Government to prescribe a solution to the situation in Kashmir, as it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution that takes into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. However, we must not shy away from raising human rights concerns that may arise as a by-product of the dispute. Therefore, it is vital that allegations of human rights abuses are investigated thoroughly, promptly and independently. Can the Minister outline how her Government are pressing both India and Pakistan to ensure that their domestic laws align with international human rights standards?
Central to today’s debate, of course, is understanding what assessment the Government have made of ongoing human rights abuses in the region. India and Pakistan are both close friends of the United Kingdom and, importantly, both are members of the Commonwealth, a unique institution that does so much to foster unity between nations that share the common values set out under the Commonwealth charter. Article II of the charter insists upon a commitment to human rights, specifically
“respect for the protection and promotion of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights”.
Both India and Pakistan have expressed their strong belief in the Commonwealth’s role as a platform for constructive dialogue. Given that, what are the Government doing to utilise the Commonwealth as a forum to encourage dialogue between India and Pakistan on protecting human rights and on this geopolitical issue more generally? What conversations has the Minister had with the secretary-general of the Commonwealth to prevent any potential future violations of the Commonwealth charter?
Regional instability in south Asia does not exist in a vacuum, so we must consider the broader geopolitical landscape, particularly the influence of China in the region. Continued tensions in Kashmir could create opportunities for external actors to further their own strategic interests, potentially undermining peace efforts and increasing regional instability. It would therefore be helpful to understand what assessment has been made of the potential security implications of China’s involvement in the region. Will China’s role in Kashmir make an appearance in the Government’s China audit?
A crucial part of the human rights discussion is the issue of freedom of religion and belief, which remains a concern in both India-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, where religious minorities continue to face discrimination and persecution. What assessment have the Government made of the state of religious freedom in Kashmir?
The Prime Minister’s recent appointment of a special envoy for freedom of religion or belief was welcome, but it is important to understand whether the envoy will be tasked with examining these concerns and engaging with counterparts in India and Pakistan on the matter. As we engage in this discussion, I urge the Government to provide clear answers on how they plan to ensure that the UK remains a voice for stability, dialogue and human rights in Kashmir. The people of Kashmir have endured decades of uncertainty and hardship. What are the Government doing to prevent a further escalation of tensions? How do they intend to use their diplomatic influence to bring India and Pakistan to the negotiating table?
His Majesty’s Government, through their diplomatic networks in New Delhi and Islamabad, must continue to encourage both sides to engage in dialogue and pursue lasting diplomatic solutions. How frequently are the Government raising this issue with counterparts in India and Pakistan? Can the Minister provide specific examples of recent diplomatic engagement on this matter?
With all that in mind, the UK must continue to encourage constructive dialogue, promote and defend international law and human rights, and work towards a future that prioritises peace, security and stability in the region.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Catherine West)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship this morning, Dr Allin-Khan.
I will begin by stating the Government’s policy on Kashmir. India and Pakistan are long-standing important friends of the UK and we encourage both to engage in dialogue and find lasting political solutions to maintain regional stability. It has been the long-standing position of successive UK Governments that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution on Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution or act as a mediator. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) has secured the debate, and as hon. Members have asked about a voice for Kashmir, I want to reiterate that this is an opportunity to bring our constituents’ concerns to the House of Commons.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South and Walkden (Yasmin Qureshi) said, the history of the region is intertwined with our own. It is very important to take account of that, which is why we have regular interventions in Parliament on this important topic. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) said that we had not spoken enough about it. I remind him that he made points about it at the Adjournment debate on International Human Rights Day in December, and there have been a number of other interventions and written questions on the subject.
We recognise that there are concerns about human rights in both India-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. I want to reassure the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) and my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald), who said that human rights are paramount. The UK Government encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws are in line with international standards.
A number of hon. Members mentioned journalists’ freedom of speech. Would my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) be happy if I wrote to her about the woman she mentioned, so that I can provide details? We will follow up directly on that case, and I will put a copy of the letter in the Library. Our position is clear that any allegation of human rights abuse is deeply concerning and must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently.
My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) said it is important to ensure effective and constructive dialogue with the communities affected. That is the role of Members of Parliament—to raise concerns, which our Government will then raise with the Governments of India and Pakistan. As Minister for the Indo-Pacific, I have interlocutors in Delhi and other places, and in the high commission here. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), who oversees the FCDO’s work with Pakistan, Afghanistan and the middle east, also regularly raises points with his interlocutors, as we both bring forward these concerns.
We undertake diligently the role of monitoring the situation and recording concerns. We understand that several restrictions have been put in place over time in Indian-administered Kashmir. Many hon. Members referred to internet blackouts, which we monitor carefully and ensure we raise effectively. Unfortunately, they tend to spike at times of violent outbreaks.
On the importance of human rights, my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) mentioned the important Amnesty International report. Other Members have mentioned the work of Mary Lawlor. We are clear on the importance of human rights being respected, and we continue to call for all remaining restrictions imposed since the constitutional changes in August 2019 to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.
Some Members mentioned prison conditions, and that goes to the heart of the issue. We welcome reports that some detainees have been released, but we remain concerned by ongoing detentions. More broadly, the Government note that the people of Indian-administered Kashmir used their collective voice with a 64% turnout in the state assembly elections last October, which is a higher turnout than in the UK local government elections, I might add. The electoral process was largely peaceful, and the state legislative assembly in Srinagar has now been restored.
Some Members have raised the revocation of article 370 of the Indian constitution. The UK Government stand by our long-standing belief that any resolution should consider the wishes of the Kashmiri people. For that reason, we continue to urge both sides to ensure that there is constructive dialogue with affected communities. As I said, we are clear on the importance of rights being respected, and we continue to call for all remaining restrictions imposed since the constitutional changes in August 2019 to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.
The UK is aware of the Indian Supreme Court’s judgment on the validity of the article 370 revocation. Where we have concerns, we raise them directly with the Government of India.
Gareth Snell
I thank the Minister for replying in such detail to the points made, and I fully accept that she and the Government are raising the article 370 suspension with India. Is she able to tell the House what the Indian response was, or share some detail of the importance with which India took that intervention from the United Kingdom?
Catherine West
The point is that this is a frequent agenda item. Without wanting to go into private discussions, the fact is this: constituents raise the matter with Members, and we then relay that message. That is as transparent as we can possibly be. As ever in foreign policy, it is almost impossible to control the response of our interlocutors. I also responded to yesterday’s urgent question in the House; if I could control my interlocutor’s response, I would be in heaven.
Many Members raised the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and the Public Safety Act. The UK Government encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws are in line with international standards. Any allegations of human rights abuses must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently.
My hon. Friends the Members for Huddersfield (Harpreet Uppal), for Sheffield Central, and for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) talked about communications restrictions and the worrying situation for journalists. It is wonderful to have a journalist, my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, in the House making such effective interventions through speeches, with such heart for his community.
Jim Shannon
Is there a role for the special envoy in relation to religious discrimination and abuse in the region? If so, we all believe that there is no better person than the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) to do that job.
Catherine West
Of course. The work of envoys and the work of the United Nations is very important for providing us with data and up-to-date analysis, but the Foreign Office also has a role in visiting the region. The way our heads of mission are able to go into those parts is really wonderful. Some Members mentioned a journey that UK Members of Parliament made some years ago. Their entrance was blocked because some areas are simply too difficult to enter; they are too violent and not safe enough. We have our own teams—envoys, United Nations teams and our own staff—that are able to give us up-to-date guidance.
I want to touch briefly on freedom of religion or belief, because the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raises it regularly and the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) spoke about its importance. I want to reassure them that when I visited Delhi, I met Hindu, Christian, Sikh and Muslim communities to hear about the different traditions in the region. We had a very impressive visit, which made a huge impression on me, to the Jama Masjid, one of the most ancient religious sites in Delhi.
Jim Shannon
I thank the Minister for her graciousness in letting me intervene a second time. The Ahmadiyya Muslims are suffering persecution simply because they are of a different kind of the Muslim religion. Has the Minister had an opportunity to discuss with them the persecution that they are enduring?
Catherine West
The hon. Gentleman refers to the Ahmadiyya, but that is mainly an issue in other parts of the region. With his permission, I will ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), to write to him with more detail.
To return to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, the UK Government are aware of reports of the detention of a number of journalists. We are clear about the importance of respect for human rights, and continue to call for any remaining restrictions to be lifted as soon as possible, and for any remaining political detainees to be released.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) raised the UN plebiscite. It has been the long-standing position of successive UK Governments that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution on Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution or act as a mediator.
Iqbal Mohamed
On that point, can the Minister confirm whether adherence to human rights and international law will be included as conditions within any trade agreements with India?
Catherine West
Trade is the responsibility of the Department for Business and Trade, but I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we remain committed to promoting universal human rights, and where we have concerns, we raise them directly with partner Governments, including at the ministerial level. My hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield also raised trade. Human rights are a golden thread that goes through all the work of the international Departments.
An issue that sits alongside that is aid—we have debated it this week because of the announcement on international aid. I assure the House that we are still assessing the impact in the Indo-Pacific region, and we will come back when we have a clearer picture. As Members are aware, our work is intertwined with that of other donor countries. For example, the United States Agency for International Development has traditionally been a very big partner in aid across the globe. In the light of the recent announcement of the cessation of that aid, Ministers have asked the Department to do an assessment in the coming weeks so that we can understand the impact of the reduction of aid more generally in different regions. As the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, I want to know exactly what impact that is going to have, but because the announcement is less than a week old, that work has not yet been completed.
I want to touch briefly on Government visits to the region. The benefit of having in-country expertise is that when it is safe to visit, we can seek and gain the various permissions that are needed. Monitoring the situation in India-administered Kashmir is part of the Government’s duties, and that includes engaging with people from different areas and travelling to different regions, including Indian-administered Kashmir. That is a very important part of our diplomacy, and we will continue to do it. Despite the controls in place, officials from the British high commission in New Delhi request access to Kashmir, monitor the situation and visit the region periodically.
The FCDO advises against travel to certain parts of Indian-administered Kashmir and against all travel within 10 miles of the line of control, whether in Indian-administered Kashmir or Pakistan-administered Kashmir. We encourage all British nationals visiting the region, including our own staff, to follow that advice very carefully. There are limits, therefore, to the frequency and geographical scope of visits. The same applies to our officials at the British high commission in Islamabad, who travel periodically to Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
I want briefly to touch on a couple of other issues raised by hon. Members, but we are getting close to the end of the debate—have I missed anything? One thing I have enjoyed about this debate has been the discussion of the many local organisations, such as the youth organisation in Rochdale mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, of the impact of councillors in our localities and of the important work on International Women’s Day, when we can celebrate the work of our representatives who have deep connections with the area. This work is the tapestry of the UK, and it is important that we bring such matters to the House to reflect constituents’ concerns.
Catherine West
I will take an intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North first.
Mr Frith
I thank the Minister for her diligent response to the debate. Is it reasonable for my constituents to hope that, within the next four and a half years—a single Parliament of this Labour Government—things will have progressed, rather than being simply being rehearsed and repeated? Her response has been sincere, but do the Government have a clear objective to move things forward and move the dial on this long-standing issue?
Catherine West
I impress upon my hon. Friend the importance of these debates in influencing the work of our teams at the FCDO and putting the work that is being done in our communities on the public record. Through that, they can have a lasting impact. However, we have to remember that we strongly hold to the principle of the important role of India and Pakistan in resolving this situation.
Gareth Snell
I thank the Minister for being so generous with her time. I want to pick up on her point about it not being for the UK to prescribe a solution. I entirely understand why that is the position that she and previous Governments have had, but in 1948 there were eight votes in favour of the special resolution of the Security Council. The USSR abstained. The UK was one of the countries that voted in favour of that resolution, which said a plebiscite should happen. Does the UK no longer support the position that we adopted in ’48—I appreciate that that was a long time ago—or do we think that, although it is a potential solution, we do not necessarily want to push it?
Catherine West
Our position is that it is for the two countries to take charge of the overall situation, while obviously listening to the wishes of the Kashmiri people.
Imran Hussain
I have a follow-up point. As it stands, the position under international law is very clear; there is a United Nations resolution that gives the birthright of self-determination to the Kashmiris. Do the UK Government support that position? That is the question.
Catherine West
A wish and a prayer is one thing, but to resolve this will definitely come down to the two partners and listening to the wishes of the Kashmiri people. We are here to support and to monitor human rights, but as has been clear in the debate, we cannot prescribe, take charge or dictate terms.
Dr Gardner
Can I at least ask that, in any interactions with the Indian Government, Ministers push for the prosecution of men who use rape and sexual violence as tools of oppression? They are not being prosecuted at the moment.
Catherine West
My hon. Friend makes a very important point—it is International Women’s Day on Saturday. Regardless of where those awful crimes happen, we will always take violence against women and girls extremely seriously—it is one of the Foreign Secretary’s priorities—and raise it with whichever Government have it happening in their area.
Thank you for your patience in chairing the debate, Dr Allin-Khan; I think we will come back to this topic.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Government support for human rights in Jammu and Kashmir.