Baroness Goudie
Main Page: Baroness Goudie (Labour - Life peer)
Baroness Goudie (Lab)
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Alexander of Cleveden for securing this Question for Short Debate. The United Kingdom’s relationship with Pakistan matters profoundly because we share substantial history through both the Commonwealth and people. More than 1.5 million people in England and Wales identify as Pakistani. Many families here follow events in Pakistan closely, not because they are taking sides but because they care about justice, stability and the rule of law.
That takes me to the heart of today’s debate. The House of Lords is not the Court of Appeal, of course, so it is not for us to determine the merits of any international criminal charge. However, it is entirely proper for us to insist on some of the basic principles laid out in the ICCPR, which we all hold dear: due process; fair trials; and human treatment for everyone, whether they are prominent or powerless, including the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Imran Khan. Concerns have been raised around Mr Khan’s detention, with reports of solitary confinement and restricted access to family. Serious questions have also been asked about his medical care, including for an eye condition through which, as his lawyers have said, he has lost much of the range of his right eye; many of the noble Lords here know better than me the condition it is in now.
In December, the UN special rapporteur on torture urged Pakistan to address reports of inhumane detention conditions, warning that prolonged solitary confinement can breach international human rights law and pointing to reported restrictions on access to lawyers and families, as well as to concerns around adequate medical attention. I recognise that the Government have said both in Written Answers and from the Dispatch Box that, although, the Pakistani judicial process is a domestic matter,
“we are clear that the Pakistani authorities need to respect … the rights to a fair trial … humane detention and access to appropriate medical treatment”—[Official Report, 25/2/26; col. 607.]
for all of their detainees. I welcome that clarity, as well as the assurance that Ministers and officials have raised these principles with our Pakistani counterparts.
I press the point that humane treatment is not just a slogan. It has a real-world meaning that applies to all, including Mr Khan. In practice, it means prompt access to appropriate medical care, regular and meaningful access to legal counsel and family contact that must not arbitrarily be interrupted. These safeguards matter in every country because they reduce the risk of ill treatment and injustice, especially to older detainees and anyone with serious health needs.
It also matters because what happens in high profile cases is felt far beyond one prison cell. Independent reporting from the Justice Project Pakistan, drawing on Pakistan’s prison data, has described a prison system operating at around 152% of authorised capacity—can noble Lords imagine what it must be like?—with about three-quarters of prisoners under trial. These pressures fall disproportionately on the vulnerable. The same reporting highlights more than 1,580 juvenile prisoners and notes that only four prisons are designed for women, with many women held in separate sections in male prisons. In such an environment, transparency and due process should be treated as the protections that they are instead of as a luxury.
Will the Minister say what further representations the Government intend to make to ensure that international standards are met in full for Mr Khan and other detainees? The test of a justice system is not how it treats those with power but whether it protects the rights and dignity of everyone consistently and without fear or favour. That is what we stand for quietly, firmly and as a friend of Pakistan.