China: Human Rights and Security

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, it is a great pleasure to follow the right reverend Prelate. There was much in his reflections; he was looking at things from having a lens on a country he knows. From the various discussions we have had, I agree with him in totality.

I thank my dear friend, the noble Lord, Lord Alton, for tabling this debate. I must admit that I am no longer the target of his daily emails and phone calls as a Minister. That is missed, I think, in some shape or form, but I am sure that the new Government are receiving them with welcoming arms. I pay tribute to the noble Lord for his perseverance on a whole raft of human rights issues—despite, let us be clear, the many personal challenges and attacks that he faces, including sanctions, in standing up for the oppressed and persecuted around the world.

I turn first, though, to governance. We hear that in early 2025, the Government will provide an audit. What exactly will be its format and the presentation to Parliament? I am sure that the Minister will cover this in her concluding remarks, but I request that, once that is done, she facilitates a meeting with Members of your Lordships’ House on this important element.

Linked to this, however, I have an equally relevant question on the material difference between the Government’s approach and that of the previous Government. Noble Lords will know that the Integrated Review Refresh 2023 built our approach to China at that time. It was cross-government and focused on three pillars. The first was “Protect”. The UK would

“strengthen our national security protections in those areas where the actions of the CCP pose a threat to our people, prosperity and security”.

We would prioritise cybersecurity and defensive capabilities, while strengthening

“protections for academic freedom and university research”.

Do the Government believe that approach is correct?

Secondly was “Align”. The UK would deepen co-operation and alignment with key allies and partners to

“shape the broader strategic environment”.

The Government said that the UK aimed to work collectively with allies and partners to encourage China to contribute transparently and proportionately to financial stability and economic development around the world but, equally, to

“push back against behaviours that undermine international law, violate human rights, or seek to coerce or create dependencies”.

Again, do the Government agree with this approach?

Finally, there was “Engage”: the UK would engage directly with China through bilateral channels and international fora, including the UN Security Council, seeking

“to preserve and create space for open, constructive … and stable relations”

that reflect China’s global significance, which is an undeniable fact. The Government also stated that they believed in the potential benefits of positive trade and investment relationships with China, while safeguarding critical supply chains and national security. Does the Minister agree with that? If the answer to all three questions is yes, we need to move forward and start motoring.

In the multilateral sphere, what engagement is taking place on co-operation and conflict resolution? On the G20 meeting between the Prime Minister and President Xi, what has happened subsequently? On the Human Rights Council—I have raised this before—and the UN Third Committee, what has happened specifically in these areas on issues such as Xinjiang and the Uighur Muslims?

I know that during my over seven years as the UK Human Rights Minister, we led on bringing together an ever-growing number of nations to highlight the plight of the community and other minorities. What steps are the Government taking to build on the work of the previous Government in strengthening this coalition of almost 50 nations? I welcome the appointment of the new FoRB envoy; indeed, I am personally invested, as I was the first envoy and helped create the role. How is the international alliance, where my dear friend Fiona Bruce played such a pivotal role, being utilised in this respect?

Issues of contention and profound disagreements remain between the UK and China, some of which have been amplified in recent days and remain at the core of this relationship. Our colleagues, including the noble Lord, Lord Alton, and the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy, remain under sanction by the Chinese authorities. Previous Prime Ministers had direct meetings with those sanctioned; I ask the Minister, through her good offices, to ensure that that continues.

I have already mentioned Hong Kong and the national security law, and Xinjiang, but, in the spirit of the season, if we are to move forward in turning a page in this relationship—perhaps even writing a new chapter—we need to bear in mind, as the right reverend Prelate reminded us, that China itself recognises the need for collective action. President Xi is focused on a revival of the teachings and philosophy of Confucius. It is to that philosophy I turn, in the spirit of building a bridge and moving forward, to lay the foundations for addressing serious human rights concerns and related freedoms. It was Confucius who said:

“To be able under all circumstances to practice five things constitutes perfect virtue; these five things are gravity, generosity of soul, sincerity, earnestness and kindness”.


I therefore reach out to the Chinese authorities—I trust that the Minister will agree with me. Let us move forward in that spirit, in this season, with some immediate practical steps: remove the sanctions from our colleagues in Parliament and beyond as a first step, and let us build a new dialogue; recognise that the major challenges of the world, be they a resolution to the war in Ukraine or peace in the Middle East, require collaboration; build on the experience of recent history and the fact that, when a pandemic engulfed the world, co-operation between nations was the bedrock of a new dawn after the tragedy that impacted us all; and release those who are held in detention for calling for freedom of expression. As my noble and learned friend Lord Garnier expressed so powerfully, Jimmy Lai is a man who has suffered for far too long and whose health is deteriorating. China should show compassion and clemency to him and his family, reflective of the season of good will but also of the central Confucian tenets of generosity and kindness—end his trial now and return our citizen. Finally, with the Sino-British treaty, China must revive freedom of expression and end acts of suppression.

China is important to the UK but the UK is equally important to China. We have differences and profound disagreements, with different governance systems, yet the links between our two nations are deep-rooted, in business and education, and from science and corporation to culture and cuisine, underpinned and defined by our people-to-people links. We are at a crossroads at this time. I have sought to outline some simple, practical steps that can be taken and which in my view may, I hope and pray, turn the trajectory of travel towards a more positive space.

British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The security of and continuation of legal certainty regarding the base on Diego Garcia has been our prime objective in these negotiations. We would not have entered into any kind of agreement or deal that did not have the support of our closest allies, because if something might be acceptable to us but is unacceptable to them, the stability and security that we were trying to achieve would have been compromised, so the noble Lord is completely right.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, one of the key reasons why previous Governments did not conclude these negotiations was the issue of security. That is why there are repeated requests to see how that has been aligned. My question, however, is about the United States, which is a key component. What representations have been made to and what conversations have been had with the incoming US Administration of President Trump regarding negotiations on Diego Garcia? I say to the Minister that their perspective will be markedly different from that of the current Administration.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

As the noble Lord knows, we deal with the current Administration until they are no longer the current Administration. I note that as negotiations concluded, support was provided by our US allies not just at the political level, but throughout their Department of Defense and Department of State. This is seen as a desired outcome not just by leading politicians; those who are closely concerned with the security and stability of the base and its continued viability and legal certainty have very much been in support of this treaty.

Ukraine

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Thursday 5th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I have heard much commentary about the basis on which negotiations may or may not begin. At this stage, this is all speculative and hypothetical. It is probably better that from these Benches we do not try to construct some kind of framework for negotiation without including the people of Ukraine.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, what further focus has there been, and what further determination has been made, on the Ukrainian children who have been taken by Russia? A recent report by Yale talked of re-education camps and coercion. Close to 20,000 Ukrainian children were taken. The Qataris played an important role in the return of some of them and I would appreciate it if the Minister could update us on the latest efforts in this regard.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I am very happy to do that. I want to do that justice as it is such an important issue, so I would like to come back to the House and speak on that properly at more length. What has happened to those children is one of the most tragic and upsetting abominations of this conflict. I cannot imagine the hell that their parents are going through not knowing what has happened to those children.

Georgia: Political Situation

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Wednesday 4th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I have spoken many times in this House about this Government’s unwavering support for Ukraine and the fact that we will be alongside it for as long as it needs us. The noble Lord is right to raise that, but it is also true that the impact of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine is causing fear among other states and influencing some of the decisions they are taking. Our position will always be that it is for the people of any nation to decide which way they wish to look. You can see some of this playing out in Georgia, and it is something that we are very mindful of and are keeping a careful watch on.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, in agreeing with the noble Lord, Lord West, I also say to the Minister that we must reassure Georgia because Russian aggression was first impacted on Georgia with South Ossetia and Abkhazia. What assessment have the Government made to ensure that the territorial sovereignty of Georgia is fully protected?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right, and the territorial integrity of Georgia must be respected by all, including Russia, and we will be firm in that position.

International Aid Workers: Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Tuesday 26th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

My Lords, we are using all our diplomatic efforts to get aid into Gaza, because the situation is becoming urgent as we approach winter. Some 1.9 million displaced people are living in just 57 square kilometres in the south of Gaza. The Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Minister Dodds and Minister Falconer have raised this urgent situation and will continue to do so.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, it is very clear that representations are not enough; direct engagement is required with both the Government of Israel and the Governments of Egypt and Jordan. First, what specific meetings have been held, in country and at a ministerial level? Secondly, as I have discussed before, during the previous Government, we sought out-of-the-box thinking, not just on land routes, which are of course the major delivery mechanism, but on maritime and air routes. Has any work been done in that regard?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The noble Lord is completely right that this is the moment when we need out-of-the-box thinking, and we are looking at every available avenue. We have been working with the Government of Egypt to try to provide medical assistance, and we have been a major donor to that work. We are doing everything that we can. As I said, the Government-to-Government connections are being used as much as possible, because this problem is getting worse by the day, and we need action to save lives.

Jailing of Hong Kong Pro-democracy Activists

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Wednesday 20th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

No, I do not agree with that. I would point out that this Government are taking a very different approach to China in many ways. The previous Government had what at best could be described as a passive approach, where criticisms were made here in the UK but there was very little engagement to speak of, especially not on a ministerial level. We are taking a different approach; we are having a review of China which is going to go across Whitehall, so noble Lords can expect to see a different tone from this Government. I do not know whether this new approach is going to have the effect that we would all wish to see on human rights—nobody could know that—but I am confident that our approach has a far better chance of achieving a good relationship, where we are able to be heard and have the conversations we need to have at the right level, with the effect that we wish to see.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I am saddened by the Minister’s response, because she will recall that the previous Government took a very robust stance when it came to the issues of human rights, particularly the situation in Xinjiang. She will also recall that it was the previous Government who took action on sanctioning what was happening in Xinjiang. The previous Government also took action in leading the way at the UN and at the human rights committee with other countries and building a coalition. So I ask the noble Baroness to reflect on her remarks, because the previous Government was pretty robust when it came to these issues.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I do accept that. The noble Lord is completely right. He will recall that we supported the previous Government in all those endeavours. The difference is that this Government are attempting to engage in a different way, at a different level. Noble Lords can have a view on whether that is something that they welcome or that they think will ultimately be futile. But this Government’s position is that it is right to engage and to try. However, I wholeheartedly accept the points that he made about the work that the last Government did and I want noble Lords to know that we supported those measures at every step and called for some of them.

Journalists Detained or Killed Overseas

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Wednesday 13th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

As the noble Lord knows, I believe that we have answered questions on Jimmy Lai very recently, but we continue to raise these cases at ministerial level with the relevant Governments, and we remain deeply concerned that we have been unable to gain the access that we would wish.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her Question. We in the previous Government were very much focused on this; can the Minister reassure us about the focus of this Government on media freedom globally and the international alliance that the previous Government set up with Canada? Secondly, the previous Government were exploring the issue of compensation. She may recall that, back in 2014 under the leadership of my noble friend Lord Cameron, we set up a compensation fund for victims of terrorism abroad. Efforts were made to see whether we could also look at extending the scope of that fund, which—from memory—sits with the Ministry of Justice.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

In thanking the noble Lord, I note that sometimes, where there is a change of power in our democracy, former Ministers take with them different things; the noble Lord takes with him a desire to make sure that the torch is received by the incoming Government and that we will carry on doing the work that he initiated. We respect that. I will consider the points he makes about compensation; as he rightly says, that may well lie in other departments, but he was right to raise them.

China: Human Rights and Sanctions

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Tuesday 29th October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

My Lords, I must disagree with my noble friend on his assertions and the tone in which he put his question. My right honourable friend David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, went to China because he wanted to raise these issues. Unless we engage with China, we do not get the opportunity to raise these issues. He raised the case of Jimmy Lai. He has called for Jimmy Lai to be released, as well he should. This is consistent with his position in opposition. He has gone further and made sure that every Minister in their engagement with China continues to raise on every occasion the case of Jimmy Lai. He should be released.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, the United Kingdom consistently led on the situation of the Uighurs in Xinjiang. Last year, at the UN Third Committee and subsequently at the Human Rights Council, 51 member states, led by the United Kingdom, signed a statement. I note with some degree of disappointment that there was a statement presented this year at the same forum, where only 16 countries, the United Kingdom included, came behind an Australian- led permanent representative statement. What action will the Government take to continue to ensure the UK’s leadership on this important issue?

South Asia: Minority Faith Communities

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Monday 28th October 2024 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the situation of minority faith communities across South Asia, and the role of the United Kingdom in safeguarding the freedom of religion and belief in that area.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I rise to bring to the House’s attention the extremely pressing issue of the treatment of religious minorities across south Asia. I am grateful to all noble Lords who are speaking in this important debate this evening.

Despite the region’s rich diversity, tapestry of faiths and historical commitment to pluralism, religious minorities often face discrimination, persecution and unequal treatment, and are regarded by many as marginalised citizens. The challenges they face are immense, from social exclusion and legal inequalities to violent attacks and, tragically, murder. This threatens not only individuals’ rights but the very fabric of these societies and their ability to go about their daily lives.

I recall the words of the founder of Pakistan, Quaid-e-Azam, as he was known, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in his historic speech on 11 August 1947. As Pakistan was established, a new dawn was heralded, and he said:

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan … we are all … equal citizens”.


These powerful words embody the founding vision for a state where freedom of religion and equal citizenship were seen as fundamental principles. Mr Jinnah’s message highlights the ideal of an inclusive society where freedom is not merely a privilege but a guaranteed right for all. Indeed, in the early days after Pakistan’s birth, we saw the esteemed jurist Sir Chaudry Zafarullah Khan, an Ahmadi Muslim, appointed as the first Foreign Minister of the county. Indeed, in 1960 Justice Cornelius—a Christian by faith—served as the Chief Justice of Pakistan for almost eight years.

Yet, despite these noble intentions laid down at the birth of the nation, the reality for many minority faiths, not just in Pakistan but across south Asia, tells a tragically different story.

First, on Pakistan, women and girls from religious minority communities, including Christians, Hindus and Hazaras, are disproportionately likely to experience gender-based violence. Indeed, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan itself reported around 1,000 cases of forced marriages and abductions of religious minority girls in the province of Sindh in 2018.

I also draw to the particular attention of the House the plight of the Ahmadi Muslim community in Pakistan, of which I myself am a member, whose situation starkly illustrates the discrimination faced by religious minorities in the region. Ahmadis are effectively excluded from the democratic process. They are not permitted to vote or stand for Parliament unless they self-declare that they are not Muslim—what kind of constitutional choice is that for any citizen? The denial of political representation leaves them without any voice in the very system that is meant to protect their rights, and they are the only minority, unlike other minorities in Pakistan, who cannot vote for mainstream parties as part of the general electorate.

Since the introduction of discriminatory laws in 1984 under the then leader, General Zia, 277 Ahmadi Muslims have been murdered simply for their beliefs, and 220 mosques have been destroyed. Saying the simple greeting “Assalamo alaikum”, or “Peace be upon you”, used by one Muslim to another, results in a three-year prison sentence.

These actions against Ahmadis and the environment being created embolden extremists, who also target Christians and Hindus. The mob attacks on Christians in Punjab’s Jaranwala district in August 2023 were particularly vile, resulting in the torching of 25 churches. I was grateful to the then caretaker Foreign Minister of Pakistan, who acted to set up a compensation and support scheme for those targeted. Can the Minister say what the current situation is on compensation and accountability?

The previous Government took action on the egregious abuse of human rights—I was involved, and indeed acted on this—but this needs to be stepped up further. The human rights sanctions regime, which was set up in 2019, is there to ensure that we stop such extremists, stopping them from travel and freezing their bank accounts. This sends a very strong message to those who seek to discriminate against minority communities. Can the Minister update and confirm that the Government will continue to work with Members of your Lordships’ House and the other place to take this forward?

Briefly, on Bangladesh, the recent removal of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina from power has further exacerbated the ongoing violence and unrest in the country. Like the Tehreek-e-Labbaik in Pakistan, an extremist organisation being emboldened through the political system, we now see the rise of groups such as the Hefazat-e-Islam—which, ironically, means “The Protection of Islam”; its actions far from demonstrate that noble principle—which sees the deposing of the former Prime Minister, who, to her credit, resisted the call of extremist right religious groups, as free season to attack minorities. The political instability has led to an increase in targeted violence against religious minorities, who are often the first to suffer in times of upheaval.

The Hindu population in Bangladesh, a significant religious minority, has been facing an alarming rise in violence. It is worth noting that of course a majority of the Hindu population supported the former Prime Minister, whose removal has left them even more vulnerable to attacks. Other communities, including Ahmadis, are seeing their places of worship and mosques being targeted and calls from Hefazat-e-Islam for them to be banned.

Briefly on India, during my time in office as the Minister for Human Rights and South Asia, I regularly raised issues of the rights of minority faiths and communities, and we had a constructive dialogue with India. Let us not forget that the rights of minorities are safeguarded under law in India’s own constitution. Can the Minister update the House about the current situation, particularly in Manipur, following the communal tensions early this year, when tribal tensions manifested themselves in extremists trying again to use the religious divide?

Finally, I turn to the United Kingdom’s leadership on freedom of religion and belief. A brief bit of history: it was in 2018 that, working with many Members across your Lordships’ House and the other place, I presented a proposal for a Prime Minister’s envoy on freedom of religion or belief. Starting something from scratch in government is difficult, and I am grateful to the then DfID Secretary, Penny Mordaunt, for providing financial backing, for the strong support of Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary at that time, and to the then Prime Minister, now the noble Baroness, Lady May of Maidenhead. Indeed, the UK was recognised for its leadership in this regard. I was honoured to be appointed the first envoy in this respect in 2018, and more recently we have seen Fiona Bruce, the former MP for Congleton, so ably lead this agenda with immense passion and principle, as well as leading on the International FoRB Alliance. The United Kingdom also hosted the international FoRB conference in London in 2022.

I also highlight the significance of the global report of Bishop Philip of Truro, set up in 2019—he is now the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Winchester—and I praise the efforts of the then Foreign Secretary, now shadow Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, which address specifically the issue of persecution of Christians and other minorities around the world.

In south Asian countries, Christians continue to experience widespread discrimination, legal restrictions, social marginalisation and violence. The rise of nationalist ambitions in south Asia has contributed to the perception of Christians and other minorities as a threat to societal cohesion, further marginalising these communities. I say again to the Minister that I hope that this issue is being prioritised in our engagements across south Asia.

In Sri Lanka, we witnessed a rise in attacks on both Christians and Muslims in 2017, including assaults on churches and acts of intimidation. Through the previous Government’s position of the special envoy, along with the valuable support of communities, parliamentarians—most notably the noble Lord, Lord Alton, who cannot join us this evening, and the honourable Member for Strangford, Jim Shannon MP—and diplomats from across the FCDO we led on this agenda. The UK took a strong position, working with the United States, our European neighbours and other nations. Ensuring the continuity of this important agenda under Prime Minister Starmer would not only expand the UK’s influence but provide much-needed relief to those seeking protection.

The Truro review highlighted the necessity of placing the special envoy’s role on a permanent footing. I hope that the Minister will update this House. There was a Private Member’s Bill in this respect, which passed all stages in the other place but, because of the election being called, could not be taken forward here.

I will finish—I recognise that cough very well, as I was a Whip once. I implore the Government: this is an important agenda, so please do not lose time in which to act. I have said repeatedly that, when we stand up for others, it is the greatest test of our own faith and belief.

St Helena: UK Immigration

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The noble Lord rightly says that £6.65 million is a lot of money, but I point out that the previous Government were spending £50 million every year on housing those migrants on Diego Garcia. We think that that is not an appropriate place for them to be, and we are going to work to make sure that they are more appropriately dealt with.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, I agree with the Minister that Diego Garcia is not an appropriate place to house migrants; indeed, there were returns of Sri Lankans to Sri Lanka. But under the agreement, if people arrive during the 18-month period, what happens to those who are rejected for asylum after the processing takes place on St Helena? Secondly, will those who are entitled to claim asylum in St Helena be granted the same entry rights that St Helena’s residents are to enter the United Kingdom?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

It is important to note that there would be no automatic right to entry rights or citizenship. It is for the Helenian Government to make a determination about anybody who arrives and facilitate their removal.