Genocide Determination Bill [HL]

Lord Bishop of Newcastle Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 17th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Bishop of Newcastle]

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Alton of Liverpool, for introducing this Bill, which I support, and for his unwavering commitment over many years to the prevention of genocide, the protection of persecuted communities and the advancement of human rights.

At the heart of the Bill lies a simple yet profound principle that every human life possesses equal and inherent worth. There is a clear inconsistency in our present arrangements. Successive Governments have rightly maintained that genocide is a matter for a competent court. However, in practice, the international courts capable of making such determinations are not always able to do so because of jurisdictional limitations or political deadlock. The result is that credible allegations of the gravest crime recognised in international law may never receive judicial determination. The noble Lord, Lord Wills, made this point compellingly in his speech.

There are legitimate questions about how the mechanism at the heart of this Bill will operate and about its relationship with foreign policy, as my friend the noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, pointed out in his speech. Those are proper matters for Committee, but they do not undermine the principle behind the Bill. Rather, they challenge us to ensure that any mechanism is proportionate, carefully designed and properly resourced.

I have seen the importance of these principles close to home. My great-uncle, Mandy Morris, was a Holocaust survivor who, as a young boy, came to Yorkshire as a refugee with his family and rebuilt his life. In Newcastle, more recently, I have had the privilege of working alongside Smajo Bešo, a survivor of the Bosnian genocide, who found refuge in the United Kingdom and has dedicated his life to education and remembrance. Most recently I attended a Bosnian Genocide Educational Trust event at Newcastle Civic Centre, which was organised and led by Smajo. What struck me most was the response of the young people who took part. They expressed their reflections on the subject through art and poetry, and their work demonstrated remarkable empathy and compassion. They understood that behind every legal definition are individuals, families and communities whose lives have been for ever changed.

Recognition cannot undo the past, and it cannot restore those who have been lost or erase the suffering endured by survivors, but truth and justice matter. A willingness to examine credible evidence through an independent legal process affirms the dignity of victims and strengthens our resolve that such crimes should never be repeated. The Bill is ultimately an expression of confidence in the rule of law. It simply asks whether, where there is credible evidence of the gravest crime recognised in international law, there should be a lawful and independent means by which that evidence can be examined and in a timely manner. In that regard, I have a question for the Minister: what mechanisms do the Government believe are sufficient to ensure timely and independent identification of the risk of genocide? The Bill also gives an opportunity to strengthen our leadership in the area of foreign policy.

As we debate this legislation, I think again of those young people in Newcastle. In many ways, the young people in Newcastle captured the ethical foundation of this Bill better than any legal text could. They understood that every life has equal worth and that indifference is never an acceptable response to human suffering. I therefore support the Bill and look forward to its careful scrutiny in Committee.