The Commonwealth Charter
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 8 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
We strongly welcome the new Commonwealth charter which has been agreed and adopted by all Commonwealth Heads of Government. The Government have today laid a copy of this charter before Parliament in the form of a Command Paper.
A copy of the charter will be presented to Her Majesty the Queen on Commonwealth day on 11 March. Events to launch the charter officially will take place across the Commonwealth during that week.
For the first time in its 64-year history, the Commonwealth has a single document setting out the core values of the organisation and the aspiration of its members. The Government played an important role in its development.
The charter is an overarching summary bringing together Commonwealth values and commitments that are set out in more detail in previous declarations and affirmations.
The Government hope that the charter will become an established, recognisable statement of all that the Commonwealth stands for, accessible to all Commonwealth citizens, and a means to protect and promote the Commonwealth’s core democratic values for years to come. The commitments in the charter should be upheld, adhered to and kept under review by member Governments, Parliaments and civil society organisations.
A strong Commonwealth will help promote democratic values and good governance and, in turn, the future prosperity of all member states. Strong, clear values are crucial to the future credibility and success of the Commonwealth.
Special Mission Immunity
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 8 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I wish to inform the House of a new pilot process by which the Government will be informed of inward visits which may qualify for special mission immunity status.
A special mission is a temporary mission, representing a state, which is sent by one state to another with the consent of the latter, in order to carry out official engagements on behalf of the sending state.
In the case of Khurts Bat v. the Federal Court of Germany [2011]EWHC 2029 (Admin) the High Court recognised that, under customary international law, members of a special mission enjoy immunities, including immunity from criminal proceedings and inviolability of the person, and that these immunities have effect in the United Kingdom by virtue of the common law. However, the Court made it clear that not everyone representing a state on a visit of mutual interest is entitled to the immunities afforded to members of a special mission but only where a visit is consented to as a special mission. In the case of inward missions to the United Kingdom, the Court affirmed that it is a matter for Her Majesty’s Government to decide whether to recognise a mission as a special mission.
In order to avoid uncertainty as to the status of particular missions, the Government will put in place a new pilot process so that the Government’s consent to a special mission can be addressed expressly before the mission arrives in the UK. Embassies and High Commissions in London will be invited to inform the FCO of forthcoming visits in cases where they wish to seek the Government’s express consent as a special mission. The FCO will respond with Government’s consent or otherwise to the visit as a special mission. Any legal consequences would ultimately be a matter for the courts.
Afghanistan (Monthly Progress Report)
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 8 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I wish to inform the House that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, together with the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development, is today publishing the 24th progress report on developments in Afghanistan since November 2010.
In January, President Karzai and President Obama issued a joint statement, which included an announcement that they would support an office in Doha for the purpose of negotiations between the High Peace Council and the authorised representatives of the Taliban. Her Majesty’s Government support the opening of a Taliban office as an important step forward in the Afghan peace and reconciliation effort.
In January the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan—UNAMA— released its 2012 report on the “Treatment of Conflict-Related Detainees in Afghan Custody”. Its report contained findings that are of significant concern. Her Majesty’s Government have already recognised the risk of torture or serious mistreatment at Afghan facilities. This was why we suspended transfers of UK-captured detainees to the National Directorate of Security in April 2012. This moratorium was reaffirmed by the Defence Secretary in November 2012.
The UK’s support for phase one of the Bost agricultural business park in Helmand has delivered real benefits, including regular commercial flights connecting Helmand to the rest of the country. However, the UK has decided not to fund phase two, because it did not represent value for money. The money released will be used to support infrastructure projects with higher returns.
January saw some high profile attacks in Kabul that were dealt with by the ANSF, without a call for ISAF assistance. The first, on 16 January, attempted to enter the National Directorate of Security. The second, on 20 January, saw another IED attack outside the Kabul City traffic police headquarters. While these attacks demonstrate the insurgency’s intent to carry out a continued campaign of violence in Afghanistan, the response from the ANSF to both incidents was prompt and professional. With the exception of ISAF advisors within Afghan elements, there was no request for, or involvement of, ISAF forces.
I am placing the report in the Library of the House. It will also be published on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website (www.fco.gov.uk).
Special Tribunal for Lebanon and Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I am pleased to announce that the UK intends to make a voluntary contribution of £1 million to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and a voluntary contribution of £1.4 million to the international component of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). This is in order to support international justice, strengthen accountability in the international system, and bring to justice those responsible for the most serious international crimes.
The UK is committed to supporting security and stability for the people of Lebanon. That was my message during my visit to Beirut last week. This new contribution to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is a signal of our steadfast support for its work to end the climate of impunity for political assassination in Lebanon.
The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia is securing long awaited justice for millions of Cambodians through the trials of the most senior and responsible surviving members of the Pol Pot regime. The scale of the crimes committed and the number of victims makes it one of the most significant tribunals of its kind since Nuremberg. Both the international and national sides of the Court are facing severe financial shortfalls. The UK is committed to supporting the Court and our planned contribution will provide a measure of stability in this difficult period. We will continue to call on international partners, including states in the region, to contribute to the Court.
International justice is central to foreign policy. It is essential for securing the rights of individuals and states, and for securing peace and reconciliation. Through the International Criminal Court, and the separate international tribunals, we are working to make clear that those responsible for the most serious crimes will be held to account and that political leaders will not enjoy impunity. Our support to the institutions of international justice is an important part of our efforts to reduce conflict and promote stability worldwide.
Countering Terrorism Overseas
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I would like to update the House on the main principles underlying the Government’s approach to countering terrorism overseas.
The Threat
The greatest source of the terrorist threat to the United Kingdom remains al-Qaeda and other organisations who subscribe to an ideology of violent jihad. But the nature of the threat has changed, in three principal ways:
It has become geographically more diverse;
It is more fragmented;
It is based even more closely on the exploitation of local and regional issues.
Our Response
In the United Kingdom we have a long experience of confronting terrorism. Our intelligence and law enforcement agencies continue to work tirelessly to protect the British public from terrorist attack.
But unless our foreign policy addresses the circumstances in which terrorism thrives overseas, we will always fight a rearguard action against it. This means ensuring a comprehensive approach designed: to deny terrorist groups the space to operate, to help vulnerable countries develop their law enforcement capabilities, to address the injustice and conflict which terrorist exploit, and to combat their ideology.
In standing up for freedom, human rights and the rule of law ourselves, we must never use methods that undermine them. I am determined that as a democracy we must hold ourselves accountable to the highest standards. This includes being absolutely clear that torture and mistreatment are repugnant, unacceptable and counter-productive.
In order to confront the threat we must strengthen the ability of states to counter terrorism, while protecting human rights, as called for by the UN. This is difficult and challenging work, since the threat from terrorism is greatest in the countries where the rule of law and human rights are weakest. This is why I wish to set out the clear direction the Government will follow over the coming years.
When we detect a terrorist plot originating in a third country, we want to be in a position to share information to stop that planning, and do it in a way that leads to the lawful arrest, investigation and prosecution of the individuals concerned in accordance with our own legal obligations, and with their human rights respected at every stage.
In many cases we are able to obtain credible assurances from our foreign partners on issues such as detainee treatment and legal processes that give us the safeguards we need and the confidence that we can share information in this way.
Where this is not the case we face a stark choice. We could disengage, or we can choose to co-operate with them in a carefully controlled way while developing a more comprehensive approach to human rights adherence. This approach brings risk, but I am clear that the risks of the first option, of stepping back are greater still, placing our citizens at risk of terrorist attack.
How we go about this will have to vary from country to country depending on the scale and nature of the challenge. But we will seek justice and human rights partnerships with countries where there is both a threat to the United Kingdom’s security, and weaknesses in the law enforcement, human rights and criminal justice architecture. These are not one-off initiatives or stand-alone agreements, but rather a systematic process of working with authorities in question to identify shortcomings in capability, and to address these through the provision of UK assistance and expertise, over many months or years.
The sorts of measures we will take include:
Building up the capacity of overseas security services to improve compliance with the law and human rights and to make them more effective.
Working with local investigators to improve the ability to build cases based on evidence.
Supporting prosecutors and judges to ensure that they are capable of processing terrorism cases through the court systems, ensuring they are handled effectively, fairly and in line with the rule of law.
Working to improve and where appropriate monitor conditions in detention facilities so that convicted terrorists can be held securely and their treatment meets with international standards.
Crucially we are creating a strong and systematic framework for this work, with strong safeguards:
We will only engage in such efforts where there is serious and potentially long-running threat to the UK or UK interests, such as that flowing from terrorist networks in south Asia, Yemen, and parts of north and west Africa.
All our capacity building work will be carefully considered in line with our overseas security and justice assistance guidance in order to assess and to mitigate human rights risks, and specifically designed to improve human rights standards and strengthen the rule of law in that country.
It will not be carried out in isolation, but will be part of UK and international diplomatic and development efforts in that country.
The intelligence dimension will be subject to the same robust scrutiny and oversight that exists in other areas of intelligence-related activity and always be in accordance with the law.
Every aspect of this work requires ministerial oversight and approval. If I or another responsible Minister see any credible evidence that our support is being misused we will take immediate action. Any work that would involve breaking our legal obligations simply would not go ahead.
This is a framework of accountability and human rights to ensure that our counter-terrorism work support justice and the rule of law as well as our security, with the goal of creating the long-term conditions for better observance of human rights in countries that have a poor record and where the threat from terrorism is strong.
Sexual Violence in Conflict
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Nicola Blackwood) on securing and launching this debate, and welcome the words of the hon. Member for West Dunbartonshire (Gemma Doyle). I also welcome the opportunity this debate gives me to update the House on our initiative on preventing sexual violence in conflict and to take into account, in developing that initiative, the issues that have been and will be raised by hon. Members.
We have set ourselves a very important and very practical goal: to use the United Kingdom’s diplomatic influence and resources to increase the number of perpetrators of sexual violence who are brought to justice and to help to build up the legal and practical capability of other countries to tackle these crimes. We are determined to confront the culture of impunity, to overturn the age-old assumption that rape is somehow an inevitable by-product of conflict, and to rally the world to do more to help survivors. I have made it my personal priority, as has been said, during the UK’s presidency of the G8 this year to ask all the G8 nations to make practical commitments to help us towards that goal. We have had representatives of the G8 here in London this week, and I have met them in advance of the meeting of G8 Foreign Ministers in April. The agreements we reach at the G8 we will then take to the United Nations.
We are pursuing this initiative for many reasons, many of which have been mentioned already, so I shall not dwell on them. In our lifetimes, millions of women, men and children have endured the horror of rape and sexual violence in conflict, including in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Bosnia, South Sudan, Colombia and Afghanistan, and in Syria today. The sad truth is that the perpetrators of these appalling, life-shattering crimes still go unpunished far more often than not. In many situations, survivors endure the fear and torment of their abusers living freely in their communities. This shocking culture of impunity is a moral issue. Survivors face emotional and psychological pain, physical injuries, disease and social ostracism. They have a right to justice and support, and to live dignified lives.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon pointed out, tackling the use of rape as a weapon of war is also central to a just foreign policy, because the psychological and physical trauma suffered by survivors affects whole communities, exacerbating ethnic, sectarian and other divisions long into the future, and preventing reconciliation. I have seen the consequences with my own eyes in some of the countries I have visited as Foreign Secretary and that has left a deep impression on me.
Ours is a country that can actually do something about this issue. Many countries might feel powerless in the face of it, but we have one of the largest diplomatic networks in the world and one of the largest development programmes of any nation, and we have a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and play a leading role in UN agencies. Given that we have those assets and resources, and that concern for human rights and development in other countries is part of our national DNA, we should use those resources. I am absolutely convinced that shattering the culture of impunity for sexual violence in conflict is one of the great global challenges for our generation.
Some 200 years ago, this Parliament confronted the Atlantic slave trade. Now we are seeking, across parties, an international arms trade treaty. Our objective on this issue must be global action to end the use of rape as a weapon of war. Indeed, we have an even greater responsibility in the case of tackling sexual violence, because it affects women disproportionately. Ours is a world in which women in many countries still suffer discrimination, oppression and exclusion, and any effort that advances women’s rights must be pursued with the greatest resolve and commitment. I pay tribute to hon. Members from all parts of this House and in the other place who have drawn my attention to this issue, and who have championed women’s rights for many years.
Our aspiration is, of course, an end to violence against women—in any context, not just conflict, although that is what this initiative is particularly focused on. The Foreign Office works very closely with the Department for International Development and the Ministry of Defence on the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1325 as a whole as well. I am proud that our Government have a ministerial champion on tackling violence against women and girls overseas, the Under-Secretary of State for International Development, my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Lynne Featherstone).
The initiative, which I announced nine months ago, has three main practical components. First, we have set up the first ever unit in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office entirely dedicated to working on the issue. The unit comprises officials from the FCO as well as from the Department for International Development and it is working full time to lobby other Governments and international organisations. It is focused extensively on our presidency of the G8, but the work will continue beyond this year.
Secondly, we have created a new specialist team of experts that can be deployed to conflict areas to address sexual violence. We have now recruited more than 70 experts. I met many of them a couple of weeks ago and they include police, lawyers, psychologists, doctors, forensic experts, gender-based violence experts and experts in the care and protection of survivors and witnesses. The objectives for each deployment of the team of experts will, of course, depend on needs in the country concerned but they will usually support a UN mission, assist a non-governmental organisation working on the ground or be deployed at the request of the national authorities of that country.
We have already deployed the team to Syria’s borders, alongside the NGO Physicians for Human Rights, to train local health professionals in how to respond to reports of sexual violence. We will expand that work this year and will deploy a team again to help Syrian refugees. The prevention of sexual violence was included in our project with the Syrian opposition on raising awareness of the rules of armed conflict.
I announced a few weeks ago that we will deploy the team of experts to at least four other countries this year: to Libya, to support survivors of sexual violence committed during the revolution; to South Sudan, to work alongside the UN and Government to strengthen local justice; to the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, to help doctors and lawyers to investigate crimes against the hundreds of women and girls who are raped each month; and to Bosnia and Herzegovina, to help courts and prosecutors to address the backlog of war crimes cases and to protect survivors and witnesses for the thousands of women who are still waiting for justice 20 years after the war.
An effective response to sexual violence needs to be built into every aspect of conflict prevention and peace-building overseas. We have offered members of our team of experts as part of the EU military training mission to Mali to provide human rights training to the Malian armed forces on preventing and responding to sexual violence in the conflict taking place there now.
Fiona O’Donnell
I welcome all the action that the Foreign Secretary is driving forward and the leadership he is giving. Does he agree that it is vital that the Prime Minister, in his leadership role in agreeing the post-2015 framework, should ensure that women’s rights are always on the agenda?
Mr Hague
Yes, absolutely. The Prime Minister is supportive of the initiative and determined that it should be part of that agenda, too. Our initiative is focused particularly on sexual violence in conflict and we should maintain that focus. Of course, we can add more to it but it is important to make great progress—and to show the world that we can make progress—on this aspect of sexual violence with the particular characteristics of rape when systematically used as a weapon of war.
At the same time as taking the other actions I have mentioned, we have significantly increased our support for the UN Secretary-General’s special representative on sexual violence in conflict. We have provided £1 million in funding to her office and this week I announced that we will contribute an additional £500,000 to the International Criminal Court’s trust fund for victims, bringing our total support to £1.5 million in the past two years.
Thirdly, we have pledged, as I mentioned briefly, to use our presidency of the G8 this year to seek new commitments from some of the world’s most powerful nations. We have consulted UN agencies, the International Criminal Court and NGOs on how to make the most of that opportunity, and we have listened to the views of 75 experts from more than 26 countries who attended a conference we ran at Wilton Park in November, which I also attended. On the basis of those consultations, when I chair the meeting of G8 Foreign Ministers in London in April I will ask them to declare that rape and serious sexual violence amount to “grave breaches” of the Geneva conventions, signalling that we are prepared to pursue domestic prosecution of such crimes on the basis of universal jurisdiction.
We have also proposed a set of practical commitments to promote greater accountability and to overcome the most significant barriers to progress in this area. Those barriers are the poor quality of investigation and documentation of incidents of sexual violence in conflict; the inadequate support and assistance to survivors; the failure of wider peace and security efforts to address such issues; and the lack of international co-ordination.
In developing the commitments we have been careful to identify suggestions that we believe will have a real practical impact and will make concrete progress on the ground. Our proposed new international protocol, for example, on the investigation and documentation of sexual violence in conflict, should improve the evidence base from which investigations and prosecutions can be drawn.
We will suggest that the G8 provide greater protection and support to women human rights defenders, one of the target users of this new protocol, which will result in better documented cases, further building the evidence base. Doing so will also strengthen the support they provide to the survivors of sexual violence, as would broader G8 support for health, psychosocial and rehabilitation services, which will result in survivors feeling readier to pursue prosecutions.
We will also press the G8 to ensure that an improved response to sexual violence is reflected in their own security and justice sector reform programmes, as well as in any support that they provide to national legislative reform. Such actions would help to provide the domestic legal and institutional framework within which survivors can act which, if supported by more coherent international support to strengthen UN efforts, would further build this national capacity.
These commitments are ambitious. I am firmly of the view that taken together they will begin a comprehensive global response to tackling impunity for sexual violence through a combination of legal and practical interventions which complement existing international activity, but target gaps in the current global response. We have had encouraging and supportive responses from G8 partners and from others, including Australia, New Zealand and countries most directly affected by the issue, such as the new Government in Somalia. There is also enthusiasm to do more in the OSCE, the African Union and NATO. This is a time to take the issue forward. I believe we can develop a critical mass of support which will lead to serious concrete progress over the next couple of years.
What we started nine months ago and what we are going to do at the G8 is just the beginning of a long effort. We will do our utmost to galvanise greater collective action. We will take this cause to the United Nations, including to the UN Security Council in June when we hold the presidency of the council, and at the UN General Assembly in September, when we will hope to increase support for the concept of a new international protocol on the issue. I hope that the Government will have the support, advice and encouragement of Members across the House in taking forward this vital issue at a moment in world affairs when we genuinely have the opportunity to pursue it and to make a difference, for the sake of hundreds of thousands and millions of people affected by these appalling crimes.
Bob Stewart
Women need to be represented at peace conferences, but they can be only if they are leaders in their own communities. That is how we can assure their representation; we have to try to do that.
Mali
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
The Government have undertaken to keep this House updated on events in Mali and the wider Sahel region, including the deployment of UK personnel.
French and African military operations have driven terrorist forces out of the three cities of Timbuktu, Kidal and Gao. Some fighting is continuing in the Gao region and the risk of attacks remains. This strong response is absolutely right; it will need international support and that is why we are providing military, diplomatic and humanitarian aid as well as increasing our counter-terrorism co-operation with countries in the region.
The meeting of the support and follow-up group for Mali in Brussels on 5 February demonstrated the growing consensus in Africa and among the wider international community that the ongoing military operation to counter terrorism in Mali must be accompanied by greater momentum towards a political settlement.
As part of that settlement, we welcome news that the Malians have agreed a road map for a transition to full democracy, including elections. It is essential that the implementation of that road map is given top priority in Bamako and that progress is made quickly.
Terrorism and violent extremism thrives where there is political instability, so we need to support an effective, inclusive and sustainable political process that leads towards elections and the restoration of full democratic rule in Mali.
We will also support the people of Mali and the region as they seek to re-build their livelihoods and resolve long-standing grievances. We have called for serious negotiations with non-violent groups in northern Mali to resume as quickly as possible.
Development partners, aid agencies and NGOs must work together to address humanitarian need and to build resilience to endemic poverty and food insecurity. Since 2012, the UK has provided £78 million in multilateral and bilateral humanitarian contributions to the Sahel through the UN, Red Cross and international non-governmental organisations. Of this, £17 million has gone directly to help Mali, including a further £5 million announced by the Secretary of State for International Development this week.
We welcome the appointment of Pierre Buyoya as the AU’s High Representative for Mali and the Sahel as well as the news that Said Djinnit, the UN Secretary-General’s special representative for west Africa, will be taking a leading role in promoting reconciliation. We hope that both will bring much needed leadership to these important issues.
We take very seriously reports of human rights abuses and violations in Mali. Human rights and international humanitarian law training will be an integral part of the EU training mission to Mali (EUTM) and any bilateral training provided by the UK. UN Security Council resolution 2085 emphasises that any support provided by the United Nations, regional and sub-regional organisations and member states in the context of the military operation in Mali shall be consistent with international humanitarian law and human rights law and refugee law.
The evolving threat from terrorist groups in Mali demands an international response. It must be one that is tough, intelligent, patient and based on strong partnerships. The scale of this challenge means that we must use everything at our disposal: our diplomatic networks, aid and trade, our political relations across north and west Africa, our military and security co-operation as well as supporting the building blocks of democracy, such as the rule of law and a free media.
The UK is supporting French efforts through logistical and surveillance support and by sharing intelligence. We are currently providing one C-17 transport aircraft in support of French and African operations. In addition, an RAF surveillance aircraft—the Sentinel R1—flew to west Africa on 25 January to support French and African operations. Around 70 technical personnel have deployed to Dakar, Senegal, to provide support to the aircraft. Neither they nor the personnel supporting the C-17 aircraft will have a combat role. We continue to discuss with the French Government what else might be needed.
In line with UNSCRs 2071 and 2085, preparations continue for the African-led International Support Mission to Mali (AFISMA) to support the Malian armed forces. To support this, we have pledged £5 million for two new UN trust funds: £3 million to help support AFISMA troops and £2 million to activity in Mali that would facilitate and support political processes for building stability. We have also offered to provide training and other practical support—such as airlift—to those Anglophone west African countries that are contributing troops to AFISMA.
The UK has also offered up to 40 military personnel to take part in the planned EUTM—as well as a small number of civilian experts under the FCO’s preventing sexual violence initiative to provide human rights and gender awareness training within the mission. Planning for the EUTM is continuing in Brussels. No deployment of UK personnel will occur until force protection requirements are fully satisfied. None of the UK personnel involved in training missions would have a combat role.
The UK is supportive, in principle, of French plans for a UN peacekeeping operation in Mali. This would need to be deployed in support of a political process that will build long-term stability and only when the conditions on the ground are such that it can play an effective role.
North Korea (Nuclear Test)
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
At 2.57 am GMT on 12 February, the US Geological Survey detected seismic activity in the vicinity of North Korea’s Punggye nuclear test site registering 4.9 on the Richter scale. The North Korean news agency confirmed three hours later that North Korea had carried out a nuclear test. This nuclear test is a violation of UN Security Council resolutions 1718, 1874 and 2087. North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programme poses a significant threat to international security and regional stability. North Korea’s repeated provocations hinder the prospects for lasting peace on the Korean peninsula.
On the morning of 12 February 2013, I issued a statement strongly condemning the nuclear test. The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (Mr Swire), immediately summoned the North Korean ambassador to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in order to underline the UK’s firm opposition to this nuclear test and make clear to North Korea that it can either engage constructively with the international community, or face increasing isolation and further action by the international community. The Minister met with the North Korean ambassador on Wednesday 13 February.
The UK participated in an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council at 2 pm GMT on 12 February 2013. The Security Council agreed in that meeting that this North Korean nuclear test was a clear breach of existing UNSC resolutions; and that there should be a swift and robust response from the Security Council. The UK will be engaging intensively with fellow members of the Security Council over the coming days to agree a robust chapter VII Security Council resolution in response to the nuclear test. We will also consult partners in the EU on strengthening EU sanctions.
I have spoken to the Japanese Foreign Minister and plan to speak to the Republic of Korea’s Foreign Minister later today. My right hon. Friend the Minister of State has also spoken to the ambassadors of Japan and the Republic of Korea to confirm the UK’s position on the nuclear test. We will remain in close touch with the United States and with China.
I will provide a further update to Parliament, once the United Nations’ response to the nuclear test has been agreed.
International Criminal Court (Victims Fund)
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
I can announce today that the UK will contribute an additional £500,000 to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Trust Fund for Victims. This is in addition to two previous donations I announced in April 2011 and July 2012, amounting to £1 million. This brings the total UK support to the ICC Trust Fund for Victims since 2011 to £1.5 million. We believe the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) is doing excellent work in supporting victims of sexual and gender-based violence during conflict. The TFV was established by the states parties of the ICC in 2002 to benefit the victims of crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction. It is entirely funded by voluntary donations. The focus of its work so far has been in northern Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where its project work provides assistance to the victims of the most serious crimes, including torture and sexual violence. It is making an important difference in helping the victims of serious crimes rebuild their lives. The Government are calling upon G8 countries for similar support to initiatives such as the TFV to help alleviate the significant suffering caused by these horrific acts of violence and take action to prevent these crimes from occurring.
Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong
Lord Hague of Richmond Excerpts(11 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague)
The latest report on the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong was published today. Copies have been placed in the Library of the House. A copy of the report is also available on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website, www.fco.gov.uk. The report covers the period from 1 July to 31 December 2012. I commend the report to the House.