Zimbabwe: Sanctions Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Lord St John of Bletso
Main Page: Lord St John of Bletso (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)Department Debates - View all Lord St John of Bletso's debates with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Zimbabwe: Sanctions
Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)
My Lords, my noble friend is right. We have been deeply seized by and concerned about the targeting of civil liberties. We engaged with the Government on the PVO amendment Bill before the 2023 elections, and we have seen the so-called patriot Bill, which has limited freedom of expression. My noble friend will also be aware that the introduction of the global human rights sanctions regime in 2019 allows us to do exactly that: we can specifically target the people who commit egregious abuses of human rights rather than citizens or, indeed, a country.
Lord St John of Bletso (CB)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the existing sanctions in Zimbabwe have not curbed President Mnangagwa’s repressive regime and left a vacuum for the Chinese and the Russians, who are occupied in mining strategic minerals? Is it not time to convene an all-party parliamentary conference in Zimbabwe to help pave the way for the incumbent Government to be more inclusive and address the reduction of poverty for millions of long-suffering Zimbabweans?