All 1 Debates between Andrew Love and Ann Clwyd

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

Debate between Andrew Love and Ann Clwyd
Wednesday 30th March 2011

(13 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ann Clwyd Portrait Ann Clwyd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Well, the other reason the Government gave for the change in the law is, I suppose, the real reason, in respect of which my hon. Friend has hit the nail on the head: it is the Tzipi Livni case. The Government, as the Foreign Secretary and the Justice Secretary explained, are changing the law because of an Israeli politician. Changing the law at the request of a foreign Government does not, I would argue, enhance our ability to act as an international peace broker. It does exactly the opposite by undermining our credibility to speak as a country that takes human rights seriously.

Andrew Love Portrait Mr Andrew Love (Edmonton) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

Is it not incongruous that at the same time as we continue to speak here about human rights, justice and democracy in the middle east, we also have to move this particular amendment?

Ann Clwyd Portrait Ann Clwyd
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Indeed. I think it sends the wrong signal at this particular time. I hope I can persuade many more hon. Members of the force of my argument.

In today’s The Guardian online, there is an article, stating that coalition criminal justice plans

“make a mockery of universal jurisdiction”.

It continues:

“Giving suspects from ‘protected countries’ immunity from war crimes arrests would turn the UK into a safe haven for suspects”.

That was written by an eminent human rights lawyer, Daniel Machower. He goes on to say:

“A legal case for changing the current judicial process, through the senior district judge, has not been made out and parliament is entitled to reject the proposed change on that basis alone.”

I have my own views on the Tzipi Livni case. I happen to regard the crimes documented in the Goldstone report as pretty damning. The very strength of the current system, however, is that it does not matter what my view is: it is a decision taken by a court without political considerations and on the basis of the evidence alone. That is the system that the Government are going to undermine.