(15Â years, 5Â months ago)
Commons ChamberIndeed. 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 todayâs The Guardian online, there is an article, stating that coalition criminal justice plans
âmake a mockery of universal jurisdictionâ.
It continues:
âGiving suspects from âprotected countriesâ immunity from war crimes arrests would turn the UK into a safe haven for suspectsâ.
That was written by an eminent human rights lawyer, Daniel Machower. He goes on to say:
âA 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.â
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.
I do not know what the hon. Gentleman is talking aboutâand I doubt whether he does either.
The Opposition Front-Bench team has tabled an amendment proposing to create new units in the Crown Prosecution Service and the Metropolitan police. As the Minister observed in Committee, however, these units already exist for war crimes investigations. The fact that they already exist, and have done for some time, helps to show us what will happen when the Director of Public Prosecutions becomes a gatekeeper for all universal jurisdiction cases: nothing. Yes, nothing will happen. As we learned from a report in The Guardian last month and the work of the all-party group on the prevention of genocide, nearly 400 war criminals are believed to be in the UK right nowâfrom Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Rwanda, Zimbabwe and the Congo. How many prosecutions have there been? Oneâjust one, which is the Zardad case.
I conclude here because this is the core of my case. The clause is important because it communicates our attitude towards crimes against humanity and towards international justice.