Jammu and Kashmir: Human Rights

Gareth Snell Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) on securing the debate. I think that it is the first substantive debate on this issue in this Parliament. Given that we are now seven months into this Parliament, that is probably something we should all reflect on, and consider whether we have given due attention to this pressing international issue.

I will begin, much like my hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) and Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner), by paying tribute to Councillors Amjid Wazir, Majid Khan and Javid Najmi, as well as former Lord Mayor Bagh Ali. When I was first elected to this place in 2017, they were the first group of people to come and see me to talk about what was going on in Jammu and Kashmir. They told me about the challenges faced by their families in 2017; issues escalated significantly during that Parliament with the revocation of article 370, the suspension of basic human rights, the curfews, the discontinuation of telephone services and the suspension of the internet.

The fact that today, in 2025, we stand in Parliament having this debate again means that in many ways we have failed them. We have failed those people I spoke to seven years ago. We failed people like Raja Najabat Hussain of the Jammu and Kashmir Self-Determination Movement International, because we are still only talking about this issue. What are we doing about this issue? What are the actions that we can say have happened, since I was first elected seven years ago, that will make this issue better for the people living in Jammu and Kashmir.

With my hand on my heart, I cannot honestly say that the discussions that we are having today and the passionate arguments that I have heard from my hon. Friends and other hon. Members in Westminster Hall are any different from those that I listened to seven years ago. If we are still having this conversation in seven years’ time, it will be a catastrophe for the people in Jammu and Kashmir. It would be a dereliction of the responsibility of any Government of any political party to allow an issue of this significance to continue in the way it has without some form of intervention.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bury North (Mr Frith) has, I am afraid, temporarily left. He said in his speech that the UK has a global role and a global reputation. He said that wonderfully, but the UK also has a global responsibility; if we do not take our responsibility seriously, if we do not say that now is the time for action, if we do not go beyond the conversations, the debates, the words, the petitions, the conferences we all attend in Portcullis House where we rehearse the same arguments and we hear the passionate cry for assistance from the people of Jammu and Kashmir, then we will have failed to do what we, as legislators in one of the most powerful Parliaments in the world, can do.

Minister, we all know of Security Council resolution 47 from 1948 and we know of the 77-year wait that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have had for the right to self-determination. There is a generation of people who are ageing, and they would like to see some action on this before it is too late for them. These are people who have lived their entire life in hope for the land that they and their families have come from, with which they still have a deep bond and connection.

I know the Minister well. She is a thoughtful, diligent member of the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office team and I know that these matters weigh heavily on her shoulders. Can she give us some indication of what we in this House can look forward to? What can we say to our constituents in, for example, Stoke-on-Trent, Bradford, Birmingham or even Strangford, when they ask what action we are now taking to deliver the self-determination and human rights that have been denied to the people of Kashmir for the last 77 years?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Catherine West)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship this morning, Dr Allin-Khan.

I will begin by stating the Government’s policy on Kashmir. India and Pakistan are long-standing important friends of the UK and we encourage both to engage in dialogue and find lasting political solutions to maintain regional stability. It has been the long-standing position of successive UK Governments that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution on Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution or act as a mediator. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) has secured the debate, and as hon. Members have asked about a voice for Kashmir, I want to reiterate that this is an opportunity to bring our constituents’ concerns to the House of Commons.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South and Walkden (Yasmin Qureshi) said, the history of the region is intertwined with our own. It is very important to take account of that, which is why we have regular interventions in Parliament on this important topic. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) said that we had not spoken enough about it. I remind him that he made points about it at the Adjournment debate on International Human Rights Day in December, and there have been a number of other interventions and written questions on the subject.

We recognise that there are concerns about human rights in both India-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. I want to reassure the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) and my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald), who said that human rights are paramount. The UK Government encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws are in line with international standards.

A number of hon. Members mentioned journalists’ freedom of speech. Would my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) be happy if I wrote to her about the woman she mentioned, so that I can provide details? We will follow up directly on that case, and I will put a copy of the letter in the Library. Our position is clear that any allegation of human rights abuse is deeply concerning and must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently.

My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) said it is important to ensure effective and constructive dialogue with the communities affected. That is the role of Members of Parliament—to raise concerns, which our Government will then raise with the Governments of India and Pakistan. As Minister for the Indo-Pacific, I have interlocutors in Delhi and other places, and in the high commission here. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), who oversees the FCDO’s work with Pakistan, Afghanistan and the middle east, also regularly raises points with his interlocutors, as we both bring forward these concerns.

We undertake diligently the role of monitoring the situation and recording concerns. We understand that several restrictions have been put in place over time in Indian-administered Kashmir. Many hon. Members referred to internet blackouts, which we monitor carefully and ensure we raise effectively. Unfortunately, they tend to spike at times of violent outbreaks.

On the importance of human rights, my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) mentioned the important Amnesty International report. Other Members have mentioned the work of Mary Lawlor. We are clear on the importance of human rights being respected, and we continue to call for all remaining restrictions imposed since the constitutional changes in August 2019 to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.

Some Members mentioned prison conditions, and that goes to the heart of the issue. We welcome reports that some detainees have been released, but we remain concerned by ongoing detentions. More broadly, the Government note that the people of Indian-administered Kashmir used their collective voice with a 64% turnout in the state assembly elections last October, which is a higher turnout than in the UK local government elections, I might add. The electoral process was largely peaceful, and the state legislative assembly in Srinagar has now been restored.

Some Members have raised the revocation of article 370 of the Indian constitution. The UK Government stand by our long-standing belief that any resolution should consider the wishes of the Kashmiri people. For that reason, we continue to urge both sides to ensure that there is constructive dialogue with affected communities. As I said, we are clear on the importance of rights being respected, and we continue to call for all remaining restrictions imposed since the constitutional changes in August 2019 to be lifted as soon as possible and for any remaining political detainees to be released.

The UK is aware of the Indian Supreme Court’s judgment on the validity of the article 370 revocation. Where we have concerns, we raise them directly with the Government of India.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Minister for replying in such detail to the points made, and I fully accept that she and the Government are raising the article 370 suspension with India. Is she able to tell the House what the Indian response was, or share some detail of the importance with which India took that intervention from the United Kingdom?

[Catherine West]

The point is that this is a frequent agenda item. Without wanting to go into private discussions, the fact is this: constituents raise the matter with Members, and we then relay that message. That is as transparent as we can possibly be. As ever in foreign policy, it is almost impossible to control the response of our interlocutors. I also responded to yesterday’s urgent question in the House; if I could control my interlocutor’s response, I would be in heaven.

Many Members raised the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act and the Public Safety Act. The UK Government encourage all states to ensure that their domestic laws are in line with international standards. Any allegations of human rights abuses must be investigated thoroughly, promptly and transparently.

My hon. Friends the Members for Huddersfield (Harpreet Uppal), for Sheffield Central, and for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) talked about communications restrictions and the worrying situation for journalists. It is wonderful to have a journalist, my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, in the House making such effective interventions through speeches, with such heart for his community.

--- Later in debate ---

[Imran Hussain]

rose—

[Gareth Snell]

rose—

[Catherine West]

I will take an intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Bury North first.

[Catherine West]

I impress upon my hon. Friend the importance of these debates in influencing the work of our teams at the FCDO and putting the work that is being done in our communities on the public record. Through that, they can have a lasting impact. However, we have to remember that we strongly hold to the principle of the important role of India and Pakistan in resolving this situation.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Minister for being so generous with her time. I want to pick up on her point about it not being for the UK to prescribe a solution. I entirely understand why that is the position that she and previous Governments have had, but in 1948 there were eight votes in favour of the special resolution of the Security Council. The USSR abstained. The UK was one of the countries that voted in favour of that resolution, which said a plebiscite should happen. Does the UK no longer support the position that we adopted in ’48—I appreciate that that was a long time ago—or do we think that, although it is a potential solution, we do not necessarily want to push it?

[Catherine West]

Our position is that it is for the two countries to take charge of the overall situation, while obviously listening to the wishes of the Kashmiri people.