Jammu and Kashmir: Human Rights

Iqbal Mohamed Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for securing this important debate. I have many Kashmiris in my constituency of Dewsbury and Batley, and one of the pledges I made to them during my election campaign was that I promised to stand up for peace, justice and human rights anywhere around the world. Kashmir is their homeland and very close to their hearts and my heart.

A report issued by Amnesty International last year captures the reality of the repression to which the Kashmiri population are subjected. It describes a clampdown on freedom of expression via the use of restrictive travel bans and arbitrary detentions to intimidate critical dissenting voices into not speaking out. It describes how those subject to detention under stringent anti-terror laws are now being detained for much longer without trial than before: the average was 269 days between 2014 and 2019, and about 330 days from 2019 to 2024. This is, in effect, a form of internment. We know from the experience of internment in Northern Ireland in the 1970s that it did nothing more than act as a recruiting agent for paramilitary organisations. Add to that the extrajudicial killings, the police and army abuses, the Indian Government’s decision to strip Kashmir of its autonomy and statehood, and the draconian crackdown that followed in its wake, and it is not surprising that the region is in constant ferment.

What is surprising is how little is known in this country about the state of affairs in Kashmir, especially considering the British Government’s historical role in the creation of Kashmir, the partition of India, and all the chaos that came in its wake. The UK has a historic responsibility for the current situation. It has a responsibility to put rhetoric about upholding human rights into practice and to use governmental pressure on India to that end.

I have no illusions about the difficulties in making the British Government act. As the plight of the Palestinians illustrates, the UK’s commitment to human rights exists more in theory than in practice. Nevertheless, thanks to public campaigning, the issue of Palestine will not leave this Government alone—it is like a stone in their shoe. For those of us concerned about the issue of human rights and self-determination for Kashmir, the challenge is to make it the stone in the other shoe. The Government must take responsibility and a leadership role as a peacemaker and enforcer of international law.

What will the Government do to remove the impunity they provide the Indian Government for their many breaches of international and humanitarian law? What specific steps will the Government take to enforce the UN resolutions that have already been mentioned? What diplomatic engagement is the UK using to seek a peaceful resolution for the Kashmiri people and the right to self-determination? What action are the UK Government taking to enforce human rights in Kashmir? What humanitarian aid are the UK Government providing to Kashmir, and how will that be impacted by the decision to reduce foreign aid by 40%?

--- Later in debate ---

[Catherine West]

The hon. Gentleman refers to the Ahmadiyya, but that is mainly an issue in other parts of the region. With his permission, I will ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), to write to him with more detail.

To return to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, the UK Government are aware of reports of the detention of a number of journalists. We are clear about the importance of respect for human rights, and continue to call for any remaining restrictions to be lifted as soon as possible, and for any remaining political detainees to be released.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) raised the UN plebiscite. 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.

[Iqbal Mohamed]

On that point, can the Minister confirm whether adherence to human rights and international law will be included as conditions within any trade agreements with India?

[Catherine West]

Trade is the responsibility of the Department for Business and Trade, but I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we remain committed to promoting universal human rights, and where we have concerns, we raise them directly with partner Governments, including at the ministerial level. My hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield also raised trade. Human rights are a golden thread that goes through all the work of the international Departments.

An issue that sits alongside that is aid—we have debated it this week because of the announcement on international aid. I assure the House that we are still assessing the impact in the Indo-Pacific region, and we will come back when we have a clearer picture. As Members are aware, our work is intertwined with that of other donor countries. For example, the United States Agency for International Development has traditionally been a very big partner in aid across the globe. In the light of the recent announcement of the cessation of that aid, Ministers have asked the Department to do an assessment in the coming weeks so that we can understand the impact of the reduction of aid more generally in different regions. As the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, I want to know exactly what impact that is going to have, but because the announcement is less than a week old, that work has not yet been completed.

I want to touch briefly on Government visits to the region. The benefit of having in-country expertise is that when it is safe to visit, we can seek and gain the various permissions that are needed. Monitoring the situation in India-administered Kashmir is part of the Government’s duties, and that includes engaging with people from different areas and travelling to different regions, including Indian-administered Kashmir. That is a very important part of our diplomacy, and we will continue to do it. Despite the controls in place, officials from the British high commission in New Delhi request access to Kashmir, monitor the situation and visit the region periodically.

The FCDO advises against travel to certain parts of Indian-administered Kashmir and against all travel within 10 miles of the line of control, whether in Indian-administered Kashmir or Pakistan-administered Kashmir. We encourage all British nationals visiting the region, including our own staff, to follow that advice very carefully. There are limits, therefore, to the frequency and geographical scope of visits. The same applies to our officials at the British high commission in Islamabad, who travel periodically to Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

I want briefly to touch on a couple of other issues raised by hon. Members, but we are getting close to the end of the debate—have I missed anything? One thing I have enjoyed about this debate has been the discussion of the many local organisations, such as the youth organisation in Rochdale mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, of the impact of councillors in our localities and of the important work on International Women’s Day, when we can celebrate the work of our representatives who have deep connections with the area. This work is the tapestry of the UK, and it is important that we bring such matters to the House to reflect constituents’ concerns.