Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Main Page: Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Conservative - Life peer)
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Alexander, for introducing this debate and the manner in which she did so. The sentiments she has expressed and the calls she has made are things with which everyone participating in this debate will align.
In the words of the Quaid-I-Azam, Muhammed Ali Jinnah:
“My guiding principle will be justice and complete impartiality, and I am sure that with your support and co-operation, I can look forward to Pakistan becoming one of the greatest nations of the world”.
We take part in this debate with a deep sense of concern regarding the continued detention of former Prime Minister Imran Khan—a figure who, irrespective of political persuasion, remains entitled, like every citizen of Pakistan, to the protections of the law and the dignity afforded to every citizen under Pakistan’s constitutional framework. As has already been said, this is a matter not of politics but of principle. It is about whether the justice envisioned by the Quaid-I-Azam, Muhammed Ali Jinnah—rooted in fairness, compassion and the rule of law—should rightly be a factor that continues to guide the Republic of Pakistan.
Having served as the UK Foreign Minister of State with responsibility for our relationship with Pakistan, I dealt with all political parties. Indeed, I dealt directly with the former Prime Minister, Imran Khan, during his tenure as Prime Minister, as well as with the current Prime Minister of Pakistan, Shehbaz Sharif. They will both recall, as I do, that, whatever the issues—albeit ones of deep concern—and no matter how difficult they were, we would engage in a manner that was, despite differing views and positions, rooted in mutual respect. With these sentiments in mind, I wish to make three clear and what I regard as reasonable calls, grounded firmly in Pakistan’s constitution and legal traditions.
The first is the immediate provision of specialist medical attention. Article 9 of the constitution of Pakistan guarantees the right to life and liberty. As we heard from the noble Baroness, Lady Alexander, the courts of Pakistan have repeatedly interpreted this to include the rights to health and to access to medical care. Where a detainee’s health is in question, the responsibility of the state is not discretionary; it is absolute. Ensuring that Mr Khan receives an independent specialist medical assessment, including with a professional medical practitioner of his choice, is not an act of concession but a constitutional obligation.
Secondly, as I called for in our debate on a Question in the main Chamber, Mr Khan should be granted full and humane access to his family—specifically, the granting of visas to his sons, Kasim and Sulaiman, who are both British citizens. Article 14 of the constitution of Pakistan confirms the inviolability of the
“dignity of man and … the privacy of home”.
Family contact is not merely an emotional consideration; it is intrinsic to human dignity and recognised in both domestic jurisprudence and international rights, to which Pakistan is party. Denying access to close family members, particularly in times of vulnerability—as is the case now—risks undermining the very dignity that the constitution seeks to protect. Facilitating visas for his sons is, in my view, a simple, humane and lawful step.
Thirdly, I call for Mr Khan’s transfer, under the conditions, to house detention. Pakistan’s legal framework, including provisions in its criminal procedure, allows for alternatives to incarceration where the circumstances justify it—in particular, where health, security or broader public considerations are at play. House detention would ensure that the legal process is upheld while mitigating concerns around welfare, transparency and proportionality. It would be a measured and lawful course, consistent with both precedent and principle.
Alongside these calls, I turn directly to the role of His Majesty’s Government. Will the Minister take forward, in addition to the request made by the noble Baroness, Lady Alexander, a direct request to the Foreign Secretary to use her full weight of office to facilitate access, particularly in supporting the granting of visas and ensuring appropriate consular and diplomatic engagement on humanitarian grounds? I should add that this is not without precedent. The UK FCDO has, in numerous instances, advocated for medical access, family visitation rights and due process; indeed, I engaged directly and robustly where there were concerns about the welfare and rights of detainees overseas. Whether cases involve British nationals or broader human rights concerns, Ministers have rightly raised individual cases directly with foreign Governments, underscoring the fact that humanitarian considerations sit firmly within the remit of the Foreign Secretary. Indeed, successive Foreign Secretaries have intervened quietly but effectively—that is the British way—where questions of health, dignity and access arise.
These are not extraordinary demands. They do not seek to interfere with judicial processes; nor do they pre-empt outcomes. Rather, they are rather a rational call to uphold the very standards that Pakistan has set for itself—standards rooted in its constitution, its courts and the vision of its founder. At a time when the eyes of the world are on Pakistan, when it is providing a glimmer of hope in the dark clouds of war, it will also need to reflect on how it treats those in detention, especially figures of such prominence. If it does the right thing, I am sure that it will further speak volumes about its commitment to justice, compassion and human rights.
In invoking the words of Muhammed Ali Jinnah as I did, we are reminded that nations are judged not by the strength of their rhetoric but by the fairness of their actions. Pakistan must demonstrate, through these three simple steps and with the constructive engagement of a friend and partner such as the United Kingdom, that justice remains not only an aspiration but a living reality.