Human Rights: Colombia

Patrick Grady Excerpts

Wednesday 20th April 2022 Westminster Hall

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McDonagh. I warmly congratulate the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Paula Barker) on securing this debate and on her comprehensive introduction. It is the latest in quite a series of debates on Colombia in Westminster Hall in this Session—although I think the first where we have not been required to wear face masks, which is quite a good thing.

The Minister should be aware that there is growing awareness and interest in the situation in that country. Some of it is long standing: there are passionate campaigners here who have been working on the issue for decades. Others are becoming more aware, especially as we reach the anniversary of the peace accord. The APPG, which is chaired by the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson), is increasingly active; we recently welcomed the new ambassador. Organisations such as Justice for Colombia, ABColombia and the trade union movement as a whole are all doing a tremendous job to raise awareness, and campaign for peace and justice.

It is slightly disappointing that the Minister has not been joined by any of his Conservative Back-Bench colleagues. It is noticeable, but I am not quite sure what the reason is. I hope that if any members of the Colombian expat population in the UK are following this and similar debates, and live in constituencies represented by Conservative Members of Parliament, they make that contact. Indeed, if others are following this who have an interest in justice and peace, I hope that as constituents they make their voices heard and ask for representation if they are represented by a Conservative Member of Parliament.

Constituents contact me about Colombia. There is awareness and passion for peace and justice in principle, particularly among those of us who have the opportunity to meet campaigners and human rights defenders, whether they have come here through some of the organisations mentioned or whether we have had the privilege of visiting the country, as I did with ABColombia in 2018. I saw the potential of the country and all its wonderful diversity; it has the potential to thrive if violence can be consigned to the past and the peace accords can be implemented in full.

Implementing peace and sustainable development in Colombia also stands as an example to the rest of the world, for good or ill. We heard about the continuation of violence and instability, and the statistics—the highest rate of murders of human rights defenders anywhere in the world. During COP26 in Glasgow, at an incredibly powerful vigil organised by Amnesty International, the name of every human and environmental rights defender around the world who had been murdered in that year alone was read out. The vast majority of the names were from Latin America, of which a significant number were from Colombia. So it is a crucible—an example—of what is going on elsewhere in the world.

The point raised by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) about the challenges around freedom of religion and belief is particularly important. That relationship between indigenous communities and the land is at the very heart of a lot of indigenous religions. That means that to be separated forcefully from the land is a breach not only of all kinds of human rights, but particularly of the fundamental right to freedom of religion and belief; and religious leaders are very often wider community leaders and human rights defenders as well. It is important that that point is made and reflected in the UK Government’s response to the situation.

One of the big takeaways from my visit, from the conversations that I continue to have with campaigners and from the speeches that we have heard so far is that there are disparities between the rhetoric of the agreement, the structures—quite often well funded—that have been put in place, the bureaucracies that exist in the capital, Bogotá, and the reality on the ground, which is that people are still facing challenges and insecurities on a day-to-day basis and murders are continuing and increasing. Violence throws the whole electoral process into instability.

The UK Government have to rise to their role in all of this as the penholder at the United Nations; indeed, they have a more significant role on the Security Council at the moment. I welcome the dialogue that continues between Ministers. They respond very well to correspondence, parliamentary questions and debates like this. There is a good relationship between the campaign groups, individual Members and the embassy in the country. However, dialogue is not enough. One of the opportunities, allegedly, of Brexit was our “soft power” superpower—our ability to do things differently and show global leadership. How will that be lived up to in the implementation of the new trade accords that are being signed in the UK-Andean trade agreement? Will the commitments to respect for human rights that are built into it actually be implemented and followed through?

The alternative is a slide back to violence if people are cleared off their land for developments of the type that the hon. Member for Belfast South (Claire Hanna) spoke about. Such developments will make way for palm oil plantations to feed our demand in the west for cheap consumer goods, cheap food and products that are made with palm oil or fuelled by coal, or whatever. If people in Colombia feel that that comes with a lack of power, voice and agency, we can understand why people think that violence is the only opportunity to make their voice heard.

I was struck by how young the people were. We hear the term “human rights defenders” and think of grizzled old world-weary campaigners, but these were young people, standing up passionately for the rights of their community. They were incredibly frustrated that the democratic structures that had been put in place were not properly respected. The multinational behind the mine that we saw said it would be a small, artisanal project. It was called La Colosa. They were going to blow the top off the mountain, which would have had environmental consequences downstream and would have affected everybody. The community voted against it, but it appeared to be going ahead anyway.

We must live up to the standards in international agreements, like the Ruggie principles on business and human rights. We must think about whether there is something we can do with our domestic legislation to ensure that those rights are secured and that it has an impact in countries that we want to trade with and exercise diplomatic relationships with overseas. The potential is there to drive peace forward. The solutions are identifiable. The campaign groups, us as Back Benchers and Government Ministers all have a role to play in driving that forward.