Jammu and Kashmir: Human Rights Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Tahir Ali
Main Page: Tahir Ali (Labour - Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley)Department Debates - View all Tahir Ali's debates with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Jammu and Kashmir: Human Rights
Tahir Ali Excerpts(1 day, 12 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tahir Ali
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall today.
In January 1948, India went to the United Nations to ask that the issue of Kashmir be noted. Subsequently, resolution 47 determined the outcome for a plebiscite. To this day—76 years on, and into the 77th year—that resolution has not been implemented. The people of Kashmir are now asking the international community: what has to happen to them before their voices are heard? When articles 370 and 35A were revoked back in August 2019 by the Modi-led BJP Government, there was a deafening silence from the international community. The United Nations failed to act.
Earlier this week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, expressed concerns over human rights violations in India and particularly in illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir, but the response from the Indian high commissioner to the United Nations was that he should take
“a long and hard look in the mirror”.
That is nothing but a complete disregard for the United Nations.
India calls itself the largest democracy. That raises the question: if it is the largest democracy, why would it not let international observers into Kashmir, with unfettered access to observe what is happening on the ground? Why are extrajudicial killings happening on the international community’s watch? India is getting away with atrocities against women, rape, torture and even the pelleting of children who are making their way to school. What threat can they be? This is all very well documented.
It is a blatant two fingers up to the international community to shout the loudest and say, “We are the largest democracy. Nothing is happening in Kashmir. We will continue to do what we are doing. What has been happening for the last 76 years will continue, and we will take no notice.”
Kashmir is not a bilateral issue. It is not an issue between Pakistan and India. It is an issue for the Kashmiri people, who have a right to self-determination. It is for the international community to come together to make that happen. If it does not happen now, in the midst of the global turbulence that is happening in all regions, when is the time for the international community to come together? Peace is needed. Peace has to happen in the region. Two nuclear states cannot allow Kashmir to become the hanging fireball in the region that could explode or ignite at any time.
This is unfinished business from the UK Labour Government in 1947. We have a Labour Government now. Perhaps it is up to the UK’s Labour Government to take a leading role and make sure that that unfinished business is dealt with properly once and for all, without putting any more lives at risk and without risking any more atrocities, given the genocide that is taking place in India-occupied Kashmir. Why would a country not even allow its own politicians access to the region of conflict? Why will it not allow its own journalists access, if there is nothing to hide?
Back in 2020, a delegation from the all-party parliamentary group on Kashmir went to Kashmir. All of us were denied a visa to the India-occupied region. The then chair managed to get to Delhi, but she was returned to Dubai because she was not allowed any further access. When we ended up on the Pakistan side, the then PTI Government allowed us unfettered access to any areas we wanted to visit, without any hindrance. We had to ask for it, but we got access. In fact, we changed the schedules to make sure that we saw parts of the Kashmir region that had perhaps not been seen by politicians before.
On one side, Pakistan allows international access; on the other side, India is hesitant. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to work out where the problem is. My plea to the UK Government is that unfinished business cannot remain unfinished. It has to be dealt with now. Will the Government take all steps to make sure that the right of self-determination is granted to the people of Kashmir?
Several hon. Members rose—