Asked by: Chris Law (Scottish National Party - Dundee West)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether she has sought legal advice on the implications for her policies on arms export licences to Israel of the International Court of Justice’s decision on the request for provisional measures in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
All export licence applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis against the UK’s Strategic Export Licensing Criteria, including with regard to international humanitarian law.
All licences are kept under careful and continual review and the Government is able to amend, suspend, refuse or revoke licences as circumstances require.
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade receives legal advice as appropriate, on all matters related to import and export licensing, as part of advice from officials.
Any legal advice received is subject to legal professional privilege and as such we do not comment on legal advice that may or may not have been sought or received.
Asked by: Stephen Morgan (Labour - Portsmouth South)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of Israel’s compliance with the provisional measures set forth by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and we are clear the ICJ's ruling is binding.
We have stated, however, that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with International Humanitarian Law, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative.
The Court's call for the immediate release of hostages and the need to get more aid into Gaza is a position we have long advocated.
We are clear that an immediate pause is necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting.
We continue to call for International Humanitarian Law to be respected and civilians to be protected. We have previously assessed that Israel is committed and capable of complying with IHL. We regularly review our assessment.
Asked by: Dan Carden (Labour - Liverpool, Walton)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, how many arms export licences to Israel have been reviewed against the UK's Strategic Export Licensing Criteria since the International Court of Justice's order relating to the case of the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel), published on 26 January 2024.
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
All export licence applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis against the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria.
The Criteria provide a thorough risk assessment framework, and the Export Control Joint Unit will not issue an export licence to any destination where to do so would be inconsistent with the Criteria, including where there is a clear risk that the items might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of International Humanitarian Law.
All our export licences are kept under careful review, and we are able to amend, suspend or revoke extant licences, as well as refuse new licence applications, where they are inconsistent with the Criteria.
Asked by: Dan Carden (Labour - Liverpool, Walton)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, what diplomatic steps he is taking to help ensure compliance with the International Court of Justice's order relating to the case of the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel), published on 26 January 2024.
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ's ruling is binding. We have stated, however, that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with International Law, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative. The court's call for the immediate release of hostages and the need to get more aid into Gaza is a position we have long advocated. We are clear that an immediate pause is necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting. FCDO Ministers hold regular meetings with their counterparts.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Streatham)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, if he will make an assessment of the Israeli government's compliance with the provisional measures set forth by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Anne-Marie Trevelyan - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). However, we have stated that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with International Humanitarian Law, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative.
We have long advocated for the release of hostages and the need to get more aid in.
We are clear that an immediate pause is necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting.
Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, if she will review L3Harris’s licence to produce release systems for the F-35 combat aircraft in the context of the International Court of Justice's order relating to the case of the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel), published on 26 January 2024.
Answered by Greg Hands - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
Decisions on export licensing are based on the UK's Strategic Export Licensing Criteria. The Government's export licences are kept under careful and continual review, and we can amend, suspend or revoke extant licences, or refuse new licence applications, where they are inconsistent with these criteria.
Asked by: Kenny MacAskill (Alba Party - East Lothian)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will review the practice of routinely authorising requests from allies and partners to access UK air bases following the interim ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel).
Answered by James Heappey
All flights by foreign military-registered aircraft, and civil aircraft operating under government status, are required to apply to the Ministry of Defence for Diplomatic Flight Clearance whenever they wish to enter UK airspace or use a UK air base. The Diplomatic Flight Clearance policy is a longstanding and robust practice. The basis on which a foreign partner may, or may not, be granted permission to utilise UK air bases is dependent on the nature and purpose of their activity.
Asked by: Alan Brown (Scottish National Party - Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, if he will take steps to help ensure the Israeli government's compliance with the provisional measures set forth by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
FCDO Ministers hold regular meetings with their counterparts, including the Foreign Secretary's meetings with the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Minister during his visit to Israel on 24 January.
We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ's ruling is binding.
We respect the role and independence of the ICJ. However, we have stated that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with International Law, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative.
The court's call for the immediate release of hostages and the need to get more aid into Gaza is a position we have long advocated.
We are clear that an immediate pause is necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting.
Asked by: Stephen Morgan (Labour - Portsmouth South)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, what recent discussions he has had with his Israeli counterparts on compliance with the provisional measures set forth by the International Court of Justice in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
FCDO Ministers hold regular meetings with their counterparts, including the Foreign Secretary's meetings with the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Minister during his visit to Israel on 24 January.
We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ICJ's ruling is binding. However, we have stated that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with International Law, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative.
The court's call for the immediate release of hostages and the need to get more aid into Gaza is a position we have long advocated.
We are clear that an immediate pause is necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, whether he has received legal advice on the implications for his Department's policies of the International Court of Justice’s decision on the request for provisional measures in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel).
Answered by Andrew Mitchell - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Minister for Development)
We regularly review advice about Israel's capability and commitment to International Humanitarian Law and we act in accordance with that advice. We respect the role and independence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ); however, we have stated that we have considerable concerns about this case, which is not helpful in the goal of achieving a sustainable ceasefire. Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas in line with IHL, as we have said from the outset. Our view is that Israel's actions in Gaza cannot be described as a genocide, which is why we thought South Africa's decision to bring the case was wrong and provocative. The Court's call for the immediate release of hostages and the need to get more aid into Gaza is a position we have long advocated. We are clear that an immediate pause is now necessary to get aid in and hostages out, and then we want to build towards a sustainable permanent ceasefire, without a return to the fighting.