HL Deb 07 November 1995 vol 566 cc192-3WA
Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will list the States Parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Lord Chesham

The information that the noble Lord has requested is contained in a United Nations document (reference ST/HR/4/Rev.11) listing ratifications of human rights instruments as at 31 December 1994. A copy has been placed in the Library. The Republic of Ireland has become party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights since the list was drawn up.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will list those States Parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights whose governments have rejected in their entirety the recommendations made by the Human Rights Committee, for the full domestic implementation of the Covenant, pursuant to Article 40 of the Convention; and

Whether they consider that their rejection of all the Human Rights Committee's recommendations (UN document CCPR/C/79/Add.55 of 27 July 1995) for full implementation in the United Kingdom of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights will make it more difficult for the United Kingdom to ensure that the People's Republic of China implements the Covenant in Hong Kong after the transfer of sovereignty on 1 July 1997; and

Whether they consider the Human Rights Committee to be a body of persons of high moral character and recognised competence in the field of human rights, whose views on the United Kingdom's implementation of its legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights should, except for cogent and compelling reasons, be implemented.

Lord Chesham

Article 28(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that the Human Rights Committee should possess the characteristics that the noble Lord describes. The Government respect the views of the committee, which, unlike the Covenant itself, are not legally binding. The Government have not rejected the committee's recommendations issued on 27 July 1995 concerning the United Kingdom's fourth periodic report. As my noble friend Lady Blatch said on 26 October 1995 [HL Deb, col. 1187], the Government noted the committee's observations but do not plan any specific changes in the arrangements for the protection of human rights in the United Kingdom in the light of them. In their next periodic report, the Government will report on the measures which they have adopted to give effect to the rights recognised in the Covenant and on progress made in the enjoyment of those rights. The Government are not able to give details about the reaction of other States Parties to the comments of the committee after consideration of their reports. That is a matter for them. As far as Hong Kong is concerned, the last paragraph of Chapter XIII of Annex 1 to the Joint Declaration (JD 156), reflected in Article 39 of the Basic Law, obliges China to ensure that the provisions of the ICCPR, as applied to Hong Kong, shall remain in force. The committee's observations on the United Kingdom's fourth periodic report have no relevance to Hong Kong, in respect of which a separate periodic report has been submitted.