HL Deb 14 September 2004 vol 664 cc181-2WA
Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether there is evidence, either in relation to the right of petition under the First Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or under the legal systems of contracting parties to the covenant, that a free-standing legal provision against discrimination could lead to an increase in the amount of litigation. [HL4066]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs (Baroness Ashton of Upholland)

Between 1977 and October 2002, 205 complaints were brought before the United Nations Human Rights Committee under the First Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights about matters covered by the free-standing legal provision against discrimination contained in Article 26 of the covenant. Of those, the committee declared 120 inadmissible. Therefore the average increase in the number of cases of this type actually considered by the committee was about four per year shared between the states that had ratified the protocol during that period.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Which of the 20 non-governmental organisations, listed in Appendix 2 to the report on the outcome of the Interdepartmental Review of International Human Rights Instruments, recommended acceptance of the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; and which of them recommended non-acceptance. [HL4063]

Baroness Ashton of Upholland

The following non-governmental organisations recommended acceptance of the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Justice, the British Institute of Human Rights, Amnesty International, Liberty, the Law Society, the Institute for Public Policy Research, The Committee on the Administration of Justice, the Aire Centre, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the Scottish Human Rights Centre, and the London School of Economics. No organisation listed at Appendix 2 to the report on the outcome of the Inter-Departmental Review of International Human Rights Instruments recommended non-acceptance of the protocol.