§ 4. Mr. Brockwayasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply was made to the official request, made to him, as co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference on Indo-China, by the Government of the Chinese People's Republic, that, in view of their allegation that Article 15 of the Cease-Fire Agreement is being broken, Her Majesty's Government should urge the Laos Government to abandon the trial of Prince Souphanouvong and others in order not to intensify antagonisms among its people.
§ 26. Mr. Warbeyasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply he has made to the official communications sent to him, as co-Chairman of the Geneva Agreement, by the Polish and Chinese Governments regarding the arrest and impending trial of Prince Souphanouvong and seven other leaders of the former Pathet Lao forces.
§ 30. Mr. Dribergasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that the impending trial of Prince Souphanouvong and other leaders of the Neo Lao Haksat party of Laos constitutes, prima facie, a breach of the Geneva Agreement; what official representations Her Majesty's Government, as a sponsor and co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference of 1954, has received from the other Governments concerned about the need to safeguard the rights guaranteed by that Agreement to these men, seven of whom are members of the Laotian National Assembly; and what replies he has sent.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydI presume the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Driberg) is referring to Governments which were members of the Geneva Conference. We received a Note from the Chinese Government on this subject on 31st October and have replied to it. Our reply fully sets out our position and, as it is rather long, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The matter 1142 was also raised with us by the Soviet Government and we have expressed views similar to those contained in our reply to the Chinese Note. No communication from the Polish Government has been received here.
§ Mr. BrockwayMay I ask the right hon. and learned Gentleman whether, in the first place, he would consult his co-Chairman on this matter in view of the allegation that there has been a breach of the Geneva Agreement, and, secondly, whether he would use his influence to secure the abandonment of this trial in order to help the neutralisation of Laos, of which he expressed himself in favour last week?
§ Mr. LloydThis matter is, of course, being discussed between the two co-Chairmen. I indicated in my Answer that a reply had been received. The position, so far as the Laotian Government are concerned, is that they consider it an internal matter. The hon. Gentleman will realise that when a Government take up that position it is very difficult to state publicly that one is going to seek to influence them one way or the other.
§ Mr. WarbeyWas not the Laotian Government a party to the Geneva Agreement which dealt with a number of internal matters, including the question of the resolving of the differences between the Government and the Pathet Lao forces? As this is the source of the present difficulties, would not the sensible thing be to agree with the Indian Government in supporting the recall of the International Control Commission?
§ Mr. LloydAs far as the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is concerned, I think that there is no doubt that Article 9 of the Political Agreement signed at Vientiane on 2nd November, 1957, is relevant. So far as the recalling of the International Control Commission is concerned, we have said again and again that that really cannot happen unless the Laotian Government are willing to have it back. On the question of these trials, I think that if hon. Members will consider the case which we have put forward in our recent Note they will realise that there is merit in it. But I still adhere very definitely to what I said before, that our intention is to have a neutral Laos.
§ Mr. DribergCan we take it from the right hon. Gentleman's reply to the first supplementary question, which seems reasonable, that the reply which is to be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT indicates the continuing interest of Her Majesty's Government, as one of the co-signatories, in this matter?
§ Following is the text of the United Kingdom reply of 14th November to the Chinese Note of 31st October:
§ I have the honour to refer to Your Excellency's Note of 31st October about the situation in Laos and to inform you that Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom are unable to agree that the United Kingdom and Soviet Governments should take action, as suggested, in regard to the proposed trial of the leaders of the Neo Lao Hak Sat. This is a matter for the Laotian authorities in which it would not be proper for other Governments to intervene.
§ 2. The Chinese People's Government suggests that the holding of such a trial would be a violation of the Geneva and Vientiane Agreements by the Government of Laos. Nothing in those Agreements however precludes the Laotian authorities from prosecuting members of the Neo Lao Hak Sat in the Laotian courts for offences against Laotian law subsequent to the signature of the Cease-Fire Agreement. Nor does the Cease-Fire Agreement or the Vientiane Agreement absolve the members of the Neo Lao Hak Sat from the obligation to act in accordance with the laws of Laos. On the contrary, Article 9 of the political Agreement signed at Vientiane on 2nd November, 1957, gives to the Neo Lao Hak Sat the same responsibilities, as well as the same rights and liberties as to other political parties in Laos and makes those rights and liberties dependent on the statutes of the N.L.H.S. being in accordance with Laotian law. It is for the Laotian courts to determine whether the Neo Lao Hak Sat leaders have broken the law. Any action by the co-Chairmen or the International Commission to intervene between the Laotian courts and the members of the Neo Lao Hak Sat would constitute interference in the internal affairs of Laos and would be contrary to paragraph 12 of the Final Declaration of the Geneva Conference.
§ 3. In their Note, the Chinese People's Government also state that the Government of Laos have continually violated and have renounced the Geneva Settlement. Her Majesty's Government regret that they are unable to accept this statement. I wish especially to draw to your attention the statement made to the press by the Laotian Prime Minister in Paris on 31st October. After explaining that the Laotian Government had not in any way violated the Geneva Settlement, he stated categorically: "We shall do nothing contrary to the provisions of the Geneva Settlement".
1144§ 4. Her Majesty's Government are anxious to do everything possible to ensure that the Geneva Settlement in regard to Laos is maintained. They are unable, however, as they have frequently stated, to agree to try to impose the International Commission on the Laotian Government who are unwilling to accept its return. Nevertheless they consider that peaceful conditions in Laos will be reestablished if all concerned act wholly in accordance with their obligations under the Geneva Settlement. Her Majesty's Government hope that the Chinese People's Government will join Her Majesty's Government in using their influence to this end, in particular by urging on the North Vietnamese authorities the importance of acting in accordance with paragraph 12 of the Final Declaration of the Geneva Conference.
§ 23. Mr. Harold Daviesasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reports he has received, as co-Chairman of the Geneva Conference, from the Government of Laos about the proposed trial of Prince Souphanouvong and seven other leaders of the Neo Lao Hak Sat Party.
§ Mr. Selwyn LloydI have received no report from the Government of Laos about this matter. The Laotian Govern-Government does not report to the co-Chairmen and would in any case regard this question as an internal matter.
§ Mr. DaviesDoes not the right hon. and learned Gentleman realise that the situation with regard to the 1954 Geneva Conference has now become absurd? Is he as a co-Chairman still of the opinion that his function is merely to receive reports about the situation? If, through some unfortunate circumstance, Prince Souphanouvong and the other seven representatives should be tried, will the right hon. and learned Gentleman as co-Chairman undertake to see that observers are sent to the trial and that the evidence is made available to him and the House?
§ Mr. LloydIt is quite true that I am one of the co-Chairmen of the Geneva Conference, together with Mr. Gromyko. But that is a position in which one does not have the power to enforce any views one has, and one has therefore to exercise one's influence in the best way one can to secure declared objectives. I have declared my objectives, but it is not wise to say publicly the way in which one tries to implement or achieve them.