DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITIES, CYPRUS (Hansard, 17 July 1961)

§ Mr. Eric Fletcher (Islington, East)

Are we not to have an explanation of this Order? Perhaps I could put to the Under-Secretary of State the point which troubles me about it. I do not imagine the House will want to oppose the Order, but I am a little puzzled to know why the Order is made and presented to the House at this juncture.

It comes before us as a draft Order under the Diplomatic Immunities (Conferences with Commonwealth Countries and Republic of Ireland) Act, 1961, an Act which was passed only a few months ago. We had our Second Reading on 24th January and the Act received the Royal Assent on 2nd March. The operative part is Section 1 (5), which provides that The countries to which this section applies are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, India, Pakistan, Ceylon, Ghana, the Federation of Malaya, Nigeria, the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland and the Republic of Ireland Section 2 gives Her Majesty by Order in Council power to add other countries, provided they are within the Commonwealth.

What puzzles me is why Cyprus, which was already a country within the Commonwealth, was not specifically named in Section 1 (5), because, as I recall, Cyprus obtained her independent status about a year ago, and it seems a little anomalous that Cyprus should have been deliberately excluded from the Bill when it came before the House but is now added by Order in Council. It may, of course, be thought that it is desired to add to the countries I have mentioned and perhaps also to subtract from them. It may be necessary to subtract from that list the name of South Africa, but that does not arise on this Order. I think that we are entitled to an explanation, for it does seem an inconvenient way of legislating.

§ The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mr. Bernard Braine)

I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that Cyprus was not deliberately excluded. Perhaps it would be for the convenience of the House if I were to explain what the purpose of the Order is. It is, of course, as the hon. Gentleman indicated, to add Cyprus to the countries to which the Diplomatic Immunities (Conferences with Commonwealth Countries and Republic of Ireland) Act, 1961, applies. Under the Order the Act will apply to Cyprus in exactly the same way as to other Commonwealth countries.

Section 1 of the 1961 Act confers the same immunities which are accorded to the envoys of foreign sovereign Powers and their retinues on the representatives of Commonwealth countries and the Republic of Ireland and their staffs, named in a list published by the Secretary of State, who attend conferences in this country with representatives of Her Majesty's Government in this country. The immunities continue for the period of the conference only.

Cyprus was not named in the Act as a country to which it applied, because it was intended that the Act should cover only Commonwealth countries and the Republic of Ireland. The House will recall that the Republic of Cyprus became independent, it is true, on 31st August; but the Cyprus Government did not actually apply for Commonwealth membership until later, and the fact is that the Commonwealth Prime Ministers had not approved the Republic's application for admission to the Commonwealth by the date the Act was passed.

This is the first Order to be made under Section 2 of the Act, adding a country to those named in Section 1 (5). Section 2 was included with Cyprus particularly in mind. It is unlikely to be used much. It is much more likely that in future a country attaining independence will become a full member of the Commonwealth at the same time, and will be added to the subsection by special provision in the Act providing for its own independence. Sierra Leone has been inserted in the list by the Sierra Leone Independence Act, 1961.

1021 I am fully aware that the House is always rightly sensitive on the subject of these immunities. But Cypriot representatives at conferences in this country are at the moment the only representatives of any independent country who would not have these immunities and it would be anomalous and invidious to withhold them.

1022 I hope that my explanation will have satisfied the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. Fletcher) and the House.