GENEVA CONVENTION BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 2 December 1936)

§ LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. The Bill is necessary to give effect to certain provisions of the Geneva Convention of 1929. This Convention consisted altogether of thirty-nine Articles, but this Bill deals with only one of them—namely, Article 28. Your Lordships may be aware that the first Geneva Convention, which was for the purpose of protecting the medical services and the sick and wounded in time of war, was held in Geneva in 1864. It originated with Dr. Dunant, a Swiss doctor. His efforts led to the first Convention. Amongst other things which this Convention decided was that some easily recognisable mark was necessary to distinguish the wounded and the medical Services of the armed forces, and the red cross on a white ground was chosen for this purpose. That was done primarily as, a compliment to the Swiss nation whose distinguished subject had originated the whole idea. The Swiss arms, as your Lordships are aware, consist of a silver or white cross on a red ground, whereas the mark of the ambulance is the red cross on a white ground.

There was a further International Conference held at Geneva in 1906. It was felt that the Red Cross emblem was being rued in circumstances other than those provided for in the Convention, and it was thought necessary to limit its use by law. An Article was therefore embodied in the Geneva Convention under 581 which the signatory Governments undertook to pass legislation to prevent the use of the emblem or of the words "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross" for purposes other than those contemplated by the Convention. So far as this country is concerned, effect was given to this Article by the Geneva Convention Act, 1911, which prohibited the use of the heraldic emblem of the Red Cross or the words "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross" without the authority of the Army Council. In 1929 a further International Conference was held at Geneva to consider the revision of the Convention, and some time was spent on the particular Article of the Convention with which we are concerned in this Bill.

It was felt that the Red Cross emblem needed further protection, and it was specially suggested by the Swiss delegate that the Swiss arms were sometimes used for trade purposes and Swiss national sentiment was deeply offended. It was felt therefore, both in the interests of the Red Cross and of Switzerland, that something must be done to meet the position. Accordingly the revised Convention signed in 1929 contained provisions prohibiting the use not only of imitations of the Red Cross, but also of the Swiss arms and imitations of those arms, as the Convention puts it: by private individuals or associations, firms or companies … whether as trade marks or as parts of such marks, or for a purpose contrary to commercial honesty or in circumstances capable of wounding Swiss national sentiment. This country ratified the Convention on June 23, 1931, and assumed the obligation to give effect to Article 28 on December 23, 1936.

The Bill is short and simple. Clause 1 provides that no one may use for the purpose of his trade or business or for any other purpose the Swiss arms and imitations of those arms, imitations of the Red Cross emblem and any words closely resembling the words "Red Cross" or "Geneva Cross" without the permission of the Board of Trade. There is a valuable provision in subsection (3), the effect of which is to permit anyone who was lawfully using the Swiss arms or an imitation thereof prior to the coming into force of the Convention, namely, the 23rd December, 1931, to continue to use the design in question. This follows a reservation made by the United 582 Kingdom at the time of signature of the Convention. A similar reservation was made by Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Irish Free State, India and Japan. There is little else in the Bill calling for comment. There is a safeguard in Clause 1 (5) against vexatious prosecutions, in that proceedings can only be instituted with the consent of the Attorney-General in England or Northern Ireland. Clause 2 has been inserted at the request of the Commonwealth Government to empower Australia, if she wishes, to legislate comprehensively as regards her obligations under both the 1906 and the 1929 Conventions. Clause 3, which makes provision for extending the Bill to the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands, Newfoundland or the Colonies if required, is in the usual form. I beg to move.