DIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGES (EXTENSION) BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 20 July 1944)

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON)

My Lords, I rise to move the Second Reading of this Bill which is in your Lordships' hands, and which I think will commend itself to your Lordships and not arouse controversy. It aims at conferring, and more precisely defining, the diplomatic privileges which ought to be enjoyed by foreign representatives when they are here taking part in either the work of some great international organization like U.N.R.R.A. or in a conference between rations specially called and being conducted here. I think that it is convenient to regard the Bill as dealing with three matters, the first of which is to be found in Clause 1. In this it is stated that: This section shall apply to any organization declared by Order in Council to be an organization of which His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and the Government or Governments of one or more foreign sovereign Powers are members. As I say, a good example to take is U.N.R.R.A. The provision under that 1038 head is that an Order in Council may be made which will provide the conditions under which the organization itself will enjoy privileges in the nature of exemptions under the head of diplomatic exemption.

Next, the Bill will confer on persons other than British subjects who hold high office in the organization, as specified in the Order, or who represent a member Government, such immunities and privileges as are enjoyed by the envoy of a foreign sovereign Power. Next, it will also confer on other classes of officers and servants of the organization privileges and immunities which are of a less extensive order, and which in particular are limited to things done or omitted to be done in the performance of official duties. In substance this part of the Bill secures that proper diplomatic immunity is secured, within the precise limits defined by Order in Council, by the organization itself and by the foreign members of it who should be included.

The next part of the Bill deals with a rather different matter. This is Clause 3, which deals not with an organization but with the position of those who may in this country be attending an international conference. There again our custom is—and I think that it is good International Law—that there should be a measure of diplomatic immunity for the foreign representatives attending such a conference. In Clause 3 we define what the extent of those privileges may be. The Foreign Secretary would compile a list of persons entitled to such immunities and cause this list to be published. That follows, as your Lordships may know, the scheme provided in an Act of the reign of Queen Anne, which still operates, with reference to ordinary Ambassadors and Ministers. In the same way the Foreign Secretary can remove a name if it is not suitable. This will thus secure definition of the individuals who will be given those privileges, and thus exclude those who are not, whereas at present this whole subject is in rather a vague condition. I would point out in passing—although it is not one of my three compartments—that Clause 4 of the Bill provides, as I think your Lordships would expect, that these concessions are all based upon reciprocal treatment. We make such concessions to others provided they treat our own 1039 representatives, if in their the same way.

Lastly, in Clause 5, there is an important amendment of the Diplomatic Privileges (Extension) Act. That Act, your Lordships may remember, was carried through Parliament in the year 1941, at a time when a number of foreign Governments took refuge in this country. By that Act we conferred upon such Governments, which had left their own country and were here in exile, the diplomatic privileges which it was proper to confer. Since then, in more than one case, as the House knows, some of these foreign Governments have moved their principal headquarters elsewhere. For instance, the Greek Government have moved. It is at least doubtful whether the privileges which we confer on their representatives who are here in fact continue in the new circumstances. No one will doubt that they ought to continue, and Clause 5 of the Bill is aptly devised to secure that result.

Such is this Bill. I do not think that it ought to arouse controversy. I trust that your Lordships will feel that it is thoroughly in the spirit of the times, and is one of the efforts being made by Parliament and by this House to secure that important international conferences and organizations, which I trust will meet with increasing frequency, will have, as they ought to have, a proper measure of the protection which we call diplomatic privilege. I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.