HL Deb 17 April 1973 vol 341 cc1027-8
LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the decision on the Netherlands and Austrian Motion at the United Nations Human Rights Commission that conscientious objection to military service should be recognised; and how did the national representatives vote.

THE MINISTER OF STATE, FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE)

My Lords, the Commission deferred consideration of this item for one year at the instance of the Soviet Union. As this procedural vote was taken by a show of hands, an exact list of individual votes is not available, but there were 15 votes for deferment, 9 against, including the United Kingdom, and 4 abstentions.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, can the noble Baroness confirm that most of the opposition came from Communist countries and from developing countries?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

Yes, my Lords; that is so. The Soviet Union objected, together with the other countries associated with her, because she said that it was the right of the Soviet Union and the constitutional duty of her citizens to defend their homeland. The developing countries said that the developed countries, with sophisticated weapons, could afford to accommodate conscientious objectors whereas this obligation could not be imposed on other nations.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask the noble Baroness one further question? While we may not have much influence with Communist countries, could we not exert some persuasion on the developing countries? Could not the issue of personal liberties be placed on the agenda of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference in August?

BARONESS TWEEDSMUIR OF BELHELVIE

My Lords, during this particular session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, we did what we could to influence the developing countries but, so far as putting the issue on the agenda of the Commonwealth Conference is concerned, the noble Lord will realise that the same numbers do not attend as at the Human Rights Commission, and therefore we should not advance very far.

Back to