§ 2.37 p.m.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what changes in international law they have in mind to deal with the urgent subject of hijacking sabotage, now that ICAO has dropped the United States/ Canadian draft for a direct "No sanctuary" Convention and since the alternative French proposal of adding a protocol to the ACAO Chicago Convention requires time-consuming procedures for signatures and ratification.
§ THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORT-FOLIO (LORD DRUMALBYN)My Lords, the Government are very conscious of the need to obtain international agreement on effective measures to deal with the urgent problem of hijacking and sabotage of civil aircraft. The Legal Committee of ICAO has just completed its meeting in Montreal. It recommended that a number of proposals put forward by various delegations should go forward to a full conference of States. At an early stage of its meeting the Committee voted to restrict the effectiveness of any separate new convention, in particular by excluding all provision for sanctions. We therefore tabled a new proposal for the amendment of the Chicago Convention which would achieve the same objective as the United States/Canadian draft Convention which we co-sponsored. The only proposal going forward to the Conference that provides for the suspension of air services of a defaulting State is the British one.
LORD JANNERMy Lords, would the noble Lord say what exactly can be done to expedite the matter? Am I to understand that the matter has to go forward in accordance with the Chicago procedure?—because this will take a very considerable time before any results can be achieved. Would it not be an advisable course now for those countries who hold the same view as I understand Her Majesty's Government hold, America and Canada, to come together to see whether something can be expedited? Otherwise the position can become a really disastrous one.
§ LORD DRUMALBYN, My Lords, the effectiveness of action of this kind depends on its being international and being agreed by, if not all nations, at any rate a very wide number of the 125 nations who are represented on ICAO. As to the first question, it is normal of course to have a six-month interval between the sitting of the Legal Committee and the subsequent Committee, the Diplomatic Conference of States. But I understand that an Austrian proposal that ICAO should meet in three months' time has been accepted. There would be no point in having that unless there were a Diplomatic Conference of all the States at the same time. But, as I have made plain before, this country is anxious to make the utmost progress and we hope very much that it will be possible to have the meeting in three months, and not six months as was originally arranged.
LORD JANNERMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his answer, may I say that what I had in mind was the possibility of getting together those nations which I call civilised nations to see whether they cannot come to some conclusion; because is it not obvious that a bar is being thrown in the machinery by those nations who still want to harbour the criminals and who are not prepared really to stand by civilised standards?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNNo, my Lords. I do not think this would do at all because the nations who would adhere to any convention in that case would not be able to get the co-operation of the other nations who did not adhere to it; and ICAO has itself already ruled out the idea of sanctions in a new convention. That is why it is now proposed to amend the Chicago Convention. That can be done by a two-thirds majority.
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord, in view of this depressing delay, whether perhaps the time might come for the Government to make some very forthright announcements? Will the noble Lord consider that, whereas obviously it is desirable to be extremely diplomatic, none the less lives are going to be lost in the mean-while? Could not the Government speak out rather more firmly than they have done?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNNo, my Lords; I do not think they could. I think we have been making our position absolutely clear all the way along the line. We joined with the United States and Canada in 1970 when this matter was first raised, and we again supported them last year when the matter was raised again after more aircraft incidents. Our position is absolutely clear. We have made our proposal; that proposal is going forward to the next stage, and we are trying to ensure that it is going forward more quickly than was envisaged before.
§ LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYEMy Lords, does the Minister's last reply to the supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord Janner, mean that one or two recalcitrant nations could in fact hold up the whole process indefinitely?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNAs I understand it, my Lords, as it is an amendment to a convention that is being considered this can be carried by a two-thirds majority; but I cannot go further than that at the present time. It is not true to say that it could be held up by one or two nations. We have of course had a majority against us so far on the question of sanctions. It is this that we have to try to overcome by persuading people that it is in the interest of all nations that there should be sanctions.
§ LORD SLATERMy Lords, can the Minister state what hopes Her Majesty's Government hold of a satisfactory agreement being reached on this important matter? Following the observations of my noble Leader and also of the noble Lord, Lord Janner, who has taken such an interest in this matter for some time past, probably every noble Lord feels that what has been happening recently is absolutely atrocious and that every effort should be made to bring it to an end.
§ LORD DRUMALBYNMy Lords, a number of nations are anxious that this state of affairs should be dealt with by international action. It must be international in order to be effective. We are playing our part and doing all we can to secure that end.
§ LORD HARVEY OF PRESTBURYMy Lords, as it is extremely unlikely that 100 per cent. of the nations will agree on this matter, would my noble friend 385 say that if 75 per cent. agreed sanctions could be evolved?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNMy Lords, it is possible; but that would also require a resolution of the Conference.
§ VISCOUNT AMORYMy Lords, would my noble friend agree that there is great public concern about this matter and that everyone will hope that the Government will maintain the greatest possible momentum to find some kind of solution? While we fully recognise the difficulties of obtaining complete unanimity, it seems that the real crux of the matter is how to get effective action with less than complete unanimity.
§ LORD DRUMALBYNMy Lords, we hope in the end to get complete unanimity, which is the only answer in the long run. We are doing our utmost to create the climate of opinion that will allow that to happen.
LORD JANNERMy Lords, may I ask one further question? If we are going to depend on the recalcitrant nations to agree, shall we ever find a solution? Can we not realise that those people who are actually harbouring the criminals are not likely at any time—and certainly not all of them—to agree to a solution? Further, is it not important that the civilised nations should get together and say, "We have had enough of this", leaving the recalcitrant nations to suffer the consequences?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNNo, my Lords, because the main purpose of the amendment which we are proposing is to write into the Chicago Convention the provisions of the Hague and Montreal Conventions on hijacking and sabotage. We think there is a good chance of being able to persuade the nations of the world that this is the right thing to do. It has to be remembered that there are 125 signatories to the Chicago Convention; that there are upwards of 50 signatories to the other Convention and that there is quite a chance that many more will come round and endorse the amendment that we are proposing to the Chicago Convention.
§ LORD ROBBINSMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord this question? Supposing—as I hope will certainly not be the case—the noble Lord himself were 386 cruising round in an aeroplane which was under the command, for the time being, of hijackers, without any very secure prospect of landing safely, would he be able to say to himself: "Well, this is bad luck but Her Majesty's Government have done all that they possibly could"?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNMy Lords, I should certainly comfort myself with that thought but I would also hope that if this sad event is postponed by a year or so, or even six months, I should have the assurance, at any rate, that I should be released in accordance with the Tokyo and the Montreal Conventions.
THE EARL OF SELKIRKMy Lords, will the noble Lord ensure that the countries which are unwilling to co-operate are known to the public of this country?
§ LORD DRUMALBYNMy Lords, I do not think it is yet possible to say that there are countries which are unwilling to co-operate. I think we should wait for the next stage of the negotiations and then I have no doubt that full publicity will be given to those who are for and those who are against.