§ 4.25 p.m.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, with the leave of the House, I will repeat a Statement on mercenaries in Angola, made by the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. The Statement is as follows:
§ "With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement on the outcome of the trial of mercenaries in Angola.
§ "The House will recall my Statement on 29th June in which I referred to the appeal for clemency which the Prime Minister addressed to President Neto immediately after the judgment and sentences. Her Majesty The Queen sent a message on 4th July. To neither of these has there been a reply nor, as far 40 as we know, have the Angolan Government replied to numerous other appeals. As the House will know, last Friday, 9th July, President Neto issued a statement confirming the sentences of death. The four men were shot on Saturday afternoon, 10th July, by a firing squad. I am confident that I speak for honourable Members on both sides of the House when I express our shock and dismay that the Angolan Government disregarded so many appeals for clemency and have taken the extreme and irreversible step of carrying out the four death sentences. The House will know that we have already expressed our sympathy to the families in their distress. My officials have throughout been keeping in close touch with them.
§ "As regards the trial itself, although certain rights were accorded to the defence by the court, our conclusion is that the trial was not a fair trial in the sense in which we would understand that term. We have noted the absence of any presumption of innocence and the prejudicial nature of much of the process and evidence. Although all the defendants were accused and found guilty of the crime of being a mercenary we do not accept that it has been established that being a mercenary is a crime having a basis in international law.
§ "It was alleged in the trial that there had been complicity by the British Government in the recruitment of the mercenaries and arrangements for their departure. I need hardly say that this is completely untrue. We consistently expressed our opposition to all external intervention in Angola and ourselves abstained from any intervention. As to specific allegations about departure arrangements, no special facilities were given or special arrangements made by the Government. No authority in Britain has the power to prevent an individual from leaving the country with or without a passport unless he is wanted for a criminal offence.
§ "We shall leave the Angolan authorities in no doubt of our general opinion of the trial and of its procedures. We shall also consider the position of those men sentenced to long terms of imprisonment and action that we may be able to take on their behalf.
41§ "Finally the House will recall the setting up of the committee under Lord Diplock to inquire into the law on the subject of mercenaries and to make recommendations. I understand that Lord Diplock will be presenting his report in the near future."
§ My Lords, that is the end of the Statement.
Lord CAMPBELL of CROYMy Lords, we are grateful to the noble Lord for repeating this Statement which has been made in another place. We on these Benches join in the sympathy sent to the families of the men executed. It is deplorable and indefensible that the death sentences should have been carried out. Far from justice, this appears to be an act of barbarism. To be a mercenary in itself may be unwise or misguided, but it has not been regarded as a crime in international law, and by no stretch of the imagination could it be a capital crime. The offence of which it seems these men were found guilty was being on the losing side. The fact that the trial was not fair is very disturbing. Will the Government continue pressure in the form likely to be most effective to assist those who have been given long sentences?
There have been mercenaries in many armed forces. Other nationals have served in the United Kingdom forces, many with distinction, in both peace and war. We look forward to the report from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock, which the Minister said would be coming shortly. Presumably this will deal mostly with our domestic law concerning mercenaries. Will Her Majesty's Government, with other countries, seek to obtain an advisory opinion from the International Court at The Hague on the legal position of mercenary service in the forms in which it is to be found at present?
§ 4.31 p.m.
§ Lord WIGODERMy Lords, we on these Benches thank the noble Lord the Minister for repeating that Statement. If I may, I should like to raise three matters. The first is that it is, of course, right that concern should be expressed on behalf of those who were executed and sympathy expressed to their families, but would it not have been appropriate if that concern had been expressed by the 42 Government in a practical way at a very much earlier stage in the proceedings? May I also ask the Minister why it was left to young members of the Bar to go out at their own expense and defend some of those unfortunate men, and why the Government did not provide full legal representation at the earliest possible moment?
May I further ask the noble Lord whether he would agree that it might be desirable not entirely to overlook that there may be distinctions between some of the mercenaries who have been tried? Some have been tried not only for being mercenaries but also for committing serious crimes punishable under any penal code and, indeed, no doubt punishable by capital sentences under many penal codes. Surely the real concern ought to be for those who were tried for no offence other that that they were mercenaries. I respectfully agree with the noble Lords' observation that under international law it is at the very least highly doubtful whether that is a recognised offence of any sort.
Finally, may I raise one matter which does not come within the noble Lord's ministerial responsibility but about which I should welcome a comment? Is he aware that, at the time when the wretched self-styled "Colonel" Callan's appeal for leniency was being considered by the President of Angola, Scotland Yard saw fit to put out a statement, and the BBC saw fit to broadcast it on sound radio, to the effect that the police had completed their inquiries into the activities of the mercenaries and were satisfied that Colonel Callan had killed no fewer than 167 people in addition to those with whose killing he was charged at his trial? Would the noble Lord ask his colleagues in appropriate Departments to inquire how it came about that at that particularly sensitive moment there was such apparently irresponsible behaviour by both the police and the BBC?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, may I reply at once to the last point made by the noble Lord, Lord Wigoder. I have no official cognisance of the matter, though, of course, I accept what he says. I will certainly consult my colleagues on this matter to see whether it needs to be taken further than it has been on the Floor of this House.
43 Referring to the points made by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, I entirely agree with the tone and content of what he said. I am most grateful to him. We shall indeed continue in all the appropriate ways open to us to press for a mitigation of the unduly severe sentences passed on those who escaped the capital judgment suffered by the four other mercenaries. As to seeking an advisory opinion, of course, Angola is not bound by the International Court. Nor are we, except that we generally indicate that if we go to that Court we will abide by its decision, as we have done in a number of recent and famous instances, in which the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, has been perhaps currently engaged. I think we shall need to look at the question of proceeding to the International Court of Justice after receiving the report of the Committee headed by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock. That is one of the substantive matters which will need to be considered then.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that 35 years ago I expressed somewhat vehement views about a victor judging the vanquished on crimes which were not crimes at the date they were committed but which came to be considered as crimes only by reason of a unilateral law passed by the victors after the crimes had been committed and that I said at the time it would embarrass us later? Is the noble Lord further aware that any process by which a court without jurisdiction passes judgment on crimes that do not exist must be subject to some question? The general appearance of fairness in these later trials seems to me to have been a good deal superior to that which we provided at Nuremburg.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am almost hesitant to express a measure of agreement with my noble friend. I do indeed recall that he and quite a number of other people equal to him in repute and, if I may say so, in cogency, raised this matter—35 years ago, was it? It is a difficult question of how one adjusts normal juridical practice to rather unusual circumstances that arise from war or warlike situations. I give him the point entirely. As to his second 44 point, I think he should either make a speech or write an article about it, because I am sure that many other Members apart from me would like to know what he has to say on a very important and very difficult international legal point.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is it not true that we have recognised Angola, and therefore have entered into diplomatic relations? Is there not a sense of humiliation in Government circles that, having recognised Angola and having entered into diplomatic relations with that country, when we make an appeal for clemency, not only through the Government but through the Monarchy—which now in the circumstances appears to have been a mistake—our appeals are rejected? Is there a sense of shame about this? Can we not rectify the matter in two respects? Within the last 48 hours, the Prime Minister has declared that there is no illegality concerning mercenaries; but when some weeks ago the mercenaries went from this country to Angola, they were condemned by members of the Government. Can we not clarify the issue and make it clear beyond peradventure that if men—misguided, unwise, whatever adjective is used—decide to offer their services, whether for money or out of goodwill, in order to indulge in military operations in some other country, they should not be condemned? Finally, I ask this: should we not in the circumstances pay out of public funds the cost of returning the bodies of the three men who were executed?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, to take the noble Lord's points in order, we have recognised the Government of Angola because they fulfilled the criteria which successive Governments of this country have laid down for recognition—
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, we are not in diplomatic relations with them so far. Perhaps some of the enormities we are discussing today might have been avoided if we had achieved diplomatic relations with that Government as well as recognising them—who knows? Secondly, on the question of making the legal position of mercenaries clear, this we 45 hope and expect the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock, will assist us to do. I understand that he will report in the fairly near future. Thirdly, on the point of payment of costs, I think we have to consider the position of the relatives of an average of 1,500 British nationals who die abroad on their lawful avocations, without injury to anybody, who have no claim to governmental funds to bring the bodies back to this country and so far have made no complaint. I do not think we can engage in that kind of discrimination at this time. However, if anybody is destitute and cannot afford the basic humane right of interment, there is a way in which assistance can be given locally on the spot for that purpose.
The fourth point was the question: Do we not feel ashamed because we appealed for clemency for these people? No, my Lords, indeed not! I shall not mention the crowned head, but I am sure that His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury does not feel ashamed that he, too, added his voice to that of many other international leaders of conscience and opinion. The people who ought to be ashamed are those who, despite the almost unanimous appeal for clemency not only from this country but from other countries as well, from leaders of all faiths and of none, nevertheless went ahead and shot these people. We should feel proud that, although we may find the actions of the mercenaries morally repugnant to us, we nevertheless were capable of making every effort to save their lives after such an event.
§ Lord BOOTHBYMy Lords, in considering this matter will Her Majesty's Government bear in mind that the Angolan Government gave a warm welcome to the Cuban mercenaries who put them in power?
§ Lord BRADWELLMy Lords, while agreeing with almost everything that has been said by noble Lords on all sides about the fate of these unfortunate men, will my noble friend and Her Majesty's Government do their utmost to prevent further recruitment and export of mercenaries to African States; for instance, the recruitment which is already going on to assist and defend the illegal regime in Rhodesia, against the ultimately inevitable victory of Zimbabwe national forces? Also, will he take particular note of the 46 activities of a Mr. Banks who was interviewed yesterday on BBC radio, and who boasted that he would continue recruiting mercenaries to go and interfere in the affairs of African States and no doubt send them to their deaths as well?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I take full notice of my noble friend's point. In the interim, while awaiting the statement of the position as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock, sees it, and as I have no doubt Her Majesty's Government will, as a result, substantially see it, I am sure that it is necessary for Her Majesty's Government to look at the situation and approach it in every proper way to prevent a recrudescence of a similar situation. I can go no further than that, except to indicate that I have already made arrangements to draw the attention of appropriate Ministers in the Government to the broadcast to which my noble friend referred, and which I myself heard. I am grateful to him for making the point which has not been lost on me or, I am sure, on Her Majesty's Government.
§ Lord LEATHERLANDMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether, under our scheme for giving international aid to other countries, we are giving any financial assistance to Angola? If so, what do the Government propose to do about it? May I further ask him a similar question about Uganda, which 1 was about to put when I was pipped at the post by the Deputy Chief Whip suggesting the closure?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, we are giving no aid to Angola and since, I believe, 1972 we have discontinued aid to Uganda.
§ Lord GORE-BOOTHMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he can give us any information on one point in regard to our daily dealings with our African colleagues? Is it the policy of the Government, as I hope it is, that our representatives can urge upon neutral and friendly Africans that there are many friends of black Africa in this country, but that uncritical approval of things done by any African State, because they are done by an African State or are anti-Israeli, will erode the friendliness towards black Africa in things that are much more 47 important to them, eventually perhaps to a damaging degree to their better causes?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, as so often my noble friend Lord Gore-Booth has uttered words of great wisdom, to which I hope and expect our African friends will give full attention. Africa is not one man. It is a vast contitinent within which there are many leaders of constructive, moderate and humane views.
Viscount ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, while holding no solid opinion as to whether being a mercenary is or is not illegal, or should or should not be illegal, is it not most important that we should convince ourselves and the world exactly what a mercenary is, and who is a mercenary? Clearly, a conscript fighting for his own country, or somebody employed as a soldier in his own national army, is not a mercenary. But, on the other hand, a great many soldiers of one country or another are serving in other countries. Some of them are there of their own free will; many of them are not. For example, we know that a large number of the Cubans who turned up in Angola were not there as volunteers, but were conscripted to go there from Cuba, so even they may not be mercenaries. But if some went there of their own free will and were there for ideological reasons, does that make them into mercenaries? It seems to me that there is a very wide basis—
Viscount ST. DAVIDSMy Lords, the simple question that I want to put to the noble Lord is this. Will he define exactly who is and who is not a mercenary, and get this set out internationally so that we may have some idea of who are committing these offences?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSI shall not, my Lords; but I am very sure that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Diplock, will.
§ Baroness WOOTTON of ABINGERMy Lords, may I call attention to Standing Orders, under which it is not permissible to conduct a debate on a Statement, unless the House passes a resolution to that effect? Has such a resolution been proposed?