§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps have been and are being taken by them to consult other Governments on measures to combat hijacking and other forms of terrorism which are menacing the existence of civilisation.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)My Lords, the United Kingdom is a party to the Montreal and Hague Coventions, and has been encouraging other Governments to adhere to them. British representatives are playing a full and constructive part in the International Civil Aviation Organisation and the European Civil Aviation Conference in the continuing discussion of measures to combat terrorism. We cosponsored a resolution condemning hijacking in the Security Council on 12th July. Her Majesty's Government took the initiative in the European Council last December in proposing that Community Ministers of the Interior should meet to discuss co-operation, particularly on police and counter terrorist questions; a first meeting took place last month.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for the reply which he has given. In view of the terribly serious position which exists at present, and in view of the fact that civilisation is really being threatened by the terrorists, will he use his utmost endeavours to ensure that those nations who themselves are not accomplices to hijacking come together as speedily as possible and devise ways and means of dealing with the situation? May I also ask him whether it would not 680 be very important at the present time to outlaw organisations such as the PLO, who are behind all this, who have trained these criminal people and are continuing to train them in how to destroy innocent people year in and year out, and who, in spite of their denials of being involved or other attempts to cover themselves, are still carrying on with the very sinister attempt to destroy aviation in its civil and human sense and to encourage as much terrorism as they possibly can in various countries?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, consultations of the kind suggested by my noble friend have been proceeding and are now proceeding at various levels in various fora. They include co-operation in the exchange of information and in practical activity to counter terrorism. They also include discussions as to ways and means of in fact isolating potential terrorists. That, of course, among other considerations, is one for international agreement and action.
The Earl of SELKIRKMy Lords, can the noble Lord say how many countries have endorsed the Montreal Convention?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, my Lords. I believe that so far 78 States have ratified or acceded to the Hague Convention and 63 have ratified or acceded to the Montreal Convention.
§ Lord LLOYD of KILGERRANMy Lords, while I appreciate how the Minister, through Her Majesty's Government, plays a full and constructive part in these international matters to try and in some way deal with this serious matter, may I ask whether he does not now agree that this question of hijacking has reached such a serious state that unilateral action by Her Majesty's Government should at least be contemplated?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I do not think so. Unilateral action carries with it potential results which may be even worse than the problem it seeks to solve. One has one's feelings about this, but I am glad that my noble friend presented his idea with the phrase "at least contemplated". I cannot refuse to contemplate, but I do refuse to adopt.
Lord PAGET of NORTHAMPTONMy Lords, if not unilateral, why not sanctions? After all, this nuisance has gone on for 15 years and the United Nations are still on the side of the hijackers. Could not we, as the Common Market and the Americans, say quite simply that we regard it as the duty of any air Power who had hijackers to return them from whence they came, and if they did not any aeroplanes of theirs in the Common Market and America would be detained until they did? If we did that, the problem would be solved.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, that is certainly an idea which might be more than contemplated.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether the Conventions to which he has referred include prohibition of the use of any airport in the territory of the Governments which are concerned?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSLords, if I understood my noble friend correctly, he was asking whether any of the three major Conventions covered that point.
§ Lord BROCKWAYYes, my Lords.
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I would need to study afresh the three Conventions—which cover common ground to a certain extent but each one of them includes special provisions—before I gave a definitive answer to that question. Perhaps I may have a word with my noble friend or write to him—or I should not be at all surprised if he did not put down another Question.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, I do not in the least want to jog the Government's arm about this matter because I am quite sure that the noble Lord's feelings and mine are almost identical. However, would he not agree that hijacking of aircraft is the modern equivalent of piracy on the high seas? Is not the use of hostages, innocent in their nature, the most odious and contemptible way of achieving political objects? Cannot the noble Lord and the Government explore the possibility of pillorying those nations who give comfort or aid to these international pirates who adopt this odious and contemptible practice?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, on the first part of the noble and learned Lord's supplementary question, I can only say that I entirely agree with him; I wish that I could have put it from time to time in such succinct terms. The second point raises the question of unilateral action in pillorying offenders. We would seek international agreement and a basis in international law for this, but I am not deigned to exclude every and any means of isolating this pest, this odious business, even if it leads to unilateral action. The noble and learned Lord will agree with me that what he said in the second part of his supplementary question needs very careful consideration.
§ Lord SLATERMy Lords, is my noble friend aware—and I am sure he is—that every one of us in this assembly today considers hijacking to be wrong and contemptible? May I ask him whether, following the suggestion from the Liberal Benches, one could not agree to unilateralism in this matter? Does not what happened in 1939 have many lessons to teach us? Is it not a fact that our representative at the United Nations, Mr. Ivor Richard, has taken a positive stand on this issue?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend and I entirely agree with everything he said. However, we should remember that while we have necessary and practical reservations on unilateral action, which may not be indefinitely sustained, we must also remember that a great deal of international consultation and international action is going on at the moment. What does not happen is not news; it is the exception, however terrible, that engages our attention.
Lord JANNERMy Lords, does my noble friend realise that unilateral action is occasionally extremely effective, particularly bearing in mind what happened recently at Entebbe? Would he agree that that illustrated to the world how important it is that some definite action is taken? May I further ask my noble friend whether something can be done in regard to civil aviation, whereby proper supervision is provided at the various airports to ensure that security is afforded to passengers? For example, could some experts be 683 appointed by the civil aviation authorities, particularly at airports in Rome and Athens, where these piracies are of frequent occurrence?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSMy Lords, in answer to the second part of my noble friend's supplementary question, these precautions are of course very formidable and are constantly being reviewed and strengthened in most countries of the world, and certainly in this country; some time ago I described what these precautions were. They are thorough indeed, but of course they are never perfect; always the anarchist may get through. However, we are reviewing them constructively and in consultation with other countries which have experience, as we have, of these matters. Regarding the first part of the supplementary question, the arguments which my noble friend adduced for unilateral action by people whom he and I might totally approve of might well be adduced by people whom he and I might totally disapprove of.
§ Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYEMy Lords, would the Minister agree that the expression in the Question about the threat to "the existence of civilisation" is carrying things a bit far? While completely agreeing with everything that has been said in condemning these men, may I ask the noble Lord to agree that, nevertheless, our civilisation and our social structure is not so weak that we shall be menaced by these thugs with whom we shall deal in due course?
§ Lord DERWENTMy Lords, is the Minister aware that we have been discussing this Question for 12½ minutes?
§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTSYes, indeed, my Lords; it is a very important Question. The noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, made a most pertinent point; I agree that the resources of civilisation are not yet exhausted in this regard, as on many previous occasions.