HL Deb 07 November 1996 vol 575 cc729-31

3.30 p.m.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in the light of the developing situation in Pakistan, it is their intention to remove Pakistan from the list of countries designated under the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996.

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Blatch)

My Lords, we have no plans at present to remove Pakistan from the list.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, is not that an astonishing Answer not merely in response to the enforced change of government which took place last week but also following the report of the special rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights who, in the middle of October, before the change of government, found that there was endemic, widespread and systematic use of torture while people were in the custody of police, army and paramilitary forces and that the majority of women held in police custody were subjected to some form of sexual abuse, including rape? It can hardly be claimed that the new government, not being democratically elected, will have a better record. Surely the Government have an obligation to think again about the use of the white list in Pakistan?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, it is only recently that we had a long and detailed discussion on this matter. The incidence of human rights violations had decreased during the 10 years of Mrs. Bhutto's government, which has now changed. They took steps to ensure protection of, and respect for, human rights, including the establishment of a human rights cell with powers to promote human rights awareness.

We regularly raise concerns about human rights with the Pakistan Government and we will continue to do so. The only event that has changed the situation, no doubt giving rise to the Question because it is this week's emergency Question, is the latest accusation made against Mrs. Bhutto. All I can say is that Pakistan is still calm. We look continually at the situation. It would be open to the Government, if they wished, as a first step to suspend certification claims under the designation procedures. However, at this moment we see no reason for doing so.

Viscount Waverley

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the previous government had ceased to function; that fundamental rights and the constitution have not been suspended; and that any change should be seen as a change for the better?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the noble Viscount has made the most pertinent point. What has occurred is entirely constitutional; the president has acted in an entirely constitutional manner. We are monitoring the situation, which we understand is calm. There are no reports of violence or demonstrations. Elections have been called for 3rd February next year, and we will work closely with the caretaker government. However, there are serious allegations of corruption and extra-judicial killings and they must be investigated.

Lord Avebury

My Lords, has the Minister read the report of Dr. Nigel Rodley? Has she noted that in addition to the statement quoted by the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, Dr. Rodley stated that there is a climate of impunity in Pakistan such that over a 15-month period not a single officer was prosecuted for any of the thousands of violations of human rights which occurred, particularly in Karachi? Has the Minister noted that in a statement President Leghari specifically mentioned the thousands of people killed in Karachi and the fact that the previous government had failed to take any meaningful action against those responsible for the atrocities? Will the Government at least call for an independent inquiry into the killings, as has Amnesty International, preferably accompanied by a promise of indemnity and protection for any witnesses who might appear before it?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, yes, I have read the report. The assessment, which will be updated with the latest events, takes into account what has been stated by Amnesty International, the UNHCR and other foreign governments and what has been passed to other government departments by Foreign Office intelligence. The assessment is written in the light of all that information.

There are 132 million people in Pakistan and we have taken the view that in general the situation is safe. However, the fundamental point as regards considering claims for asylum is that every single applicant, whether from a designated country or not, will be given full consideration without prejudice in the first instance and that a certificate will be issued only if the person goes to appeal. As your Lordships know, because Pakistan is a designated country a certificate will be given if there is no proven case of there being a genuine fear of persecution.

Lord Dubs

My Lords, is the Minister aware that her remarks are a little puzzling? Did she not say that on more than one occasion the Government have made representations to the Government of Pakistan concerning human rights in that country? If that is the case, how can it be that Pakistan is still on the white list? Surely, making representations about human rights implies that there are abuses in that country, which would suggest that the country should not be on the white list.

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I never used the term "white list" and therefore I do not recognise it. I repeat that there are 132 million people in Pakistan and we will make representations about human rights where we believe that it is pertinent to do so, not only in respect of Pakistan but many other countries. Often the particular point we make will apply to a small group of people or an individual case of a breach of human rights and we apply as much pressure as we can bring to bear with the influence that we have. But we believe that, in general, life in Pakistan is safe for its people. That does not preclude the fact that individual applications for asylum will be considered and where there is a genuine fear of persecution, proven consistent with the United Nations convention, refugee status will be given.