Instruments of Torture (Hansard, 26 March 2001)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal)
My Lords, Her Majesty's Government deplore the manufacture of instruments of torture. On 28th July 1997 my right honourable friend Robin Cook announced a ban on the export and transhipment of equipment which might be used for torture. That included electric-shock batons, electric-shock shields, stun guns, Tasers, leg-irons, gang chains, shackles (excluding normal handcuffs) and electric-shock belts designed for the restraint of a human being.
With our EU partners we have agreed a list of non-military equipment that should be subject to export controls for human rights reasons. That list includes the equipment covered by my right honourable friend's July 1997 statement. The European Commission is now working on an instrument to introduce EU-wide controls on the export of such equipment.

§ Baroness Rendell of Babergh
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for her Answer. Does she agree that, since the 1980s, the number of countries which produce electric-shock equipment has increased fourfold to 130, and that some equipment—notably the electric-shock stun belt—appears to have no other use except as a torture-inflicting device?

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, I certainly agree with my noble friend that the continued production of such equipment is most regrettable and unwelcome. We continue to encourage other countries 9 to follow our lead and ban the export and transhipment of equipment that has been used for torture. I also agree with my noble friend that the use of stun belts could amount to cruel and inhuman treatment. We have also banned their export and transhipment. We continue to encourage other countries to follow our lead.

§ Baroness Sharples
My Lords, can the noble Baroness say how long is the list of instruments of torture?

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, I believe that I gave a fairly comprehensive list in my Answer. I could repeat them if the noble Baroness so wished, but all those items are included. It is most regrettable that legitimate instruments are sometimes converted in order to be used for such terrible means. We deplore that.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, as my noble friend used the word "export", perhaps I may ask her whether she can assure the House that no companies producing these instruments abroad are owned by companies or nationals of our country. In other words, this matter concerns not only export but British ownership.

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, I am not able to give my noble friend a firm assurance on that. Certainly we hope that no companies which declare themselves as British are involved in that manner. However, my noble friend will know that British people have now taken up residence all over the world. I am not able to give your Lordships an assurance, but certainly I express the hope and aspiration that no British person is so engaged.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, can the noble Baroness at least give an assurance that the Government still intend to legislate against the procurement from third countries by British citizens or British companies operating from this country of torture equipment for export to countries that still use it?

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, by virtue of the prohibition of the export of such equipment and the fact that it is illegal to use that equipment within the United Kingdom, I can assure the noble Lord that the ambit for those who manufacture it is very narrow indeed. For that reason, we do not believe that it has been necessary to ban the equipment. However, we have tried to ensure that it is not exported from our shores or used elsewhere.

§ Baroness Williams of Crosby
My Lords, in view of the fact that some equipment can, as the Minister said, be used for both torture and other, legitimate, purposes, do the Department of Trade and Industry or her own department keep a list of countries that use torture as one of their major weapons in maintaining 10 civil order? Could that be borne in mind when considering the export of dual-use instruments of torture?

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, I can reassure the noble Baroness that the concern of this Government is such that staff in overseas posts are taking on board instructions to watch out for the use of torture by their host governments and to make representations where credible reports are received of instruments being used for that purpose. Therefore, we are using our best endeavours to ensure that this issue is highlighted and that we garner as much support as possible for getting rid of such instruments.

§ Lord Haskel
My Lords, have the Government considered naming and shaming companies that manufacture instruments of torture?

§ Baroness Scotland of Asthal
My Lords, to the best of our knowledge, there are no such companies in this country. Therefore, the principle of naming and shaming does not apply. However, certainly we remonstrate with those whom we discover to have manufactured those goods.
We are trying to raise the profile of this issue globally. As my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary announced in December 2000, a new global lobbying campaign has been launched for the ratification of the UN Convention Against Torture. We are commissioning the publication of a torture reporting handbook to enable doctors, lawyers, NGOs and others who come face to face with torture to report it to the relevant international mechanism. Thirteen thousand copies have been distributed in English, French, Spanish, Russian and Arabic, and more than 3,000 copies have been downloaded from the web.
We are also supporting the secondment of a senior UK police officer to assist the work of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. We are giving significant financial support. We hope that all that, together with the establishment of an International Criminal Court, legislation for which I am glad to say was passed by this House last week, will do much to bring this terrible situation to an end.