§ 3.5 p.m.
§ Baroness Williams of Crosbyasked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their view of the United States' proposals to extend immunity from Iraqi laws to all United States citizens working there as civilian contractors; and what are the implications for United Kingdom citizens in Iraq.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean)My Lords, the Question slightly misinterprets the situation. What is under discussion is the way in which the Coalition Provisional Authority Order 17 will continue after 30 June. CPA Order 17 deals with the status of the multi-national force, foreign liaison missions, diplomatic missions and their personnel and international advisers and contractors of all sending states. The negotiations are inevitably complex and are continuing intensively. The UK's objective in these discussions is to put in place a practical and workable arrangement before 30 June.
§ Baroness Williams of CrosbyMy Lords, I thank the Minister for that very helpful reply. There are some 20,000 plus civilian contract employees now working who fall within the American sphere, although there are some hundreds more British citizens, some of them from security companies and private military companies. Two civilian contract employees, Mr Israel and Mr Stephanowicz, were found to be directly responsible for illegal behaviour towards Iraqi prisoners, as mentioned in a Pentagon paper, and have not been tried in any way. In view of that fact, will the Minister and Her Majesty's Government consider the issue of the uncertainty of accountability of the group of people covered neither by Iraqi domestic law nor by international military law, and who therefore appear to lie outside the broad areas of accountability?
§ Baroness Symons of Vernham DeanMy Lords, I recognise that this is a real issue and one on which I tried to concentrate a certain amount of the informal briefing that I gave to some of your Lordships and Members of another place earlier this week. I am not able to confirm the noble Baroness's numbers of civilian contractors. I have asked for figures for United States contractors but I do not have confirmed figures, although they certainly run into thousands. Neither do I feel that it would be appropriate to comment on the two particular individuals, whose case may be the subject of legal action. What I would say, however, is that the UK's position is that the immunity should extend in such a way that contractors would still be 1242 subject to effective legal and regulatory regimes. We believe that such means should apply to all contractors, including contractors from private security companies.
§ Lord Howell of GuildfordMy Lords, is it not a fact that the new Iraqi Government designate have indicated that they are very strongly opposed to that kind of broad immunity, going far beyond the military and extending to all foreign civilians and civilian contractors? Should we not be very careful about doing anything that undermines the necessary authority and legitimacy of the new government? Will the Minister reassure us that she will bear that point in mind—along with the point that when the new government urge that there should be new measures of public safety, which is very understandable in Iraq, the opposition of the American authorities is not one that we would necessarily endorse?
§ Baroness Symons of Vernham DeanMy Lords, I stress to your Lordships that I was careful in framing my initial Answer to say that the negotiations are intensive and continuing. I would not want to prejudice the position that I stated to the noble Baroness, Lady Williams of Crosby, about how we are trying to ensure that there is a proper framework in place. I asked questions on this issue only this morning. So far the Iraqis have not raised fundamental problems about the draft under consideration, although it is open to them to do so if they wish. After 30 June, as a sovereign government, they can take whatever decisions they feel to be appropriate on the issue.
I stress to your Lordships that we are very alive to the concerns around the issue. We, as sending governments, want to work with clear contractual positions and monitoring arrangements and to have a mechanism to deal with any misdeeds on the part of contractors.
§ Lord King of BridgwaterMy Lords, in relation to immunity from Iraqi law, the Question concerns civilian contractors. Is the Minister able to confirm to the House that she is satisfied about the position of our Armed Forces after the handover under the new arrangements?
§ Baroness Symons of Vernham DeanMy Lords, the order that is under discussion, CPA Order 17, covers the position of the multinational force. There was a slight misapprehension in the noble Baroness's original Question. The discussions are not just about the order in relation to private sector contractors but also in relation to, for example, our diplomatic missions and the multinational force. The order does not apply to the nationals of only one country, as the Question implied; it will apply across the board to the nationals of all sending countries.
§ Lord Thomas of GresfordMy Lords, the Minister will know that in the case of British forces in Germany there are agreements and protocols with the German 1243 Government that determine the jurisdiction over British forces to be exercised in civil and criminal law. What thought has been given by the Government to the position regarding the new Iraqi Government who are coming into being?
§ Baroness Symons of Vernham DeanMy Lords, there is an analogous set of negotiations. Obviously one cannot transfer the situation in one country to another country. We all know that Iraq is a special case and that there are difficulties regarding security; we have discussed them extensively in your Lordships' House. That is why this negotiation is under way. It is a negotiation that involves not just the United States, the United Kingdom and the Government-designate of Iraq; it also involves other sending governments, for example, the Governments of Japan and Australia.