HL Deb 16 September 2004 vol 664 cc200-2WA
Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What is the value to governments and individuals of the system for individual petitions under the United Nations human rights treaties given that such petitions do not result in binding judicial decisions. [HL4084]

Baroness Ashton of Upholland

In its recent Interdepartmental Review of International Human Rights Instruments, the Government concluded that the practical value to individual citizens of individual petition to the United Nations is unclear. They also have concerns about the levels of cost to public funds that governments might incur if individual petition were used extensively to explore the meaning of the provisions of a treaty. Therefore they have decided to accede only to one right of individual petition, under the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, to enable them to consider the merits of individual petition on a more empirical basis.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they intend to publish the results of their evaluation of the merits of the right of petition under United Nations human rights treaties. [HL4087]

Baroness Ashton of Upholland

The Government published their evaluation of the merits of the right of petition under United Nations human rights treaties as Appendix 5 of their Report on the Interdepartmental Review of International Human Rights Instruments, which was laid in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament on 22 July 2004.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether their review of international human rights instruments included an evaluation of the case law of the United Nations Human Rights Committee in considering complaints under the First Optional Protocol to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and of the experience of states which have accepted the First Optional Protocol; and, if so, what were the results of that evaluation (a) as regards the case law; and (b) as regards the experience of States Parties. [HL4089]

Baroness Ashton of Upholland

Yes. The review did include an evaluation of the case law of the United Nations Human Rights Committee and of the experience of states which have accepted the First Optional Protocol. The results are set out at Appendix 5 of the report on the review, which was laid in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament on 22 July 2004. Ministers concluded that the practical value to individual citizens of individual petition to the United Nations was unclear. They also had concerns about the levels of cost to public funds that governments might incur if individual petition were used extensively to explore the meaning of the provisions of a treaty. Therefore, they have decided to accede only to one right of individual petition, under the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, to enable consideration of the merits of individual petition on a more empirical basis.