Asked by The Lord Bishop of St Albans To ask His Majesty’s
Government what representations they have made to the Government of
Iran concerning the recent demonstrations in that country. The Lord
Bishop of St Albans My Lords, I am grateful for the opportunity
that this short debate affords to highlight the plight of many
people in Iran, especially young women, who are fighting for their
basic human rights and, as a consequence, suffering horrific
violence at...Request free trial
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what representations they have
made to the Government of Iran concerning the recent
demonstrations in that country.
My Lords, I am grateful for the opportunity that this short
debate affords to highlight the plight of many people in Iran,
especially young women, who are fighting for their basic human
rights and, as a consequence, suffering horrific violence at the
hands of the state.
Within a few metres of this Palace of Westminster, we have seen
and heard the many protesters over recent weeks who have been
chanting—please excuse my pronunciation — “Jin, Jiyan, Azadî”, a
slogan which has been taken up by the protesters. It is Kurdish
and it means “Woman, Life, Freedom”. The protesters are
demonstrating in solidarity with the women in Iran. I hope that
this will give us an opportunity for their voices to be heard in
this Chamber today.
In recent years, the light of international scrutiny has been
shone on the Iranian Government. In addition to the recent
demonstrations that we are discussing, Iran’s Government have
continued to use the death penalty, to place restrictions on
freedom of religion, and to detain British nationals. I commend
the work of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in
securing the release of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anoosheh
Ashoori from their detention in Iran. I hope His Majesty’s
Government will show the same vigour in promoting the release of
the detained British national Morad Tahbaz and in supporting all
those who are unfairly detained by the Iranian Government.
I will give some of the background to the demonstrations that
have been taking place, and indeed growing, in Iran over recent
weeks. On 13 September, just over six weeks ago, 22 year-old
Mahsa Amini was arrested by the Iranian Government’s Guidance
Patrol—a section of the Iranian police tasked with upholding
Islamic dress code. She was alleged to have worn tight trousers
and worn her headscarf improperly. Three days later, Mahsa was
dead. The Law Enforcement Command of the Islamic Republic of
Iran—the Iranian police—reported that Amini suffered from a
spontaneous heart attack, fell into a coma and died. However,
witnesses, including the women detained alongside her, stated
that she was severely beaten by the police prior to her death.
This is supported by leaked medical scans that reveal bone
fractures and haemorrhaging. Over 800 members of Iran’s medical
council have accused the Government of attempting to cover up the
real causes of her death.
Since then, as has been widely reported in our media, protests
have erupted across the country, with women demanding an end to
mandatory hijab laws, justice for the murder of Mahsa Amini, and
the protection of women’s rights. Indeed, reports coming out of
Iran today, despite the social media close-down, suggest that the
largest demonstration so far took place just yesterday. In
defiance of the authorities, thousands of women gathered at Mahsa
Amini’s grave. Demonstrations also took place in other parts of
the country.
What makes these protests unique, and the response of the Iranian
Government far more concerning, is the age of the protesters. The
second-in-command of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has
placed the average age of these protesters at only 16 years-old.
Indeed, schoolgirls have been at the spearhead of this struggle
for women’s rights. We have heard horrifying reports of the
actions of the Iranian state towards children.
On 20 September, 16 year-old Nika Shakarami went missing after
attending a protest in central Tehran. Ten days later, her family
members, who had briefly been given a chance to identify her
body, said that her nose had been completely destroyed and her
skull had been
“broken and disintegrated from multiple blows of a hard
object”.
On 12 October, Iranian security forces stormed a secondary school
and attempted to force the girls to participate in a
pro-Government demonstration, supporting oaths of allegiance to
the Ayatollah and the leader of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps. Those girls who refused to sing pro-Government songs were
arrested and beaten. Sixteen year-old Asra Panahi was one of 12
students who were taken to hospital following the attack. She
died from internal bleeding.
These are not isolated incidents. The Islamic Republic of Iran
has cracked down brutally on protests in community after
community in every corner of that country. Human rights groups
have stated that at least 244 people have been killed, including
32 children, and that over 12,000 have been detained. The
Government have shut down internet and mobile phone services in
affected areas, arrested journalists and have been accused of
threatening the family members of protesters with waterboarding
and mock executions.
I have absolutely no doubt as to the gravity and seriousness of
the actions of the Iranian regime and wholeheartedly stand with
the women who have bravely protested for freedom. The examples I
have just provided barely scrape the surface of the horrors of
what is going on.
There is little we can do to influence the Iranian Government,
but what we can do is to raise our voices, along with the
countless voices of women around the world, to show those who are
fighting for these basic freedoms that they are not forgotten,
that many people are standing in solidarity with them and that we
will continue to highlight their plight. I am grateful to noble
Lords for the contributions they are going to make to this
debate, and I would like to end by asking the Minister about His
Majesty’s Government’s response to the protests.
First, a little over a year ago the Islamic Republic of Iran was
elected to a four-year term on the UN Commission on the Status of
Women. I understand that His Majesty’s Government have a policy
of not commenting on UN elections conducted by secret ballot.
However, noting the extreme behaviour of the Iranian security
forces to women and young girls that I raised earlier, do His
Majesty’s Government have any plans to raise this matter with the
UN? What is the point of being in the UN if these things are not
raised?
Secondly, senior political figures and clerics, such as Ali
Larijani and Ayatollah Alavi Boroujerdi, have come out in support
of the protesters, criticising their Government’s hard-line
stance towards them. What steps will His Majesty’s Government be
taking to enter discussions with sympathetic politicians and
religious leaders as we try to raise the plight of these women
and hopefully, by the grace of God, bring it to a close?
2.32pm
(Con)
My Lords, I pay tribute to my local bishop, the right reverend
Prelate the , for obtaining this
important debate. I wish the new Minister well on his debut.
It is often said that fact is stranger than fiction. To follow
the right reverend Prelate’s words, it is hard to believe that on
25 March 2022 Iran began a four-year term on the Commission on
the Status of Women, the UN’s top women’s rights body. I want to
go one stage further than the right reverend Prelate. Commending
the women for their bravery and courage is absolutely right, but
it is just words. Talk is not enough, so let us act—and I think
we can act. Can the Minister advise me on whether the UK can take
a lead at the UN and ensure that Iran is immediately suspended
and removed as a member of the UN Commission on the Status of
Women? It is impossible to understand how it can be on it. I urge
the Minister to take that to the department. Let us lead—and this
we can do.
In this Chamber, I have been consistently critical of the Iranian
regime and have called for the proscription of the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps several times. The US State Department
designated the IRGC as a terrorist organisation in April 2019,
adding it to a list of 67 other terrorist organisations,
including Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which the UK has recently
proscribed. This past July, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee
in the other place named Hossein Taeb, a former head of
intelligence in the IRGC, as part of a group of 10 Iranians who
played a large role in the arrest and intimidation of Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe. Despite this, the IRGC as an entity has been
not been proscribed and Taeb has not been designated under our
Magnitsky sanctions.
Furthermore, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry has accused Iran of
supplying Russia with weapons to help Putin’s illegal war effort
against Ukraine. US reports have suggested that Iranian trainers
from the IRGC have been deployed to a base in Crimea to teach
Russian personnel how to operate the systems.
Last week, the Iranian Foreign Ministry announced a package of
sanctions in retaliation for human rights sanctions that our
Government imposed on Iran on 10 October. The Iranians singled
out nine individuals in the UK who have been
blacklisted—including myself. What an honour: banned from a
country that attacks its own people, beating women and children
because they dare to protest against backwards and oppressive
laws. This is a country where peaceful protesters are dragged and
beaten to death; a country that shuts down its own internet so
the rest of the world cannot bear witness to the murderous
brutality of the IRGC, while providing weapons and training to
support Putin’s criminal acts in Ukraine. To be banned from such
a country for standing up against its leadership, terrorist
actions and treatment of its own people is indeed an honour.
I will continue to speak out against the Iranian regime and
specifically its terrorist arm, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps, for their inhumane activity on the ground in Iran and
their acts of terror internationally. I urge my new noble friend
the Minister to persuade those who are shamefully blocking the
proscription of the IRGC to take immediate action and designate
them to proscribe the murderous Iranian revolutionary guard.
2.36pm
(Lab)
My Lords, I too thank the right reverend Prelate for bringing
this important debate to our attention and for highlighting the
terrible catalogue of inhuman activities by the regime. If we are
to have any influence at all on the obscene activities of the
Iranian regime, now is the time for us to act. The UK will have a
major impact if it goes ahead now and proscribes the brutal
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps at a time when those brave
women, and men, are taking to the streets in one of the biggest
demonstrations the regime has ever faced. Of course, our
Government have rightly been quick to sanction the so-called
morality police—what a misnomer; they would be better named the
mortality police—but that is not enough.
It is the revolutionary guard, that draconian instrument of the
regime, that callously murdered Mahsa Amini in custody for simply
casting off her hijab. It is now murderously persecuting those
hordes of protesting Iranians who have taken to the streets in
unprecedented numbers. It represses the population without mercy
and kills women and children with impunity, as we have heard. Of
course, this latest outrage simply broke the dam of pent-up rage,
after years of persecution of any Iranian who dared to challenge
the regime. Examples of death by public hanging of so many, often
very young, are so common that they are scarcely commented upon
in the western media.
That the people of Iran are suffering terribly is no secret, yet
we in Europe and America have until recently been willing to turn
a blind eye to this unconscionable behaviour to try to do a deal
through the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in the vain hope
that this would curtail Iran’s plan to gain nuclear weapons. It
seems to have mattered little that Iran has cynically violated
any possible agreement, continuing along the path to a bomb
completely undeterred by these never-ending discussions, now
mainly defunct. The west’s conditions in the JCPOA say nothing
about the treatment of Iran’s own citizens, nor the revolutionary
guard’s activities outside Iran; about its sponsorship of
terrorism abroad; about its support for Hezbollah in Lebanon,
where it is completely destabilising that country, and in Gaza,
where Hamas is preventing any form of stability. And here in the
UK, it is spreading its venomous extremist messages wherever it
can.
There are many examples of its influence, from the attempted
kidnapping of the Iranian women’s activist Masih Alinejad in New
York to the IRGC-inspired extremism which led to the attack on
Salman Rushdie. That Iran’s regime is a danger to the world and
its own citizens is beyond dispute, to say nothing of its obvious
repeated intentions to wipe Israel off the
map. That is always there, but it is perhaps for another
debate.
Now is the time for our new Conservative leadership to show some
resolve. Proscribe the horrific Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
and withdraw completely from the fruitless and moribund JCPOA
discussions, or strengthen them by including reference to the
IRGC’s terrorist activities at home and abroad. It may not be
possible for us to be directly involved in regime change, but we
can at least support those brave Iranian citizens who are
desperate to do so.
2.40pm
(GP)
My Lords, I congratulate the right reverend Prelate the on bringing this debate
to the House, particularly as it is the 40th day since the death
of Mahsa Amini. Her death has resonated throughout the world. She
is an incredible martyr for something that ought never to have
taken place, something we perhaps allowed in some small way to
happen in Iran. I also welcome the new boy on the block, the
noble Lord, , and hope he enjoys his post;
it might be quite demanding.
I suspect that here in this Chamber we all support the women of
Iran. We understand that they are morally justified in what they
are doing, which is a peaceful but very loud and vigorous
protest. They are incredibly brave in the face of a repressive,
dangerous and cruel regime. I would like to ask what we can do
about it and what the Government have started to do. The right
reverend Prelate said that there is not much we can do, but there
probably is a lot—including proscribing the Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps. I have a few more ideas if the Government would like
some of them.
I would like to know how this affects the nuclear deal with Iran.
The deal is that they do not try for an increase in enriched
uranium, and we do not put sanctions in place. However, given the
current human rights abuses, will the Government continue to
express full support for restoring the Joint Comprehensive Plan
of Action, which was mentioned earlier, or will they stand with
the women of Iran who are fighting for freedom? Will there be
additional targeted sanctions of any kind to show that the UK is
a defender of human rights and freedom for all in society? With
inflation in Iran of 40%, it is likely that some of the richest
Iranians will start to bring their private assets to Britain. Has
any thought been given to imposing measures on the assets of the
richest, and perhaps those in power, who might be banking with
us? While we are at it, could we also demand that Iran stops
supplying Russia with drones? That might be a step forward for
world peace.
I feel we have missed our moment. We could have led the world in
shouting about this and putting in sanctions first. The USA has
done it. We could all have been proud of that, if we had led the
way. As with all decisions in government, at some point we have
to decide if we want to protect economic gain, which in this case
would mean abandoning the women, or to protect democracy, which
in this case would mean supporting them.
I would like to repeat the shouts of Iran’s women: “Women, Life,
Freedom”—“Zan, Zendagi, Azadi.”
2.44pm
(CB)
My Lords, I know Iran. The people of Persia are considered one of
the great civilizations, but the world of Iran is a complex world
and it is moving into a darker place. The Iranian people and the
free world have been taken hostage—hijacked in effect—for over 40
years. My remarks are for the 80 million Iranians who have been
directly affected and are being misled. For how much longer is
their leadership’s behaviour to be allowed to continue? The
corrupt leadership of thugs does not represent its people; it
represents an inexcusable form of governance.
In yesteryear, I had been briefed by the appropriate department
in Jerusalem and shown evidence of why Iran is a threat. Part of
that footage was devoted to the youth. We all know that change
can come only from within, and now it is the brave youth who must
be supported—how the tables have turned. I suggest
that Israel takes note: we
know its anxieties and remember that it was not so long ago that
Jews and Persians were so close. That world needs to be returned
to. Care in doing so, however, must ensure that this is not
perceived as pitting Judaism and Christianity against Islam.
Nevertheless, it is a form of cowardice not to be supportive of
those who are bravely defying this abhorrent regime, believing
that it is ostensibly safer for free people not to become
directly involved. That is a false illusion.
The leadership in Iran is reliant on the Revolutionary Guard and
has consequently become more assertive. But make no mistake that
there is one core fundamental: the language of power is all that
is understood. When faced with credible condemnation and
pressure, the leadership will buckle. The people of Iran need to
be given their freedom and to lead their lives in a world free of
tyranny. The world will be a safer and better place without the
current leadership in Iran. We must support the people of Iran.
There is no place in today’s world for the mullahs, and those who
support them, who lead for self-serving purposes only. My final
words are borrowed from a regional analyst friend: “It is about
time Iran had a taste of its own medicine”.
2.47pm
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, one ongoing issue in Iran that has received virtually
no publicity in this country or across the West over the last 20
years is the repeated action by trade unions and trade unionists
striking against the regime. For the last 20 years, that has been
a continuum. The action by the women and girls of Iran does not
come from nowhere; there has been, including increasingly in
recent years, major industrial protest—specifically political in
nature—directed against the regime. We hear little of it—only
bits come out. For example, in the last fortnight, the
co-ordinating council of teachers’ unions has highlighted what it
describes as systematic repression through the entry of military
and uniformed forces into schools. We also hear from the writers’
union, which explains how the spread of rumours and the
distortion of public opinion to thwart its efforts to tell the
truth is the current reality.
Intellectuals and the middle class are battling, but it is far
deeper and more worrisome to the regime than that. Ongoing in
recent weeks is the Mahmoodabad strike; the Teheran truck
drivers’ strike; the Isfahan stone factory workers’ strike of
thousands; and repeatedly and consistently, every single time,
the bus drivers’ strikes, bringing the country to a halt. There
is what the International Trade Union Confederation calls no
guarantee of workers’ rights in Iran—that is category 5, the
lowest category. Yet, as we saw in South Africa and in the
communist bloc, not least in Poland, trade unions are at the
front of taking on repressive regimes.
There is also the South Pars gas field strike and the Bushehr
petrochemical strike, as well as action at the Haft-Tappeh sugar
refinery, from the Hengam petrochemicals and Azar water workers,
at the Aidin chocolate factory in Tabriz, and from the 3,500
Ahvaz steel workers and the Neyriz Ghadir steel workers. I could
go on. Across Iran, now and repeatedly, industrial trade
unionists are striking at great risk. At Zahedan in the recent
fortnight 200 refinery workers were arrested for daring to strike
against the regime. This regime has no support among the working
classes; it uses repression and traditional style to hold back
the workers of Iran, who are demanding greater rights and greater
pay in traditional ways—but specifically they are protesting
against this regime.
Yet there are those in this country—I am going to name only one,
but there are others—who act as excusers for the Iranian regime,
some on a weekly basis. Let me give one example: a professor
recently removed from Bristol University, Professor David Miller,
supported by around 200 academics from across our universities.
He is an apologist and a sycophant to Iran. This is a man who
says that Mahsa Amini was not murdered and that it was an Israeli
and US-inspired insurrection. Do those 200 or 300 academics
across our universities now have the decency to withdraw their
support from Miller and support the workers of Iran?
Another example that I want to quickly highlight is that of Elnaz
Rekabi, the sports climber. Has she or has she not been stopped
from climbing and forced to live in isolation at home, as is
reported, because her hair came out when she was climbing for
Iran in national competition? Bouldering is an Olympic sport.
Will GB Climbing and the British Mountaineering Council, of which
I am a member, and the International Climbing and Mountaineering
Federation join in demanding an Olympic removal of Iran if this
potential Olympian is not seen in competitive sport in the next
year? Iran should not be in Paris or Los Angeles—if she does not
compete, Iran should be thrown out of the Olympics.
2.53pm
(LD)
My Lords, I thank the right reverend Prelate the for bringing this
Topical Question to debate for us. As he introduced it so well,
it is about a blend of our UK strategic interests and human
rights and freedom of speech for the people of Iran.
As the noble Viscount, Lord Waverley, indicated, our debate is
less about looking at Iran through the prism of its regime—and
therefore there is no question of our solidarity with people
within Iran—and more about questioning the tactics and brutality
of the regime. It is about highlighting in particular, as has
been remarked consistently in this short debate, the bravery of
women in Iran, and especially—it is what stands out—the young
women in Iran, criticising in schools the president in their
presence. There cannot be anything more brave than that. It
should be an inspiration to the whole world.
I welcome the Minister to his position again. Since he answered
his first Question yesterday on the trade deal, he is a slightly
more experienced maiden, but I look forward to his maiden speech.
His predecessor was exemplary in reaching out to the Opposition
Front Benches and keeping us informed and I welcome the
commitment he gave yesterday evening that he would carry that on.
Because our time is limited, I shall just ask a number of
questions, a couple of which were raised so well by the noble
Baroness, Lady Jones, and I welcome her contribution.
First, can the Minister give an update on payments with regard to
what Iran had claimed? As the Minister will know from the
briefing he will have received, these were part of some of our
debates about Nazanin. We very much welcome her return, of
course, but it was linked by some to payment of what the UK was
claimed to owe Iran. If he can update us on the processing of
that, it would be helpful.
Secondly, on the global human rights sanctions regime, these
Benches welcome the Government putting financial sanctions in
place on 85 individuals, on the cyber police and on the morality
police. The cyber police sanctions have not been mentioned so
far, but they are critical in this and I welcome them. I know
that the Minister will have been briefed to say that the
Government do not comment on considerations for future
sanctions—so he does not need to spend time saying that; we know
that—but I impress on him, to add to the comments of the noble
Baroness, Lady Jones, that we now need to be in a position where
we are preparing an audit of the property and investments of
those within the regime in Iran and whether any UK interests have
invested in any of the state-owned enterprises linked to the
Iranian Government. That audit needs to be carried out and the
City of London needs to be aware of it, because we should not be
in a situation where we have delays like those we have seen with
other regimes, such as Belarus and Russia, where kleptocrats have
used the London laundromat approach. We need clarity that the
Government are preparing that with the City of London.
My other point is linked to a question I asked in the Chamber a
number of weeks ago about the BBC Persian Radio service. The BBC
has been in touch with me and I am grateful for its briefing. It
is horrific that the BBC staff and families of staff are being
persecuted and harassed by authorities in Iran, and that the BBC
itself is now under sanction as a criminal entity. That is
unacceptable. Will the Government make sure that there is no
platform, radio or online, which can be easily reduced by the
Iranian regime? I believe that emergency funding should be made
available to BBC World Service so that radio service resilience
can be provided.
Finally, as requested, I hope the Minister will be able to give
an update on the JCPOA. I see the noble Lord, , in his place. We have had many
debates on the JCPOA. It is timely that the Minister can give an
update on what British policy is in the current context. If the
Minister can respond to these points, I would be grateful.
2.59pm
(Lab)
My Lords, I too start by saying that I look forward to the maiden
speech of the noble Lord, . It is a big step to enter
the House as a Minister and I welcome him to his position. I hope
he plays a full role and engages, as the noble Lord, Lord Purvis,
reiterated, across the House in the best traditions of the Lords.
I also welcome the right reverend Prelate initiating this debate,
which is important at this time. I echo his comments about
maintaining pressure to release those foreign detainees,
including Morad, about whom we have repeatedly asked for more
information in this Chamber. I welcome that commitment and I hope
the Minister can respond on those specific issues.
The tragic death of Mahsa Amini is both disgraceful and
unacceptable, and the UK must continue to support calls for a
transparent, impartial investigation into the circumstances that
led to it. The situation is increasingly alarming; reports
continue of disproportionate force by the Iranian authorities,
including as protests spread to universities and border
communities, as illustrated by the right reverend Prelate. As the
UK is a supporter of human rights, we must continue to maintain
calls to protect the people of Iran’s fundamental freedom to live
as they choose.
Like other noble Lords, I fully support the Government’s decision
to sanction those responsible for these human rights abuses,
using our powers under the human rights sanctions. I am also
pleased that the Foreign Secretary summoned the most senior
Iranian official in the UK, but I urge the Minister to explore
further options to hold the Iranian Government to account.
First, can the Minister update the House on steps taken at the UN
to raise the recent violations? What steps has the UK taken with
our European partners since the joint statement on 13 October?
Secondly, as illustrated by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, will he
explain the Government’s decision to cut funding to BBC Persian
Radio? At this vital moment, the United Kingdom should be
standing by the protesters, not eliminating a vital source of
impartial information. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Purvis,
that we should be looking at special ways to push that service
out into the communities.
Finally, I echo something I have repeated before: the important
role of civil society in Iran, which is continually under attack.
How are we working with our allies to promote global civil
society organisations, including interfaith groups? One thing the
community in Iran needs to hear is that there is a tradition of
Islam that does not support the Government’s actions. There are
traditions of faiths working together. We need to ensure that we
amplify that. Supporting the BBC World Service is one way, but
there are others. I hope the Minister will commit to doing
so.
3.03pm
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office and Department of
International Trade ( of Lainston) (Con) (Maiden
Speech)
My Lords, before I begin, to follow on from yesterday’s
declaration of interests, I have interests in financial services
groups that have investments in the region, although I do not
think there is anything specific relating to this debate.
It is a great honour to close this debate and address this House
for my maiden speech—or, as has been pointed out, almost maiden
speech. I thank all those who have kindly offered me advice and
friendship since I joined this House, in particular my
supporters: my father-in-law and, if I may use the term, my noble
kinsman , whom I sadly cannot
see here today, who while introducing me tapped me on the
shoulder and whispered, “I thought I’d be long dead before you
sat in a place like this”—I am not sure if that was a desire or
an expectation; and the noble Lord, , in whose honour I will have to
declare the interest that, like so many people of West Berkshire,
I am his tenant. Indeed, the noble Lord has already informed me
that he is one of the few residents of the county who is not
one.
I also give my warmest thanks, love and appreciation to my wife
Alice and my children Eliza, Alexander and Victor—so-called
because he was born on 6 May 2010, the day the Conservatives won
their historic first victory of many. I also thank my friends and
colleagues who have supported me all my life, at least up until
this point. Finally, I owe immense thanks to our doorkeepers,
clerks, police officers and all the staff, who have been
unbelievably kind to me since I arrived earlier this week. This
is a very special place, made so by all noble Lords and the
people who support us in our efforts.
As an investor and entrepreneur, I am incredibly fortunate to be
speaking from the Front Bench as Minister for Investment at the
magnificent Department for International Trade. I have put my
heart and soul into building businesses across the UK, Asia and
America. I want to bring my understanding of just how hard it is
being a business partner to this House and to this Government. I
will effectively be the UK’s chief salesman, telling everyone
about our fabulous firms, people and institutions, and doing my
utmost to deliver investment to allow our creatives and
risk-takers to flourish.
This job also allows me to pursue my other life’s mission:
promoting global free trade. For me, two parties coming together
to voluntarily trade goods and services for their mutual benefit
is the most magical of exchanges. I believe this kind of
trade—free from coercion or corruption—is the greatest force of
progress that mankind has ever known. To quote Libanius, the
fourth-century philosopher:
“And He created commerce so that all may enjoy the fruits of the
earth, no matter where produced”.
It was my ancestor the first Baron Somers who wrote our Bill of
Rights in 1689. It is my firm belief that today, with
globalisation in retreat and autocracy on the rise, the tenets he
espoused could not be more relevant. The freedom from government
interference, the protection of private property and the rule of
law—these are values that underpin free trade, free enterprise
and free societies, and these are the values I will make it my
mission to champion here as I fight for our freedoms against
protectionism and autocracy.
This fight for freedom brings me now to the subject of today’s
debate: the United Kingdom’s response to the Iranian regime’s
brutal repression of peaceful protest. I thank the right reverend
Prelate the for tabling this
Question and his dedication to seeking the betterment of peoples’
lives around the world. I thank all noble Lords for their
contributions to this incredibly informed debate, and I will try
to answer as many of their questions as I can in my comments.
We are gathered today in this House just 41 days after the death
of Mahsa Zhina Amini following her arrest by Iran’s so-called
morality police. These are 41 days in which the Iranian people
have sent their strongest message yet that their human rights
must be respected by the Iranian authorities. The violence
levelled at protestors in Iran by the security forces is truly
shocking. It is abhorrent that Iran has responded with such
unconscionable violence, as well as mass arrests, internet
shutdowns and media blackouts. This is no way for any Government
to treat its own people. The international community must shine a
light on the situation in Iran and hold the Iranian Government to
account for the serious human rights violations they are
committing. I think we are all agreed on that.
In relation to the question from the noble Lord, Lord Collins, I
say that Iran has yesterday returned British citizen Morad Tahbaz
to Evin prison. Mr Tahbaz’s horrendous ordeal has gone on long
enough. As my noble friend the Minister for the Middle East,
South Asia and the United Nations said in a statement
yesterday:
“We call on Iran to release Morad back to his family in Tehran
immediately. Iran must stop unfairly detaining British and other
nationals, and we will continue to work closely with our US
partners to hold Iran to account”.
The noble Lord, , raised a question relating Elnaz
Rekabi. Forgive me, but it would be unreasonable to go into
specific details about some of the other individuals raised.
However, we are certainly concerned to hear the reports that she
has been put under house arrest. I am sure there will be
follow-up comments on that—I appreciate them.
Since Mahsa Amini’s death, protests have continued across Iran on
a daily basis. The longevity alone of the protests marks them out
as the most significant we have seen in Iran for decades and I
note the comments from the noble Lord, , about the bravery of the trade
union movement in standing up to this repressive regime. What we
are seeing now is exceptional, but I am grateful for his
comments.
The protests are an authentic expression of the wishes of
ordinary Iranians to enjoy fundamental freedoms. It is too soon
to predict their long-term impact, but some facts are clear: Iran
must stop blaming external actors for the unrest, listen to its
people and stop committing violence against them. Let us be under
no illusion: the Iranian authorities’ response to these peaceful
protests and the people’s legitimate desires for fundamental
freedoms, such as the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of
expression, have been completely indefensible. NGOs have
estimated over 200 deaths, at least 23 of which were children,
but I gather from some of the comments today that that figure may
tragically be higher. The Iranian authorities’ use of live
ammunition against demonstrators is truly barbaric. The mass
arrest of protestors and the restriction of internet access are
sadly typical of this oppressive regime and its flagrant
disregard for human rights. These are not the actions of a
Government listening to their people. Iran’s leaders can and must
now choose a more peaceful path.
Noble Lords raised a number of points relating to the UN
commission on women and other actions that the Government can
take, so I will now go through what we have been doing, to
reassure your Lordships that we have been responding with the
utmost vigour. The UK has joined the international community in
swift and robust condemnation of Iran’s actions. We have, as the
right reverend Prelate said, raised our voice. At the 51st
session of the Human Rights Council, His Majesty’s Ambassador
called on Iran to carry out
independent, transparent investigations into the circumstances of
Mahsa Amini’s death. Our global human rights ambassador, Rita
French, condemned the repression of women in Iran and the
violence faced by Iranians who stand up for their fundamental
right to freedom of expression. I take note of the various
comments made about Iran sitting on the commission for women’s
rights. While we do not comment on the election processes in the
United Nations, clearly we are working with our international
partners to seek a resolution there.
In his statement on the death of Mahsa Amini, my noble friend
Lord Ahmad urged the Iranian Government to undertake a
transparent and accountable investigation and to respect the
right of peaceful assembly. On 3 October, the Foreign Secretary
summoned Iran’s most senior diplomat in the UK to the Foreign,
Commonwealth and Development Office to condemn the Iranian
authorities’ violent crackdown on protest. We urged Iran to
respect the right to peaceful assembly, exercise restraint in
policing and release unfairly detained protestors.
On 10 October, the UK sanctioned the morality police—this is
important, because a number of noble Lords commented on various
sanctions and the options therein—and some of its leaders, as
well as five other leading political and security officials
responsible for serious human rights violations in Iran. All are
now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. In total, the UK
now maintains close to 300 sanctions designations against Iran in
relation to human rights, nuclear proliferation and terrorism.
The IRGC is a sanctioned organisation, and a number of the
individuals involved in that grouping are also sanctioned. We
will not comment on potential sanctions or other actions taken,
because, clearly, it would allow those people to avoid them in
advance. Noble Lords will understand the discretion I have to
employ there. Our sanctions will ensure that the individuals
designated cannot travel to the UK and that all their assets held
in the UK will be frozen. As the Foreign Secretary has stated on
many occasions, the UK has sent a clear message that we stand
with the brave Iranian people in their struggle for fundamental
rights.
Lastly, the JCPOA and our determination to try to reduce nuclear
weapons proliferation in Iran and its development of a nuclear
weapon were raised continually. Clearly, the JCPOA has not
developed in the way we intended it to. Our view is that we are
addressing our options with our international partners, and I
hope that noble Lords will support the Government in trying to
come to a conclusion on this, and certainly continue to work
towards a sensible solution.
In conclusion, the demonstrations following the death of Mahsa
Amini have left the world in awe. The courage of the Iranian
people is striking. They have for too long lived under the threat
of detention, violence or harassment for what they wear or how
they express themselves. The people are speaking their truth to
power, encapsulated in three powerful words: women, life and
freedom. Universal human rights know not of geographical
boundaries, so it is our hope that these demonstrations will lead
to the advancement of human rights in Iran and safer, freer lives
for the Iranian people. The UK’s position is clear: through our
words, sanctions and work with international partners, we will
hold Iran to account and defend the rights of its people.
|
