The following Answer to an Urgent Question was given in the House
of Commons on Monday 25 October.
“It is indefensible and unacceptable that Iran has rejected
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s appeal against the new charges made
against her. We continue to call on Iran to let her return home
to the UK immediately. On 22 September, the Foreign Secretary
spoke to the Iranian Foreign Minister to make clear our deep
concern about the ongoing situation of Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe
alongside the continued detention of Anoosheh Ashoori and Morad
Tahbaz. Iran must release British dual nationals who have been
arbitrarily detained so that they can return home.
The Foreign Secretary spoke to Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe and
Richard Ratcliffe on 16 and 17 October respectively. Earlier this
month, I spoke to the families of arbitrarily detained dual
British nationals and reiterated that the UK Government, from the
Prime Minister down, remain fully committed to doing everything
we can to help them to return home. We also called for
humanitarian treatment of detained British dual nationals. Their
welfare remains a top priority for us. We lobby on health
concerns and mistreatment allegations whenever we have specific
concerns or a family member brings issues to our attention. We
call on the Iranian Government immediately to allow health
professionals into Evin prison to assess the situation of dual
British nationals incarcerated there. We continue to raise their
cases at the most senior levels and discuss them at every
opportunity with our Iranian counterparts. Our ambassador in
Tehran regularly raises our dual national detainees with the
Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Foreign, Commonwealth
and Development Office provides consular assistance to the
families of British dual nationals detained in Iran wherever they
seek our support.
The UK Government continue to engage with international partners
and directly with the Government of Iran on a full range of
issues of interest to the UK. Our priorities remain to prevent
Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability, to promote
stability and security in the region and to secure the full
release of our dual national detainees. I can assure this House
that the safety and welfare of all British dual nationals
detained in Iran remains a top priority for the UK Government. We
will continue to raise our concerns with our Iranian
interlocutors at every level and we will not stop until those who
have been detained unjustly are at home with their loved
ones.”
15:51:00
(Lab)
On Monday, Nazanin’s husband Richard began a hunger strike
outside the FCDO. I hope that as many noble Lords as possible
from across the House will visit him if they have not already
done so. When I met him on Monday, he repeated his description of
the Government’s policy on Nazanin as a policy of waiting. Does
the noble Lord think that is correct? In 2019 the Government
granted Nazanin diplomatic protection. Will the noble Lord
explain what this has achieved? What precisely the United Kingdom
is doing, with our international allies, to bring an end to state
hostage-taking by Iran?
The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office () (Con)
My Lords, first, I think that I speak for all noble Lords in
saying that we stand very much with all families experiencing the
dreadful situation of their loved ones being detained in Iran.
The Government will continue to do all we can to ensure that not
only are representations made but that we seek their earliest
release from Iran, so that they can be reunited with their
families.
On the noble Lord’s specific point, we are very much aware of
Richard Radcliffe and his situation. As the noble Lord said, he
has begun a hunger strike. Tomorrow my right honourable friend
the Foreign Secretary will meet Richard to discuss the issue, and
I know that she has been very seized with the situation since her
appointment.
With regard to the diplomatic protection, as the noble Lord will
know, that move raised the issue to formal recognition in terms
of state representation. Nevertheless, Iran still fails to
recognise Nazanin’s dual nationality status.
(LD)
I agree with the noble Lord in encouraging noble Lords to meet
Richard, as I have done in advance of this Question. In last
week’s debate initiated by the noble Lord, , I raised Iran’s contravention of
the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment. A statement by the previous
Foreign Secretary indicated that it was UK policy that Iran was
in contravention of the convention. The concern is that with
every new Foreign Secretary—and there have been five since
Nazanin’s detention—officials wipe the slate clean. When the
Foreign Secretary meets Richard, will she commit to press Iran to
investigate this case formally, which is its duty under this
convention?
(Con)
My Lords, I hear what the noble Lord says. On my return from your
Lordships’ House, I will make sure that this issue is raised
specifically in the briefing that is prepared.
(Con)
My Lords, is it not the case that the Iranian authorities
maintain that we owe them a very large sum of money relating to a
cancelled contract some years ago? What is the Government’s
position on that matter, and does it play a part in these
discussions?
(Con)
My Lords, one thing that we have been clear on is that this
situation—the debt referred to by my noble friend—is a live issue
bilaterally between the United Kingdom and Iran. On the debt
itself, as I said last week during the debate on a QSD asked by
the noble Lord, , there has been an adjournment on
this case. I cannot go into the details, but the next hearing on
this case and its details will be in April 2022. We have been
clear what needs to happen is that Nazanin and others who are
being held should be returned.
(Lab)
My Lords, if the Iranians believe that we owe them £400 million,
and believe that we have promised that that money will be paid,
without excusing the Iranian Government for any of things they
are doing to the hostages, surely the Iranians have a sense that
we have not been straight with them. Can we look at this £400
million again? Never mind the legal action, which has just been
delayed. The Urgent Question repeat uses fine language but does
not add up to anything at all. I put this to the Minister: there
is a belief that there is more going on than we know about and
that there is some reason why the Government keep hedging their
bets and not getting on with it. What is it?
(Con)
My Lords, as I said, I cannot go into the case itself;
notwithstanding his comments about the sensitivity of commenting
on an ongoing legal hearing, I am sure that the noble Lord will
appreciate that I have shared as much as I can on the details of
the case.
On what we are doing to seek Nazanin’s release and that of
others, I assure the noble Lord that we are working in diplomatic
channels and with international partners. I mentioned the Human
Rights Council last week. We are raising these issues
consistently and directly with the Iranians as well.
(LD)
My Lords, this sorry saga has been going on for more than five
years. Each time, the Government’s involvement seems to have made
matters worse, not better. Will they recognise that the dual
nationality issue is an excuse by Iran? This woman is a British
citizen and should expect to be supported by the British
Government. How come we have a claim for a global Britain but are
unable to find a solution to release this shamefully wronged
British citizen?
(Con)
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord that the Government
have not prioritised this case and others. We continue to do so.
Of course, there is a relationship with Iran on wider issues as
well where, again, the Government have taken what I believe to be
the right line, particularly in connection with the JCPOA. On
this case and others, we will do all we can to ensure an early
release. As far as the wider issues are concerned, they play into
the general narrative but we are very much focused on individual
cases.
(Con)
My Lords, can the Minister say whether it has been possible to
make a reasoned assessment of Nazanin’s health and whether she
has been able to access any medical care?
(Con)
My Lords, my noble friend raises an important point. We are
consistently in touch with Nazanin directly. Indeed, my right
honourable friend the Foreign Secretary spoke to her on the 16th
of this month. We are in direct contact with her, Richard
Ratcliffe and other families to ensure that the issues my noble
friend raises around health and general welfare are being
addressed.
(CB)
My Lords, if it is true that the Government owe Iran some money,
is it not possible to have some form of compromise and a
discussion with government lawyers to see whether something can
be paid to it? The detail of whether there should be interest and
that sort of thing can go through the laborious process until
next April. Give Iran some money and see whether it does any
good.
(Con)
My Lords, as ever, the noble and learned Baroness puts forward a
practical solution. However, she will know better than me the
specific issues around the legality and sensitivity of ongoing
legal proceedings. For me to comment any further would not be
appropriate.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, having watched this cruel saga play out over the years,
it is obvious that the Iranian regime—or the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard, to be more accurate—is playing mind games
with a British citizen who is being used as a political pawn.
Does the Minister agree that this matter must be completely
divorced from any financial debt that may or may not have been
incurred by different Governments of the day? If the UK
Government accept liability in principle, surely the matter can
now be settled amicably without either side losing face and the
torture of a mother and her family can be brought to an end.
(Con)
The noble Lord articulates the position very clearly; we should
not focus on seeking to join the two issues. We do not believe
that there is any reason for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe to be
detained in Iran, which is why we continue to implore the
Iranians to ensure her early release and continue to campaign on
that very principle.
(Con)
My Lords, we cannot join these two things together, but this is
about a hostage who has been taken. If she is released for some
money, there will be another issue and the Iranians will take
another hostage for another reason.
(Con)
My noble friend articulates the position very well and I agree
with him.
(Con)
My Lords, while I accept what my noble friend has just said,
there is a debt and there is a hostage. Following on from the
point made by the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss,
can we not lodge this money with the United Nations, so that we
acknowledge there is a debt and when she has been released, as
she should be immediately on humanitarian grounds, we can go
forward?
(Con)
My Lords, again I hear what my noble friend has said but I cannot
say any more than I have already on the case and legal
proceedings.
(CB)
My Lords, when he was Foreign Secretary, the man who is now our
Prime Minister misspoke about the reason for
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe being
in Iran. Should he not now take personal responsibility for
getting her out, as those words undoubtedly worsened her
position?
(Con)
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister takes the
issue of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and
indeed all detainees in Iran, very seriously and is personally
engaging on this issue.
