Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) (Lab) I beg to move, That this
House has considered the case of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe. It is a
pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. A lot of
Members will be well versed with the details of my constituent’s
case. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been unlawfully detained in
Iran for nearly six years now, separated from her young daughter
and her family. She served the first five years of her first
sentence and...Request free trial
(Hampstead and Kilburn)
(Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the case of Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. A
lot of Members will be well versed with the details of my
constituent’s case. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been unlawfully
detained in Iran for nearly six years now, separated from her
young daughter and her family. She served the first five years of
her first sentence and was then put under house arrest at her
parents’ house, wearing an ankle tag. She then faced another
charge and was sentenced to another year, and then a year’s
travel ban—effectively, two more years of being separated from
her family in London.
Nazanin appealed the sentence of her second case, which was
rejected. At that time, her husband, Richard Ratcliffe, decided
to go on hunger strike. I say to Members across the House that no
one goes on hunger strike on a whim. Richard Ratcliffe went on
hunger strike because he felt that he had no other option, and
that this was his last resort. He went on hunger strike for three
weeks outside the Foreign Office in order to capture the
attention of those in the upper echelons of Government, because
he does not think that they are helping with his wife’s plight. I
am disappointed that in the three weeks during which Richard was
starving himself outside the Foreign Office, the Prime Minister
of our country did not come to visit him.
(Batley and Spen) (Lab)
Has the Prime Minister met my hon. Friend and Richard in recent
years? What has his personal intervention been in this case? Does
he keep in touch with my hon. Friend? Has he shown the leadership
and compassion needed in this case?
The Prime Minister did meet us shortly after becoming Prime
Minister, but he has not done so in recent years. After dealing
with this case for nearly six years, having tabled eight urgent
questions in the House, and having dealt with five Foreign
Secretaries and countless Ministers, I think it is high time that
the Prime Minister, knowing the details, got involved
properly.
(Cardiff South and Penarth)
(Lab/Co-op)
These sentiments are shared entirely by my constituents. Like
many Members here today, I have been overwhelmed by messages of
support for Nazanin, Richard and the whole family. All urge the
Government to act and to show solidarity with the whole family in
wanting Nazanin to be freed. Could my hon. Friend please convey
that to the family?
Richard Ratcliffe is in the Gallery and will have heard that
message directly from my hon. Friend. This campaign has touched
everyone, regardless of where they are in the country. A lot of
Members will know that my constituency of Hampstead and Kilburn
is one of affluence and deprivation. When I am in Hampstead, Emma
Thompson will stop me and ask, “Have you got Nazanin home?” When
I am campaigning in the south Kilburn estates, people will open
the door and say, “What good are you if you haven’t got that poor
woman home yet?” The campaign has touched everyone; my hon.
Friend is right to make that point.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I commend the hon. Lady for her excellent campaign. She deserves
every credit. The USA has agreed to pay around $1.4 billion in
moneys owed to Iran, even though it supports the sanctions
against Iran. Does she agree that the UK should follow the USA’s
decision by paying the £400 million, thereby ensuring Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s immediate release?
The hon. Gentleman has appeared at every single debate we have
had on Nazanin. I thank him for all his efforts in the campaign.
I will come to the debt and getting our constituents back
home.
It goes without saying that the reason why my constituent is
imprisoned in Iran is because of the Iranian regime. It is
because of them that my constituent is away from her young
family. But in six years of dealing with our Government, I have
become increasingly frustrated that Ministers are ignoring the
elephant in the room, which is the fact that this case is now
linked to the £400 million that this country owes Iran. That is
not something I want to deal with, but it is the reality of the
situation. It is becoming obvious that the Iranians see the £400
million that we owe as a pre-condition to releasing Nazanin.
(North Thanet) (Con)
I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing the debate. She said
“constituents” and she is absolutely right. Nobody in this room
has anything but compassion for Richard Ratcliffe and his family,
but there are other constituents who are dual nationals who also
need the help of the British Government. Does she agree that they
are living under the most awful regime and that has to be a
priority?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I will
mention the other dual nationals who are imprisoned in Iran. As
he says, Nazanin is not the only one.
I want to go back to the question of the debt before I take
another intervention. When Nazanin was captured and put in
solitary confinement in Evin prison, she was told by prison
guards that the reason she was being held was because of our
failure to pay this historic debt. Former President Rouhani told
our Prime Minister in March this year that accelerating the
payment on the debt would solve a lot of the problems in the
bilateral relationship between Iran and our country. Iran’s
former Foreign Minister Zarif also cited the debt in an article.
There is no question but that the debt is linked to Nazanin’s
case.
We have seen that it is not a coincidence: every time there is
any movement on the IMS court hearing, there is some movement on
Nazanin’s case. When the IMS court hearing was delayed earlier
this year, Nazanin received a call a week later saying, “Come to
court, because we need to speak to you.” There is no coincidence,
because the two are linked. What frustrates me so much is that
every time I speak to the Government, they seem to bury their
head in the sand and deny that there is a link.
(West
Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
I thank the hon. Member for securing the debate. I wonder whether
they, like me, believe that for cases such as Nazanin’s and that
of my constituent Jagtar Singh Johal, having a fully resourced
consular support service that enables diplomats rather than
hindering them, so that families can have confidence in that
consular support, is the least that the Government can provide
for them and for the rest of us?
I fully agree. One of the biggest disappointments has been that
British officials will not go to the court hearings for Nazanin
when she is called back to court. That is something we have been
asking for again and again.
(Reading East) (Lab)
The hon. Member for West Dunbartonshire () makes an important
point. I also wish to offer my support to the family—to Richard
and Nazanin—at this very difficult time. My hon. Friend makes an
excellent point about the level of involvement of the Prime
Minister and those at senior levels in the current
Administration. Will she comment on how that compares and
contrasts with the level of support from previous Prime
Ministers?
I will come to the topic of the three former Foreign Secretaries
and what they have said. In terms of Prime Ministers, one of the
problems that I have always had with this case is that it needs
intervention from the Prime Minister, but it has not felt as
though the three Prime Ministers that we have dealt with have
given us that option. Bear in mind that I have asked Prime
Minister’s questions to all of them and turned up at No. 10 to
knock on their door every single time there has been a new Prime
Minister.
I will take an intervention in a minute, but I want to make a
little more progress.
The Leader of the House told me in March that Iran was holding us
to ransom. He said that
“the UK Government do not pay for the release of
hostages”—[Official Report, 11 March 2021; Vol. 690, c.
1014.]
I see the logic of this principle but, in the truest form of the
word, this is not a ransom; it is a debt. It is a debt that we as
a country owe Iran. It was ruled in international tribunals that
we owe Iran this money. Anyone hiding behind the fact that it is
a ransom is wrong. They need to see the ruling in international
courts to understand that we owe this money.
(Chingford and Woodford
Green) (Con)
I thank the hon. Lady for giving way and congratulate her on
securing the debate. I will also take this opportunity to say
exactly how brave Richard has been throughout this ordeal, on
behalf of his whole family. He is here today. As I am a co-chair
of the all-party parliamentary group on Magnitsky sanctions, I
wonder whether the hon. Lady might ask the Government this
question in due course: how is it that the United States,
Australia, France and Germany have all now successfully
negotiated the release of their citizens who were arbitrarily
detained in Iran, yet we have made no progress? Perhaps she could
challenge the Government on that.
I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention. He is
absolutely right, because those countries have brought their
people home. Indeed, Australia actually managed to bring
Nazanin’s prison cellmate back home, while Nazanin herself is
still in Iran. So I hope that the Minister will pay attention to
what the right hon. Member has just said, because he makes a very
important point.
Regarding the debt, I will come back to something that the
Secretary of State for Defence has said:
“With regard to IMS Ltd and the outstanding legal dispute the
government acknowledges there is a debt to be paid and continues
to explore every legal avenue for the lawful discharge of that
debt.”
So if anyone questions whether we owe the money, we definitely
owe the money, as has been stated several times. It is not a
ransom; it is a debt that we as a country should lawfully pay
back to Iran.
(Rutherglen and Hamilton
West) (Ind)
Nuclear negotiations restart on 29 November and there is a risk
that both Nazanin’s case and Anousheh Ashouri’s case will be used
as leverage. The negotiations are complex and we cannot risk
these cases becoming entangled in them. Does the hon. Lady agree
that the Government need to have a plan in place to ensure that
these cases do not get caught up in the nuclear negotiations?
I thank the hon. Member for her intervention. I think that
Members from across the House can probably hear the frustration
in my voice, because I am very worried that my constituent is
getting caught up in this overall universal problem and becoming
a pawn between the two countries. Her husband has maintained from
day one that she is a pawn caught between the two countries,
which is unacceptable.
(North Antrim) (DUP)
Will the hon. Member give way?
I will make just a bit more progress before giving way again.
One of the things that I have been told by different Foreign
Office Ministers, off and on the record, is that there are
practical issues with actually paying the debt. However, if
anyone has read the news this week, they will have seen that
three former Foreign Secretaries have come out and said that
there are ways of paying the debt without busting sanctions and
without angering our western allies. For me the question is this:
if we all know that the debt exists, and we have ways of paying
it, what is the explanation for why we have not paid it?
(Cardiff West) (Lab)
I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. Earlier
the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green ( ) made the point about the
UK’s seeming inability to get our people who are held captive
overseas released. I know that she is aware of the case of Luke
Symons, my constituent who is held by the Houthis. Similarly,
other countries seem to have been able to get their people held
by them released. Does she think that there is something wrong in
the way the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is
approaching these cases?
That is the frustration that Nazanin expresses every time I speak
to her: that her Government are not doing enough for her as a
British citizen. The people she was in jail with are going home,
while she is still stuck there, missing out on her daughter’s
childhood.
Will the hon. Member give way?
The other point I will make—then I will take another
intervention—is that I do not think that as a country we can take
the moral high ground in relation to Iran and to Nazanin if we
are not following a legal ruling that says we owe Iran money.
(Belfast South) (SDLP)
I thank the hon. Member for her generosity in giving way. People
across south Belfast, and indeed across Northern Ireland, have
expressed their distress at the forced separation of a mother and
her young daughter. Does the hon. Member share my concern that
the failure that this family are experiencing is part of a
pattern of moral unseriousness and a lack of moral courage, which
is in very stark contrast to the steadfastness and bravery that
this family are somehow finding?
I agree with the hon. Member and thank her for her help in this
campaign. I repeat the point that several other Members have
already made, which is that this issue is not just about Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe; it is also about Anousheh Ashouri and Morad
Tahbaz.
(Lewisham East) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this essential debate. I also
thank her for mentioning my constituent Anousheh Ashouri, a
67-year-old man who is a father and a husband, and a British
citizen who is also locked up in the same prison as Nazanin. Does
my hon. Friend agree that it is a grotesque crime for Iran to
hold hostages but that it is also a crime for our country not to
settle any debts that are possibly keeping the hostages
there?
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and applaud all the
work she is doing to try to free her constituent. It is sad that
we have had to bond over this topic, with both of us having
constituents who are imprisoned in Iran and separated from their
families.
We need to pay our debt and challenge Iran, calling it out for
what it is—challenging the perpetrators. But until we pay our
debt, they will not even come to the negotiating table and we
cannot deal with them.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
In February, the Minister assured us that the UK Government were
using every tool in their diplomatic arsenal and doing everything
they could to get Nazanin home. Does the hon. Lady want to ask
the Minister, as I do, what is missing from those diplomatic
tools, because so far they have failed to bring anything
about?
What I would say is that in the nearly six years that Richard
Ratcliffe and I have been campaigned to get Nazanin home, we have
heard every platitude. We have heard about no stones being
unturned. We have heard about how this issue is top of the
Government’s agenda. We know it is their highest priority, but
warm words are not enough any more. After six years, I want to
see my constituent come home. I do not want to hear from the
Government the same rhetoric over and over again, which is what
we are hearing.
(Hornsey and Wood Green)
(Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for giving way.
I want to put on the record my heartfelt feelings on behalf of
all the people in Hornsey and Wood Green. I also want to point
out how long it has taken to resolve the case of my constituent
Aras Amiri, who was a member of the British Council—she was
almost a Foreign Office employee. There is a feeling that we all
think this is inevitable, but we have to get some energy and some
push in order to get Nazanin home.
That was a tragic case, and I know my hon. Friend fought very
hard for her constituent.
Before I get to a series of questions that I want to ask the
Minister, I would like to give the opportunity for anyone else to
intervene.
I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing a debate on this serious
matter. Is not the elephant in the room the very obvious fact
that the current incumbent in Downing Street said something that
was a monumental cock-up, which has had a human cost? It is now
up to the Government to fix that immediately, without further
delay.
The truth is that the Prime Minister made an enormous blunder
when giving evidence to Parliament, and I hope he feels
responsible for that. As a result, I hope he takes some action to
bring my constituent home.
(Glasgow East) (SNP)
On behalf of the people in Glasgow East, I extend my best wishes
to Richard, Nazanin and Gabriella. The hon. Member for Hornsey
and Wood Green () mentioned the need to get
energy into the effort to get Nazanin home. It is widely accepted
in the House that the current Foreign Secretary is always full of
energy, so can the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () tell us what the new Foreign
Secretary has done to try to progress the case of Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe?
I am appreciative of the fact that the new Foreign Secretary
called me as soon as she was in post and said that she was
dealing with Nazanin. She also called us in for a meeting, along
with Richard Ratcliffe and members of his family. I am grateful
that she seems to be acting on the issue, but I will judge her on
what she does at the end. As I say, we have dealt with five
Foreign Secretaries and none of them has brought Nazanin home
yet. It is time the Foreign Secretary took some action
properly.
I have to go on to my questions, but I will take some very short
interventions.
(Twickenham) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Lady on her campaign. Given that Nazanin
has been granted diplomatic protection, how does the hon. Lady
feel that the Government are treating her case differently from
other consular cases? Does she think that Anousheh Ashouri should
also be granted diplomatic protection?
I give way to the hon. Gentleman.
(Chesterfield) (Lab)
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend on behalf of the people of
Chesterfield. She is absolutely inspirational in the campaign
that she is fighting, but I know it will mean something to her
only when she gets Nazanin home. Will she tell us a bit more
about the barbaric Iranian regime and the way it has operated?
What is her message to the regime?
I give way again.
(Weaver Vale) (Lab)
The people of Weaver Vale send their love and compassion to
Nazanin, Richard and Gabriella, and to my hon. Friend, who is a
real champion of this issue. It is now important that the Foreign
Secretary and the Prime Minister do the right thing.
I have rarely seen such a crowded Westminster Hall debate. It
demonstrates the amount of affection and concern that we have for
Nazanin. I think Richard will report that back to his wife, so I
thank hon. Members.
I will pick up on diplomatic protection. It is right to say that
diplomatic protection was given to Nazanin by the former Foreign
Secretary. We in the campaign do not feel that the Government
have used that enough, because it became a state-to-state dispute
the moment that diplomatic protection was given. One of the
questions I have for the Minister is whether he will do something
to use the diplomatic protection and try to get Nazanin home.
I will get to my questions, if that is okay. I am conscious of
the time.
(in the Chair)
If Members have intervened on the hon. Lady already, please do
not do so again. I think the hon. Lady was going to give way to
Mr MacNeil and then Ms Vaz.
(Na h-Eileanan an
Iar) (SNP)
If we were able to engineer a vote today on the payment of the
debt, it would be unanimous. Is there a way that we can engineer
a vote in the main Chamber on the debt, so that we add pressure
on the Government to pay the debt and get Nazanin home?
(in the Chair)
Ms Vaz, you are not going to get in to speak. Do you have an
intervention to make?
(Walsall South) (Lab)
Very briefly, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and
Kilburn () and wish her and my hon.
Friend the Member for Lewisham East () well. The Ratcliffe family,
and Anousheh Ashouri, Morad Tahbaz, who was born in Hammersmith
Hospital, and Mehran Raoof are all British citizens. The Hague
convention applies to them; they can get diplomatic protection.
If the Minister would only look at the Hague convention, he would
find that it takes other factors into account. More importantly,
why do we not harness the spirit of Lewis Hamilton at the
Brazilian grand prix, and realise that there is not a single
obstacle that is going to stop us bringing home our Nazanin,
Anousheh, Morad and Mehran?
I give way to the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and
Strathspey ()
(Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch
and Strathspey) (SNP)
May I put it on the record that the people of Inverness, Nairn,
Badenoch and Strathspey are fully behind Nazanin being freed?
Would the hon. Lady agree that the UK Government must now act
without any fear of upsetting allies such as the United States,
and do what must be done to free Nazanin now?
I absolutely agree. I will ask the Minister a series of
questions, and then I know that there are lots of hon. Members
who want to speak.
Why will the Government not acknowledge that Nazanin is a
hostage, and challenge Iran’s hostage-taking with sanctions or
legal action? Will the Minister set out exactly what practical
and legal issues he believes stand in the way of resolving the
International Military Services debt, so that these can be
properly scrutinised? The Government have long accepted that they
owe the debt as a matter of international law. Do the Government
think that they are entitled to ignore their legal obligations
and the rule of law? Have the Government made a specific offer to
Iran to discharge the debt through humanitarian assistance, such
as the provision of medicine? Have the Government sought or
received assurance from the US, in the form of a comfort letter,
that no bank will be sanctioned or fined for facilitating the
payment of the debt? Finally, a Foreign Office Minister, of Richmond Park, said in
the Lords yesterday that,
“were the Government to pay hundreds of millions of pounds to the
Iranian Government, that would undoubtedly be seen as payment for
a hostage situation.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 15
November 2021; Vol. 816, c. 18.]
Is that the view of the Government?
(in the Chair)
Colleagues, many of you are not going to get called. I will give
those I do call three minutes, but if you speak for less, more
people will get in. Please stop taking photographs; you know that
you are not meant to take photographs.
14:53:00
(Beckenham) (Con)
I will focus on the money that we owe Iran for the tanks that we
never delivered even though the Shah’s regime had paid for them
before the Iranian revolution of 1979. The United States was in a
similar position to us, and apparently owed $1.7 billion to the
Iranian regime. However, it was reported that the Obama
Administration returned that money, via Switzerland and in other
than US currency, on 17 January 2016, 22 January 2016 and 5
February 2016. On 17 January, by chance, four US prisoners were
released from Iranian jails. The Obama Administration, of course,
denied that there was any connection.
On 30 June 2016, I asked the Secretary of State for Defence how
much the MOD owed Iran for Chieftain tanks that were never
delivered. The answer that I received was that the MOD did not
dispute that the money was owed, but that EU sanctions stopped
repayment. There is no doubt that we owe Iran £400 million, and
it should be given back. With luck, if we repay the money, the
supreme leader, who is the only person who will make the
decision, may be magnanimous enough to order the release of not
just Nazanin but all the other British prisoners held in jail in
Iran. As we have always owed that money, I can live with the idea
that we have not been blackmailed into returning £400 million for
military equipment that we never delivered.
14:55:00
(Edinburgh South West)
(SNP)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () on securing the debate and on
her hard work on this serious issue. I pay tribute to her
constituent, who is sitting behind me. Along with many other MPs,
I was privileged to visit him during his hunger strike.
The facts are stark. A British citizen has been detained for five
and a half years on unsubstantiated allegations of spying.
Successive Conservative Foreign Secretaries have failed to secure
her freedom. No less than three distinguished former Foreign
Secretaries have said that the debt to Iran should be paid so
that Nazanin can come home.
I will keep my comments brief. There have been some good articles
about the case in the newspapers over the weekend, particularly
The Times and The Observer. I am grateful to them for informing
the questions that I will ask of the Minister.
First, why is the Prime Minister still refusing to settle the
acknowledged £400 million debt to Iran incurred before the ’79
revolution? Why has he let that unjustified failure to pay up
bedevil the talks? Why are the Government saying that bank
transfer restrictions arising from international sanctions
prevent payment? Is that not untrue? Surely the Government can
find legal ways around rules that they helped to create. As we
have already heard, the United States settled a similar debt in
return for the release of four American hostages.
(Carmarthen East and
Dinefwr) (Ind)
The hon. and learned Lady is presenting a forensic case in her
usual style. Does she agree with the International Observatory of
Human Rights that one way around that issue might be to use
humanitarian aid?
Yes, indeed. I will come to that.
Secondly, why has the Prime Minister failed to honour the
personal promise to pay the debt that he made as Foreign
Secretary to Mr Ratcliffe and, indirectly, to the Iranians? That
promise was a blatant attempt to compensate for the disastrous
blunder that we have heard about when he misrepresented Nazanin’s
activities in Tehran. Why will the Prime Minister not keep his
word and his promises, particularly when the life of a young
mother is at stake?
Thirdly, why are the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary
persisting with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office’s non-confrontational softly-softly approach? Let us be
honest: the Government are not exactly known for their
non-confrontational softly-softly approach when it comes to the
European Union or the vexed question of the north of Ireland. In
this respect, their approach has failed completely. It is not
about paying a ransom; it is about the credibility of the British
Government abroad and the confidence of British citizens in their
Government. When will the Prime Minister take a tougher line with
Iran than with the European Union?
14:58:00
(Tatton) (Con)
I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn
() for securing this important
debate and for her unyielding determination to keep the issue in
the public’s consciousness and alive in Parliament. Nazanin and
her family have been subjected to the utmost cruelty—a
never-ending emotional torture. Just when they think that freedom
is within their grasp, it is ripped away again. Where does
somebody go from here and what do they do?
Richard asked himself that question. He has raised the issue with
a series of Secretaries of State and Prime Ministers. He has
involved the media in the UK and what independent voices there
are in Tehran. When I spoke to him when I visited him a few times
in the last couple of weeks, he said that the only thing he felt
he could now do was starve himself. I ask how hopeless, powerless
and desperate someone must be to feel that the only thing they
can do is go on hunger strike—endure 21 days of not eating, while
at the same time being prepared to see people, greet people and
do interviews, explaining again and again what their situation
is, in the hope that something will budge.
Throughout, Richard has remained utterly gracious. He has asked
himself, “How do I break this stalemate? What do I do to make
sure that my wife, and other British citizens in the same
situation, are not forgotten? How do I make sure that their lives
do not disappear in a pile of paperwork pushed to the back of a
desk?” Nazanin has endured the most profound mental and physical
trauma throughout her imprisonment, tortuous heartbreak caused by
prolonged separation from her loved ones. She has been subjected
to prolonged periods of solitary confinement, vastly inadequate
living conditions, and traumatising interrogation. Her treatment
has been utterly appalling.
How do we end this nightmare? So far, diplomatic routes have not
worked. The sticking point is a £400 million historical debt
relating to a sale of Chieftain tanks, paid for but never
received, dating back to the 1970s. To date, there have been
conversations, discussions, deliberations, articles and newspaper
coverage, but words alone are no longer enough: it is time for
action. Can the Minister today let us know what that action will
be, so that Nazanin can come home where she rightly belongs, with
her family?
15:01:00
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Charles. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Kilburn
() on securing today’s debate,
and on the relentless tenacity she has shown in highlighting the
injustice of Nazanin’s incarceration at every opportunity. I of
course wish to pay tribute to Richard Ratcliffe as well: I have
had the privilege of meeting him on a number of occasions, and
each time he has been a picture of calm, dignity and resolve.
Goodness knows what he must be feeling inside, yet despite that
unimaginable torment, he has always conducted himself in a way
that is a credit to himself and to Nazanin. To have gone on
hunger strike for three weeks, having done so previously and
suffered the agonies of it already, and knowing the damage it can
do to a person, shows the level of desperation he must feel at a
seemingly intractable situation in which hope can be cruelly
snatched away. That must be the hardest thing of all to take.
Many of my constituents have been in touch to register their
support for the release of Nazanin. Understandably, they have
been moved by the plight of a mother separated from her husband
and child, but they have also been motivated to contact me
because of what they see as a failure of the UK Government to
take decisive action. We all know that diplomacy is a fine art
and that nuance is required, but there is no room for doubt here:
this is an injustice and an intolerable situation, and every
opportunity should be taken to right this wrong. Many of my
constituents believe, as I do and as we have heard today, that
more can be done. We have heard some examples of what that might
look like.
The entire history of this situation does not need repeating, but
it is worth repeating that Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been
imprisoned for crimes that she did not commit. I use the word
“crimes” with a heavy caveat: we should resist talking about this
situation in terms of crimes committed, because this is not a
criminal justice matter but a political one. She is a victim of
the long-standing dispute between Iran and this country over the
£400 million it says is owed by the UK Government. It seems to me
that until we have a public acknowledgment that that dispute lies
at the root of this situation, we shall struggle to move forward,
so will we get such an acknowledgment today from the Minister?
Will that then lead to an approach based on Nazanin effectively
being a hostage, for whom a ransom is sought?
We can be in no doubt that the Government’s approach thus far has
been ineffective, and in some instances counterproductive. I
noted with interest that the Government will not disclose how
many dual nationals currently find themselves in the same
position. One can probably conclude from that fact that there are
others, which prompts the question: where does this end? How many
more innocent people could find themselves pawns in a game that
they have no control over, and which their own Government seem
unwilling to take steps to resolve? I also ask the Minister what
efforts are being made to gather international support, and what
other diplomatic and financial levers can be pulled to bring
about a satisfactory resolution, because we cannot accept that no
more can be done. We cannot accept that this is just the way it
is, or that such a gross injustice can be tolerated, and the
support that we are seeing from Members today shows that this
Parliament does not accept that nothing more can be done.
15:04:00
(South West Surrey) (Con)
I salute the quiet dignity of Richard Ratcliffe, who is one of
the bravest people I have ever met. I thank the hon. Member for
Hampstead and Kilburn () for her campaigning. We are
from different parties, but she makes me proud to be a Member of
this House.
How do we get Nazanin, Anousheh, Morad and Mehran home? If it
were ransom money, heartbreaking though it is, we should not pay
it, because it would only lead to more hostages being taken. But
it is not ransom money; it is a historical debt that we owe Iran.
The debt should not be linked to this case, but it is, and that
is why we should pay it. It is not easy to do because of
sanctions, but with political will it can be done. No country can
have a veto over a sovereign Britain deciding to pay its debt,
not least the United States, because it did exactly the same
thing under President Obama.
When the right hon. Gentleman was Foreign Secretary, were they
advised by senior civil servants that this money would not be
paid, and what was the answer in Cabinet?
I believe that during the period when I was Foreign Secretary,
the decision whether we owed that money was settled. There was an
understanding, confirmed publicly by the Defence Secretary, that
the money is owed and should be paid. It was going to take, and
will take, a real effort to deal with the practicalities. But the
Americans managed it and we can most certainly manage it, if
necessary by getting an RAF plane to fly gold over to Tehran.
There are lots of ways of doing it.
Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
I will make some progress. One other thing needs to happen to
ensure that Nazanin and the other dual nationals can come home:
we must completely de-link their fates from the outcome of the
Vienna talks on the joint comprehensive plan of action. Just as
we tell Iran it should not make anyone a pawn in a diplomatic
game, we too must live by those words and ensure they are not
being used in any way by any country to put pressure on Iran to
sign up to that deal. Their fates should be completely
separate.
This is a terrible tragedy. It is a shame not just on Iran but on
Britain that it has taken us five and a half years to solve it.
There must be two outcomes: first, the reuniting of all the
families who have been separated by this vile detention in Iran,
including Nazanin’s family; and secondly, the legacy of this
tragedy must be the end of the vile practice of hostage
diplomacy, which must be consigned back to the 19th century where
it belongs. Britain needs to learn from this to lead a diplomatic
initiative with other countries, so that if someone is taken
hostage from one country, we treat it as if they had been taken
hostage from any of us. We act accordingly; we deter it and it
never happens again.
15:07:00
(Cardiff North) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and
Kilburn () on securing this important
debate and on her hard work so far.
Unjustly convicted, denied basic human rights and
tortured—Richard Ratcliffe is rightly desperate as his wife has
to undergo this cruel ordeal. It is heartbreaking that, once
again, Richard has had to resort to the life-threatening action
of a hunger strike. I visited Richard on day 16 of his strike.
The pain in his eyes was harrowing. He just wants the Government
to act. To go 21 days without food is testament to Richard’s love
for his wife and his resolution to get the attention this issue
rightly needs. The risks and symptoms of going on the strike are
huge. After two weeks, people on hunger strike will have
difficulty standing. They suffer severe dizziness, sluggishness
and loss of co-ordination. After two or three weeks, it can
result in severe neurological problems—vision loss and lack of
motor skills. That is the love that Richard has shown for his
wife.
Nazanin’s reaction to her husband’s strike brought me to tears at
the weekend. She was worried sick about her husband. My heart
breaks that this family is caught up in this dispute between two
states. I want to address Nazanin directly, if she is able to see
this debate. Nazanin, you can see the love and support right
across this Parliament. I want to assure you that we, as
representatives up and down this country, will not stop until you
are free, home and reunited with your family and daughter. I pay
tribute to the whole family, who are always there to support
Richard, Gabriella and Nazanin. Richard’s sister Rachel lives in
Cardiff and is always there for them, always looking for the
positive and determined to bring a positive outcome.
Let us be clear: the blame lies firmly at the Prime Minister’s
door. He could resolve this issue by paying the debt to Iran, yet
he refuses to do so. On Monday, told peers that paying the debt owed by the UK
would be seen as payment for a hostage, and would not be in the
Government’s interest. Well, Zac, tell that to this family.
Paying a debt is not paying a ransom. It has been ordered by an
international court. It is clear this case could have been
resolved many months ago. As well as Nazanin, we must not forget
Anousheh, Morad and Mehran—we must bring them home too. I hope
this debate is a turning point, and that the Government will do
everything in their power to bring them home.
15:11:00
(Kenilworth and Southam)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I
join the tributes to Richard Ratcliffe—it is great to see that he
is able to join us—and to his entire family, some of whom live in
my constituency, whose resilience and bravery have been truly
remarkable during this long period. I also join the tributes to
the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn (), whose campaigning has been
exemplary; many of us have been delighted to assist her in
that.
I will make two points in the time available to me about the
linkage of debt repayment to the detention of UK nationals and
about the sanctions regime. First, I understand entirely and
agree with the Government’s rejection of any suggestion by Iran
that there is a connection between the repayment of a decades-old
commercial debt and the release of UK citizens. However, I urge
the Minister and his colleagues not to be hamstrung by what I
might call the mirror image problem. Failing to repay a debt that
would otherwise be repayable for fear of it being linked to the
release of UK detainees is, in itself, to make a linkage that the
Government have been at pains to say does not exist. If the debt
should be repaid—and it seems clear that it should, subject to
the remaining legal proceedings—then it should be repaid.
The UK’s adherence to standards of behaviour that states should
maintain—standards which we argue Iran is not maintaining—demands
that the debt be repaid promptly. How such a repayment is
perceived should not, as a matter of principle, prevent us from
making it.
(Central Ayrshire)
(SNP)
Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the failure
to pay an acknowledged debt creates a fig leaf for the Iranian
Government to hide behind? It is not a matter of it being
connected; it is an obstruction to things moving forward.
I understand entirely the point made by the hon. Lady. However,
as I say, I do not think it is necessary to accept any
linkage—positive or negative, by the Iranians or by the UK—to
justify the decision to repay a debt that is legally repayable.
We should do that for its own reasons and for its own sake,
regardless of what else may be happening.
That brings me to the issue of the sanctions regime as an
obstacle to repayment. It seems that we require more ingenuity
and more innovation. Certainly, in so far as my right hon. Friend
the Minister and his colleagues are concerned, I accept that a
huge amount of personal effort has been put into this case.
However, as others have said, something is still missing, and
that may be the innovation that we need to find.
The debt predates the sanctions regime that we see as an obstacle
to making the repayment. The purpose of that sanctions regime is
to prevent the enrichment of Iran during the course of the
sanctions period, but it does not seem to me that this repayment
would do that. The repayment of the debt would, in effect, put
Iran in the position it would have been in if the obligation had
been fulfilled when it should have been—well prior to the
beginning of the sanctions regime.
I know better than many that the Minister has access to some
exceptionally good lawyers in government. I hope that he is
instructing those lawyers to use their best imagination and
innovation to find ways of resolving this legal problem, because
that is what we will require to break this deadlock. I know he
will do his best, but I hope that he will give instructions to
apply innovation and ingenuity to the case, as well as simply
effort.
15:14:00
(Oxford West and Abingdon)
(LD)
May I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Hampstead and
Kilburn () on the way she has taken up
this cause? I also pay tribute to Richard Ratcliffe and his whole
family. The case has touched the hearts of the entire nation; 200
of my constituents have written in. I first heard of it when
Richard’s aunt Rosemary and Colin came to see me in my advice
surgery. As their MP at that moment, I said I would do everything
I could to help. Now, as Liberal Democrat spokesperson, I intend
to do the same.
It has been 2,000 days since the first detention. Since then,
there have been eight urgent questions and 125 written questions
from Members across the House. This is the third debate we have
had on this, and yet Nazanin is still not home. To add another
number, this is the fifth Foreign Secretary during that time, one
of whom became Prime Minister. While he was Foreign Secretary he
caused his own problems in this case. No offence to the Minister,
but I find it regrettable that we have yet to see the current
Foreign Secretary making statements to the House, because people
watch what happens in Parliament. If they indicate that it is a
priority, then I believe that that is what needs to happen.
(Richmond Park) (LD)
I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn
() for bringing the debate. Amid
this talk of international diplomacy, sanctions and payments,
when my constituents write to me about this case, they want to
express their huge sympathy for Richard and particularly his
daughter. Gabriella was just 22 months old when her mother was
imprisoned. When I had the pleasure of speaking to Richard
recently, he told me that now she is in the UK she is doing
really well at her school, but my heart goes out to them. I want
to express, on behalf of my constituents, how for them this is
really about reuniting a mother with her daughter.
(in the Chair)
I will not give another speaker another minute. You get one
injury-time minute; I will not give any more time if you give way
again. That goes for all colleagues.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park () says, the reason this has
touched the hearts of so many people is that they can imagine
being in this position.
The Government need to acknowledge that they are state
hostages—they have been taken hostage by the Iranian state—and
the problem is that there is no way to tackle this
internationally. Will the Minister update us on any progress on
the Foreign Affairs Committee recommendation to work with the
United Nations to create an internationally recognised definition
for state hostage-taking, so that this does not happen to other
families in future?
It is clear that the Government have got themselves into a bit of
a twist over what they think of the debt. Either it is linked or
it is not. In my view, it is not linked. We owe the debt; we
should pay the debt. It is now increasingly clear that there are
ways in which that could happen. I would say, call their bluff.
If the Iranian Government say that there is a debt, remove the
barrier. If they still do not release the hostages, we show the
Iranian Government for the wicked regime that it is. I do not see
a downside to doing that.
In closing, I simply want to express my wholehearted support for
anything the Government can do, so that this is the last debate
on this matter. A standing-room-only debate in Westminster Hall
shows that this Parliament cares. I know the Minister cares. I
would like to think that the Foreign Secretary and the Prime
Minister care, but I do know that the whole country cares. We
just want Nazanin home.
15:18:00
(Leeds North West)
(Lab/Co-op)
I have received more than 100 emails from constituents on this
matter, which shows that the case of Nazanin has touched the
hearts of the nation. It is all too common for people to claim
that the situation is Kafkaesque. To me, as an avid reader of
Kafka, the similarity between current cases and that of Josef K
in “The Trial” are all too apparent. Kafka himself described the
seeming basis of the Iranian judicial system when he wrote in
“The Trial” that
“it’s characteristic of this judicial system that a man is
condemned not only when he’s innocent but also in ignorance.”
Nazanin was charged and convicted without adequate representation
or due process—indeed, condemned in ignorance. Like other hon.
Members—particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and
Kilburn ()—I call on the Foreign
Secretary, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Minister
to press the Iranian Government on a number of issues that my
constituents, Amnesty International and I have raised. They
should press them to allow Nazanin any specialist medical care
she may require; apply without discrimination article 58 of the
Islamic penal code, which allows for someone to be conditionally
released after serving a third of their prison sentence and would
ensure the immediate release of Nazanin; ensure that Nazanin has
regular access to a lawyer of her choice; allow Nazanin to be in
contact with her family, including relatives abroad; and allow
her to communicate with British consular officials—although that
seems to be a contentious issue. I ask the Minister to respond to
those points.
The United Kingdom has a well-deserved international reputation
for its justice system. I hope that the Government will press for
the most basic justice in Iran for our citizens, whether they are
British citizens or dual citizens, and particularly for Nazanin.
It is clear from the contributions to this debate that that is
completely and utterly lacking.
Sir Charles, that was the speech I made in this place on 18 July
2017—word for word. In fact, it was my first speech in this
place. I ask the Minister: what has changed? The answer is very
little. What has the FCDO managed to do in the last four and a
half years? It has failed to secure Nazanin’s release. Four and a
half years of failure—a litany of failure at the Department’s
door. I call on the Minister to answer the points raised in this
debate and ensure that our debt to the Iranian Government is
repaid—a debt that was incurred not by the last Government or the
Government before them, but by the Government who were in power
when I was in nursery school. It is all the more important that
we ensure that the UK honours its international obligations. We
have failed to do so, and Nazanin is paying the price.
15:21:00
(Worsley and Eccles South)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles,
and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and
Kilburn () on securing this debate. I
know that she has been a great source of support for the
Ratcliffe family with her campaigning.
Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is being held as a political hostage in
Iran. Her life is being used as a bargaining chip in a diplomatic
game between Britain and Iran. In September, in order to mark
Nazanin’s 2,000th day in detention, Richard Ratcliffe and their
daughter Gabriella stood on a large snakes and ladders board in
Parliament Square that represented the ups and down, twists and
turns and false dawns that this family have endured. Gabriella
has been separated from her mother for most of her young life;
Richard has been separated from his wife. Nazanin has endured
terrible mistreatment, and Amnesty International rightly
describes her as a victim of torture.
As so many colleagues have done, I want to pay tribute to Richard
Ratcliffe and his unwavering determination to keep Nazanin’s case
at the top of the agenda. I have met him during both his first
and second hunger strikes to show him solidarity and support. The
strength, determination and dignity that he continues to show is
heroic. The Government’s response to the escalation of Nazanin’s
ordeal in Iran has rightly been described as pitiful. In May this
year, the former Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for
Esher and Walton (), said that Iran’s treatment
of Nazanin “amounts to torture” and that she is being
“held unlawfully…as a matter of international law.”
The strengthening of the language being used by Ministers is
welcome, but it is just words—the Government have to act. We need
to know why the Government are not acting to bring British
hostages home.
In her eighth urgent question on Nazanin’s case recently, my hon.
Friend the Member for Hampstead and Kilburn asked the Minister to
acknowledge that Nazanin is a hostage, to resolve the £400
million debt issue—I am pleased that so many Members have raised
that today—and to work to secure an end to hostage taking. The
shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Caerphilly (), rightly called for a
fundamental rethink of the Government’s approach to Nazanin. It
is long past time for an urgent intervention from the Prime
Minister, and for a new strategy to bring Nazanin home. The
strength of support in this standing-room only Westminster Hall
debate shows how much support there is in this House for that
urgent action.
(in the Chair)
I am going to annoy colleagues by dropping the speaking time to
two minutes, and none of you is going to get injury time for
interventions—I want to get you all in.
15:23:00
Brendan O'Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
I thank the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () for securing this debate.
Almost exactly a year ago, on 3 November 2020, the Minister stood
at the Dispatch Box and said that the Government,
“from the Prime Minister down, remain committed to doing
everything we can for her.”—[Official Report, 3 November 2020;
Vol. 683, c. 185.]
In the intervening 12 months, nothing has changed. Nazanin is no
closer to being released, her daughter is no nearer to being
reunited with her mother, and her husband, Richard, has been
forced into enduring yet another hunger strike to highlight her
case. Since her detention in April 2016, five Foreign Secretaries
have promised to explore every avenue, leave no stone unturned
and work tirelessly to secure her release. However, there has
been no progress.
Last year, when the Defence Secretary finally acknowledged that
there is a debt and a debt has to be repaid, it suddenly felt
like progress; it felt like perhaps there was a breakthrough. The
Minister himself admitted that they were exploring ways to repay
this debt.
A year ago it felt like negotiations were at a delicate stage,
when one misspoken word could set the whole process back. Yet
here we are, stuck in the same situation as we were then. The
inescapable conclusion must therefore be that this Government are
actually not serious about securing the release of Nazanin. They
have had so many chances, so many opportunities, and every single
one of them has been missed.
I visited Richard twice during his hunger strikes, and on both
occasions I was struck by his resolve to not sit meekly back and
wait for debates to take their course. The Government are letting
the people down; they are letting Nazanin down, and there is a
seven-year-old girl stuck in the middle. Minister, it is not good
enough. The public are not with you. Richard Ratcliffe is not
going to go away, and neither are his supporters in this
House.
15:25:00
(Barnsley Central) (Lab)
Like others, I would like to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the
Member for Hampstead and Kilburn (), not just for securing this
debate but for her tireless and unwavering commitment to her
constituents.
I have had the pleasure of meeting Richard on a number of
occasions: first, outside the Iranian embassy while on hunger
strike, and most recently outside the Foreign Office, also while
on hunger strike. I cannot begin to imagine the living hell he
has endured over the past five years, yet he has only ever acted
with the utmost dignity and decency. His dedication to his wife
and devotion to his family are a true inspiration. The pain, the
cruelty, and the unfairness to which Nazanin and many others have
been subjected is, sadly, all too routine for the Iranian regime.
Their fates should not be tied to geopolitics and arms deals, but
they are.
We are all well versed in the complexities of these cases, the
issues around breach of sanctions, arguments about interest, the
relationship with the US. However, one thing is clear: we do owe
that debt. Former Foreign Secretaries have said that we should
pay that debt. The Defence Secretary has said that we should pay
that debt. An international court has said that we should pay
that debt. The Prime Minister said that we would pay that debt.
There is a plan to free Nazanin, but the Government, for whatever
reason, have so far chosen not to pursue it. That has come at an
immeasurable cost to Nazanin, Richard, Gabriella and the many
other families affected.
I want to take this opportunity to urge the Minister—and I know
that he cares about these matters—to do whatever it takes to
prevent those who have been ripped apart from being kept apart
for much longer. No one should be forced to starve themselves
just to get their family back, and the last thing any of us want
is to see Richard on hunger strike again. The torment must not
continue, and we look to the Government to ensure that it does
not.
15:28:00
(Vauxhall)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I
would also like to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for
Hampstead and Kilburn () for securing this really
important debate.
Like many in this House, I visited Richard a couple of weeks ago
outside the Foreign Office, to see him and the measures he has
taken. It is something he should never have had to do. For five
and a half years, Nazanin and her young family have felt the
horrific pain of separation as a result of an unjust and
arbitrary detention. In May last year, the previous Foreign
Secretary outlined that the treatment of Nazanin “amounts to
torture”. I agree with this assessment.
Not only is Nazanin’s treatment unimaginably cruel, but our
position internationally is weakened if we do not appear to have
a diplomatic solution to look after our own citizens.
Unfortunately, the Government have not explored the full suite of
diplomatic levers to get her home, so I urge them to act today
and bring this case to the fore.
Last Christmas many of us spent a number of days away from our
families and loved ones. We felt the pain of not being able to
see them. This evening, after today’s debates, after we have all
voted and had dinner, we will all go home to our families. We
will tuck our children in. We will see our grandchildren. Nazanin
will not have that; Richard will not have that; Gabriella will
not have that. They have been going through this hell for years,
and it is time for it to end. I hope that today the Minster will
outline what key actions he will be leading to change the
situation.
15:29:00
(Cumbernauld, Kilsyth
and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I
also pay tribute to the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn
() for her tremendously
eloquent, passionate, and absolutely relentless pursuit of this
cause. She has been an absolute credit to her constituents. I too
am grateful for the opportunity to express my solidarity and
support for Nazanin and her family, and I do so on behalf of my
constituents in Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East. Many
of them have been in touch to express their shock at the
continuing torture that Nazanin endures as a hostage in Iran.
Like pretty much everyone else in the Chamber, I have had the
privilege—and it was a privilege—of meeting Richard a couple of
times at the Iranian embassy and then at the Foreign Office. It
is appalling that he has felt compelled to go on hunger strike
twice just to seek justice for his family. I hope it gives him
some heart to see the huge cross-party support on display
today.
First and foremost, our starting point is condemnation of the
Iranian regime. How it has acted and continues to act is
absolutely appalling, but today we have the opportunity to ask,
and we must ask, questions of the UK Government. My constituents
want to know what the strategy is. We almost need to ask whether
there is a strategy. I appreciate that there are no easy answers
to such situations, but we are entitled to see evidence of a
concerted strategy and one that is being pursued energetically.
Sadly, we are not convinced that that is the case.
It has been rightly asked why other countries have managed to
secure releases, but the UK has not. It is beyond doubt that it
is linked to the IMS debt that is legally due. Why is that not
being paid? Why are the Government unable even to speak about it
when previously they appeared very willing to make promises and
raise expectations?
While it is welcome that diplomat protection was granted to
Nazanin, how has it been used by the Government? What practical
difference has it made? If it is useful, will others be granted
the same status? These are just some of the questions that my
constituents and I would love to see answered, and we will
continue to push for answers along with colleagues across the
House.
15:31:00
(Newport West) (Lab)
I am grateful to be called to speak in the debate, and I hope
Richard can feel the support, warmth and love for him in the room
today. I want to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead
and Kilburn () for her tenacity and
commitment to the Zaghari-Ratcliffe family, as well as her
compassion. She has done so much to help and champion Nazanin’s
case. In my constituency of Newport West, this case is personal.
Richard Ratcliffe’s sister Rebecca is a constituent of mine, so I
was determined to speak today. I thank Rebecca for being in touch
ahead of the debate, and I thank all the people from across
Newport West who have written to me about Nazanin in recent
days.
There is no doubt that the failure to get Nazanin home with her
family and friends lies at the door of No. 10 Downing Street and
on the desk of this Prime Minister. I would be grateful if the
Minister could tell the House exactly what the Prime Minister has
done since July 2019 to get Nazanin home. Can he tell us
precisely how many meetings the Prime Minister has had on the
issue? Can he outline what efforts are being made to ensure
Nazanin is home in time for Christmas? Nazanin’s lovely husband
Richard has previously said that this Government’s inability to
secure his wife’s return home is “a failure of diplomacy”. What
does the Minister say to that?
I am here in the debate as a mother and a wife, but most
importantly as a parliamentarian. I feel a massive obligation to
Richard, Gabriella, Rebecca and all the family to press the
Minister in the strongest terms. So far this Government have
failed to get Nazanin home, so I urge the Minister to get back to
the Foreign Office and make it very clear to the Foreign
Secretary that this simply cannot go on. We need Nazanin home in
the UK, and we need her home now.
15:33:00
(Stirling) (SNP)
I can be brief because there is so much agreement across the
House on this point, but I put on the record the SNP’s deep
appreciation for the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn
() for bringing the debate
forward and her dogged pursuit of the issue. The SNP has a deep
respect for the profound dignity of Richard Ratcliffe, who is
obviously undergoing a living hell in this situation and deserves
the cross-party support that is evident today.
I also put on record that I do not think the Minister is part of
the problem. I think he has been diligent and is carrying the can
for a story of other people’s failures, because this is a story
of failure. The fact that Nazanin and others have not been
released when they are clearly political hostages is something
that should give us all deep cause for concern. It is up to all
of us to find solutions to the problem.
I have two concrete points that I will make and be grateful for a
response on. There is clearly agreement across the House that the
historical £400 million debt does need to be repaid. What
consideration have the Government given to translating that debt
into humanitarian aid or some sort of other payment that would be
a face-saving mechanism and also a more legally sound way of
making that payment? Surely that would move things on.
Parallel to that—because I do not think it should just be carrot;
I think we need some stick as well—what consideration have the
Government given to Magnitsky sanctions on individuals within the
Iranian regime to focus minds that this is an intolerable
situation that cannot stand? The Minister will get great support
across the House if he takes these measures forward—certainly
from the SNP. We want to see Nazanin and the other people home as
soon as possible.
15:34:00
(Islington North) (Ind)
I will be brief because I very much want to hear what the
Minister has to say in response. The whole House owes a debt to
the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () for the way she has pursued
this case for so long—I remember having a conversation with her
when Nazanin was first taken prisoner. We should all also admire
Richard for the way he has campaigned so effectively despite his
suffering. As a result of that, this is the largest Westminster
Hall turnout I can remember.
Obviously, the debt is owed and must be paid. If this country
wants respect for behaving in the proper manner, the debt should
be paid. It is not a negotiation; it is saying “This money is
owed. Let’s pay it.” I believe that would help to unlock a lot of
things, and help to open up a serious human rights dialogue with
Iran in the future, which is necessary. While we are here today,
concentrating on Nazanin’s release—which I completely support—I
would put on record that we should also be calling for the
release of Anousheh Ashouri, Mehran Raoof and Morad Tahbaz, who
are in a similar situation. I hope that, in the context of a
changed and renewed relationship with Iran, they would be
released.
I want to see decent human rights everywhere around the world,
and that obviously includes Iran. The people of Iran deserve
that. We should do everything we can to ensure that happens. I
hope the Minister can unlock this—maybe not completely today but
I hope it can be unlocked—and that he will have got the message
of the strength of feeling, from everybody across our House, for
her release.
(in the Chair)
Thank you, colleagues; we finish with 45 seconds to spare before
going to Front Bench wind-ups.
15:36:00
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles;
congratulations on chairing the debate so effectively. I also
congratulate the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () on giving so many people the
opportunity to share her passion and frustration over the
situation that Nazanin, Richard and Gabriella are all in. We all
express our personal solidarity with them today, along with that
of the thousands—probably tens or hundreds of thousands—of
constituents represented by the voices here.
I hope you will indulge me, Sir Charles, if I recognise the SNP
and Plaid Members who are either here or have been to visit
Richard, but have not been able to speak. Those are my hon.
Friends the Members for East Renfrewshire (), for Glasgow South West
(), for Linlithgow and East
Falkirk (), for Paisley and Renfrewshire
North (), for North Ayrshire and
Arran (), for Inverclyde (), for Aberdeen South (), for Glasgow Central
(), for Glasgow South
(), for Gordon
(), for Glasgow North West
(), for Ochil and South
Perthshire (), for Edinburgh East (), and for Edinburgh North
and Leith (). I also pay tribute to the
hon. Members for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (), for North East Fife (), for Ceredigion (), and for North Down (). We all believe that enough
is enough; it is time for action.
I first met Richard outside the Iranian embassy in 2019, and had
the privilege of meeting him again outside the Foreign,
Commonwealth and Development Office. He said it was one thing to
keep vigil outside the embassy of the country that is holding his
wife hostage—let us make no mistake; that is what Nazanin is, and
that is the first thing the Minister ought to put on record
today—but it is another to have to protest, and to go on hunger
strike, outside his own Government’s buildings because of their
inaction and unwillingness or inability to carry out their basic
duty of care for one of their own citizens.
The Government repeatedly say they are doing everything they can
but, as we have heard in this debate, that is patently not the
case, as the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd () and many others have
said. It is clear that the repayment of debt is a major issue,
and one that, if resolved, would bring about a major shift in
Iranian policy. The right hon. Member for South West Surrey
() has said as much, and others
have said how that could be done.
Sadly, the feedback that we have had—the result of the hunger
strike—was a series of increasingly frustrating meetings that
made the family and all campaigners feel that no progress is
being made. That is despite, as the right hon. Member for
Chingford and Woodford Green ( ) says, other countries in
recent years, including the United States, Australia, France and
Germany, all successfully negotiating the release of their
citizens who have been arbitrarily detained in Iran—but Britain
has not secured any releases.
We have also heard the cases of Anousheh Ashouri, Mehran Raoof
and Morad Tahbaz, all of whom, interestingly—my hon. Friend the
Member for Central Ayrshire (Dr Whitford) said this to me in
conversation—are dual nationals. I wonder if that makes the UK
Government feel they have some sort of diminished responsibility
for them, but a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for West
Dunbartonshire (), Jagtar Singh
Johal, remains incarcerated in India, so there has to be more;
more can be done and must be done.
Saying that diplomatic protection exists is one thing, but acting
on it is another. I pay tribute to the point made by the right
hon. Member for Walsall South (), and to the fact that, week
after week, she raised this at business questions. She did that
on behalf of all of us in the House who take an interest in that
case, and I do not think the Government would be as responsive if
not for her continuing to do that. That should be recognised.
Having the right to diplomatic protection means there should be a
right to private consular meetings and immediate access to
medical examination by an independent doctor. The Government
could issue a formal protest to the Iranian authorities; they
could summon the Iranian Ambassador—they summoned the French
Ambassador after all. They could propose to the Iranian
authorities the immediate commencement of formal negotiations to
resolve the dispute; they could send a detailed legal memorandum
to the Iranian authorities outlining the breaches of
international law arising from their detention of these British
nationals; and they should assert under international law their
right to provide assistance. Consular assistance is important to
all of us, including my hon. Friend the Member for Livingston
(). I hope there will be a
further debate on that in the Chamber very soon.
Throughout the Brexit campaign and, indeed, the independence
referendum campaign, we were always told how proud we should be
of our British passports. Well, the British passport says:
“Her Britannic Majesty’s Secretary of State Requests and requires
in the Name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow
the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and to afford
the bearer such assistance and protection as may be
necessary”.
That is what it says on Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s passport. The
question for the Government today is: what are they doing to make
it a reality?
15:41:00
(Caerphilly) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles.
Like other Members, I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for
Hampstead and Kilburn () on securing this debate and
on all her incredible work on behalf of her constituents. Nazanin
Zaghari-Ratcliffe has been held in Iran for five and a half
years. Like many here, I visited Richard, her husband, on two
occasions outside the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
Office and I want to pay tribute to him for his determination and
incredible resolve.
Many MPs and members of the public visited Richard during his
hunger strike. In his final speech outside the FCDO, looking back
at his time on hunger strike, he said that it had always been
important to him that everyone who visited him had been united
against injustice. We all pay tribute to Richard and, as others
have said, the fight will go on.
Last week, there were talks between the Government and the
Iranian deputy Foreign Minister. Unfortunately, yet again, there
was no progress. Nor has there been progress on the cases of
other dual nationals, including Anousheh Ashouri and Morad
Tahbaz. Both men are not in good health and, like Nazanin, are
being arbitrarily detained on spurious fabricated charges.
Anousheh Ashouri has not been granted diplomatic protection by
the UK Government and has not been allowed out of prison. Morad
Tahbaz was one of eight conservationists held by the Iranian
authorities. Amnesty International has said that there was
evidence that those eight had been tortured to obtain false
confessions.
Everyone here is united in believing that those detentions are
wrong and totally unjust. Surely, all this has gone on long
enough. For more than five years, British Governments have tried
and failed to secure the release of Nazanin and the other dual
nationals. If there has been a Government strategy during this
time, it has clearly failed.
A number of Members have mentioned the debt of £400 million which
Britain owes Iran. The money was paid to the United Kingdom by
Iran over 40 years ago for 1,500 Chieftain tanks which were never
delivered. The Government have said that bank transfer
transactions are not possible because of restrictions but, as we
all know, if the Government had the will to settle the debt, one
way or another the payment would be made.
I am not suggesting that any sort of ransom is paid by our
Government, but if the money is owed and there is no question but
that that is the case, the debt should be settled. In fact, when
the Prime Minister was Foreign Secretary, he made a promise to
Richard Ratcliffe that the debt would be paid. Significantly, in
2014, the current Defence Secretary described the unpaid debt as
“a sorry story”. He said the whole issue had been,
“marred by double dealing and obfuscation”.—[Official Report,
Westminster Hall, 11 March 2014; Vol. 577, c. 103WH.]
More recently, a number of distinguished former Foreign
Secretaries, Conservative and Labour, have said that the debt
should be paid. That is also the view of many international and
legal commentators, and it is our view as well. As the right hon.
Member for South West Surrey (), who is a former Foreign
Secretary, has said, this is not about paying a ransom. It is
about the UK’s credibility and doing what is right.
On numerous occasions, we have been told by the Government that
they are doing their best and that it would be unwise to rock the
boat, but it has to be said that the Government’s approach has
failed abysmally. Now is surely the time to take off the kid
gloves and to be vigorous and determined. Nazanin, Anousheh
Ashouri, Morad Tahbaz and all the dual nationals need to be
brought back home. The time for discreet pressure and cautious
words is long past. I look forward to hearing from the Minister
what plan of action the Government now have for bringing our
people home.
(in the Chair)
Minister, please leave about 90 seconds at the end, to allow Ms
Siddiq to wind up.
15:45:00
The Minister for the Middle East and North Africa ()
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Charles. I
am grateful to the hon. Member for Hampstead and Kilburn () for securing the debate and
for her tireless work in supporting Nazanin and Richard and in
championing this issue. Although there have been times when we
have disagreed, it is absolutely right that I put on the record
our respect for the hon. Lady’s passion.
The hon. Member for Lewisham East () mentioned her support for the
family of her constituent, and right hon. and hon. Members have
spoken about the work that they have done to support family
members of those in Iran. Other Members were unable to attend the
debate because of ministerial duties—I think particularly of my
hon. Friend the Member for North East Hampshire (Mr Jayawardena),
who speaks to me regularly about the situation and who is the
constituency MP for some of the members of Richard and Nazanin’s
family.
Like all Members of the House and everyone in the country, I have
huge sympathy for the families of those who are incarcerated in
Iran. The Government will continue to do everything we can to
resolve the situation in which they find themselves through no
fault of their own. The ongoing suffering that Iran is inflicting
on British dual nationals such as Anousheh Ashouri and Morad
Tahbaz is deeply distressing and rightly elicits very strong
feelings from hon. Members of different parties. I cannot
overstate the fact that the Government share that frustration and
are unwavering in our commitment to resolve this issue. We have
made it clear to the Iranian Government at every stage that we
expect Iran to release all British dual nationals and allow them
to return home to their families.
In today’s debate, we are focusing primarily on Nazanin, Richard
and Gabriella. The UK Government continue to work tirelessly to
secure Nazanin’s full, permanent release and ability to return
home to her family. As right hon. and hon. Members are aware,
Nazanin was released on furlough into the care of her parents in
Tehran in 2020, but the Iranian system has refused to let her
return home and has not left her alone during the period of
furlough. The Government have kept up our campaign of pressure on
the Iranian authorities throughout this time, and we will not
relent until she is fully and permanently released.
The completion of Nazanin’s first sentence and the removal of her
ankle tag in March 2021 should have been a time for happiness and
enabled Nazanin to be reunited with Richard and Gabriella.
Instead, Iran doubled down on its baseless charges against her.
We have raised our objections at every stage, and when those
charges were formalised at a court hearing in April, we summoned
the Iranians and demanded that she be released. When her appeal
was rejected in October and her sentence confirmed, we again
objected in the strongest terms and demanded her release. The
Foreign Secretary and this Government continue to be clear in our
discussions with Iran that under no circumstances should Nazanin
be returned to prison, that we would react strongly if she were
and that she should instead be allowed to return home to her
family immediately. The Foreign Secretary raised this point again
with Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian, most recently on 8
November. I raised this issue again with the Iranian Deputy
Foreign Minister Bagheri Kani on 11 November.
At every stage since Nazanin was detained, the UK Government have
carefully considered and assiduously pursued the courses of
action that we have assessed offer the best opportunity for
resolving this case. We have not pursued any course of action
that we believe would be counterproductive to the release and
return home of those in incarceration.
In March 2019, my right hon. Friend the Member for South West
Surrey () afforded diplomatic protection
to Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe. This formally raised it to a
state-to-state issue. At that time, he also recognised that that
was unlikely to yield immediate results, in part because Iran
does not recognise dual national status. Unfortunately, his
prediction at the time seems to have been proven right.
Since then, this Government have continued to take further action
where we judge it will help to secure full and permanent release.
We constantly review what other steps are possible, and we weigh
up all the diplomatic and legal tools available to secure her
release.
Will the Minister give way?
I will not. A number of hon. Members have raised the issue of the
IMS debt. As I have said to the House on a number of occasions,
the UK Government recognise that we have a duty to legally repay
this debt and we continue to explore all legal options to resolve
this 40-year-old case. [Interruption.] We have always been
clear.
I want to address the point that my right hon. Friend made and the way his words
have been interpreted, and I want to make the point absolutely
clear. We have always been clear that we do not accept British
dual nationals being used as diplomatic leverage. My right hon.
Friend the Member for South West Surrey made the point with
regard to the payment of the IMS debt that it is not easy, and he
is right.
This Government remain committed to doing everything we can to
explore all avenues to secure Nazanin’s release. We always act in
what we believe to be her best interests, with the ultimate aim
of securing her return home to be reunited with Richard and
Gabriella.
Since the family requested assistance from my Department,
officials have provided support to Nazanin’s family and are
available to be contacted 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Since Nazanin’s release on furlough, we have also been able to
talk directly to her through our ambassador in Tehran. We will
continue to offer that support until Nazanin is returned
home.
This Government and I have the utmost respect and admiration—I
have said this directly to him and I am more than happy to say
this publicly again— for Mr Ratcliffe’s stoicism, resolve and
commitment to securing Nazanin’s release and for the support of
his family. Mr Ratcliffe has met with the Foreign Secretary, with
me and with senior officials. We will continue to update him, and
the other families who have British dual nationals in
incarceration, whenever we have information on progress or
whenever we feel there is an update to do with the families in
detention.
Our concern for Nazanin and her family is mirrored by our concern
for all detained British nationals in Iran and their families,
wherever they may be. Their welfare remains a top priority for
this Government. Our ambassador in Tehran regularly lobbies on
mistreatment allegations and on their health, whenever we have
specific concerns or whenever a family member brings this issue
to our attention. This Government will continue to lobby for the
full and permanent release of those held in Iran.
On our international efforts, we will also collaborate with all
relevant international partners to seek to put an end to Iran’s
unacceptable practice of detaining foreign and dual nationals in
an attempt to find some kind of diplomatic leverage. As part of a
Canadian initiative on arbitrary detention, we are committed to
enhancing international co-operation to prevent any state from
arbitrarily detaining foreign nationals for coercive
purposes.
On the debt, which is obviously crucial—many Members raised it—as
the Minister accepts that it will be repaid, can he give any
indication of the Government’s timetable for the repayment of
that debt by whatever means?
It is not possible to give the hon. Gentleman details on that. As
I said, we recognise the legal duty to repay the debt, and we
will explore all legal options for doing so.
I once again express my deepest sympathies for Richard and his
family, and indeed to all the families of those incarcerated in
Iran. He has campaigned with such tireless commitment. The
Government will continue to push in all the ways we can.
The Minister mentioned Anousheh Ashouri, my constituent. I am
grateful for that. However, the family are still waiting to hear
whether they have received diplomatic protection from the
Government. Is the Minister able to respond to that?
We of course consider this issue carefully. However, I have made
the point already that—I suspect in large part because Iran does
not recognise dual nationality and therefore does not recognise
our authority to speak on this issue—that has proven to be of
limited success in the instance of Nazanin. We will continue to
hold the Iranian Government to account for their treatment of the
British dual nationals in incarceration, including Anousheh
Ashouri and Morad Tahbaz. I assure the House that the Government
remain committed to doing whatever we can to secure their release
and will continue to work and make representations at every
opportunity on their behalf.
I remind all Members that it was the Iranian Government who
arrested these British dual nationals. It was the Iranian
Government who applied these bogus charges against them. It was
the Iranian Government who hold these people in incarceration and
prevent them from coming home. It is the Iranian Government who
are wholly and solely responsible for the appalling circumstances
that these people find themselves in. The British Government will
continue to work tirelessly to secure their release and return
home. I assure everyone in the House that that will remain our
priority until they are released and are able to return home.
15:58:00
I was planning to thank everyone who spoke in the debate, but the
list is too long, I am afraid. MPs are very lucky that we can sit
here and talk and it is recorded in Hansard, but our constituents
are not always so lucky, so I will read some words from Richard
Ratcliffe:
“Today marks day 2,054 of Nazanin’s detention. We are approaching
our 6th Christmas apart. A little girl has been without her
mother for 5 and a half years. It did not have to be like this.
Back in 2017—when the now Prime Minister scrambled following his
false statements in Parliament that are still used to justify
Nazanin’s second case—he promised to resolve the debt we owe to
Iran which is the reason for Nazanin’s detention, effectively
setting a price for her release. He has now been Prime Minister
for two years, yet that promise is unkept—but remembered in
Tehran. The Prime Minister did not visit me on hunger strike,
though he did pass one morning without coming over. His
government continues to put British citizens in harm’s way.
Nazanin's story shames this country.”
I do not think I could have put it any better. I read Richard
Ratcliffe’s words so they can be recorded in Hansard.
|
