Saudi Arabia: Anticipated Executions 3.53 pm Tom Brake
(Carshalton and Wallington) (LD) (Urgent Question): To ask
the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he
will make a statement on what steps are being taken to intervene in
the anticipated execution of 14 people in Saudi Arabia. The
Minister for the Middle East (Alistair Burt) ...Request free trial
Saudi Arabia: Anticipated Executions
3.53 pm
-
(Carshalton and Wallington)
(LD)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a
statement on what steps are being taken to intervene in the
anticipated execution of 14 people in Saudi Arabia.
-
The Minister for the Middle East (Alistair Burt)
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his urgent question.
Media reporting has suggested that 14 men could be facing
the death penalty in Saudi Arabia for attending protests in
the eastern province of the country in 2012. We are looking
into the details of the reports and seeking urgent clarity
from the Saudi authorities, both in Riyadh and here in
London. I have been in contact with the ambassador for the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who I know will come back to me
with information when he has it.
We regularly make this Government’s opposition to the death
penalty clear—we are firmly opposed to it—and we raise such
concerns at all levels and at all appropriate
opportunities. The Saudis are aware of our stance on their
human rights, and this position is a matter of public
record. The Prime Minister most recently raised this during
her visit in April this year.
-
I thank the Minister for his helpful response. Evidence
points to Saudi Arabia taking the final steps before
executing up to 14 people, including at least two who were
juveniles at the time of their alleged offences and were
convicted on the strength of confessions obtained through
the use of torture. Our Prime Minister has highlighted the
UK’s “long-term and historic relationship” with Saudi
Arabia, and has said:
“rather than just standing on the sidelines and sniping,
it’s important to engage, to talk to people, to talk about
our interests and to raise, yes, difficult issues when we
feel it’s necessary to do so.”
I am sure the Prime Minister and the Minister will agree
that 14 executions are just such a difficult issue and I am
pleased that it has been raised urgently with the Saudi
Government.
I would like to ask the following questions, however. Will
the Minister ask the Prime Minister to call on Saudi King
Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to stop the
executions—especially of juveniles Mujtaba Sweikat and
Salman Qureish—going ahead? If the executions of juveniles
and others arrested in relation to alleged protest activity
go ahead, will the UK commit to freezing and reviewing any
criminal justice assistance which could contribute to the
arrest of protestors and dissidents in Saudi Arabia? What
further steps will Her Majesty’s Government take to condemn
Saudi Arabia’s use of the death penalty, especially in the
case of people with disabilities and juveniles, such as Ali
al-Nimr, Dawoud al-Marhoon, and Abdullah al-Zaher?
Our Prime Minister is promoting the UK as a global nation.
How she responds to the threat of summary executions by a
partner and close ally will determine exactly what kind of
global nation she intends the United Kingdom to be—a global
champion of human rights or an apologist for human rights
abusers.
-
First, on the death penalty, in particular in relation to
juveniles, the UK Government oppose the death penalty in
all circumstances and in every country, including Saudi
Arabia, especially for crimes other than the most serious
and for juveniles, in line with the minimum standards set
out in the EU guidelines on the death penalty 2008, the
provisions of the international covenant on civil and
political rights and the Arab charter on human rights. A
law has been proposed to King Salman by the Shura Council
that codifies the age of majority at 18, and the death
penalty should not be given to minors. All the cases the
right hon. Gentleman mentioned towards the end of his
remarks have been raised specifically by the United
Kingdom, and in each case we have received assurances that
minors would not be executed.
On the general relationship with Saudi Arabia, our starting
point for engagement on human rights with all countries is
based on what is practical, realistic and achievable, and
we will always be ready to speak out as a matter of
principle. Ministers frequently discuss human rights and
raise concerns with the Saudi Arabia Government. We have a
balanced relationship with Saudi Arabia and use engagement
to encourage reform. This is a society that is going
through a process of reform, heading towards Vision 2030,
which the new Crown Prince has laid out as a pattern for
Saudi Arabia for the future. Women’s rights are changing
with the addition of women to the Shura Council. It is a
process that goes not at our pace, but at other paces.
We make sure that human rights are a key part of every
conversation that senior colleagues have, and that would
certainly be the case should it be necessary to intervene
should any minors be in the position described by the right
hon. Gentleman. As I indicated at the beginning, we have
very sketchy reports on this at the moment. That is why we
are doing more and I will write to the right hon. Gentleman
when I receive further, more detailed information, so that
he has it available.
-
Several hon. Members rose—
-
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Select Committee on Foreign
Affairs, .
-
(Tonbridge and Malling)
(Con)
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.
We have heard—over the years, indeed—Her Majesty’s
Government talk about the influence they have had over the
actions of the Saudi Government in terms of capital
offences. I would be very grateful if the Minister could
from his place today give some examples of how that has
paid off, because, on days like this, it does leave some
questions to be answered.
-
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his election to the office
of Chairman of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs. It
is an important office, which was well held by his
predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Crispin
Blunt), to whom we would all pay tribute. These are
difficult jobs done by colleagues, and my hon. Friend did
it particularly well, but we are very pleased to see my
hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom
Tugendhat) in his place.
It is so difficult to try to prove a negative. The
authorities with which we deal in Saudi Arabia are not
necessarily in a position to make their judicial decisions
dependent on external pressure, and nor would we be in a
similar situation. We know that allegations are made about
possible executions, including those of minors, and that
they then do not happen, but we do not know whether that
can be laid at the door of any specific representation. I
can assure my hon. Friend and the House that these
representations are regularly made to a changing society
and a changing judicial process in Saudi Arabia, which
must, of necessity, be theirs and not ours.
-
(Heywood and Middleton)
(Lab)
I add my thanks to you, Mr Speaker, for granting this
urgent question today. I also thank the right hon. Member
for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) for bringing such
an important matter to the House and for speaking so
eloquently on the subject.
I am sure that all Members present today share my concern
about the impending executions. Saudi Arabia is one of the
world’s most prolific executioners, and the death penalty
is increasingly being used there as a punishment for
non-violent acts. In January 2016, the Saudi authorities
executed 47 men in a single day for alleged terrorism
offences, and just last Monday, six men were killed. It is
becoming clear that these executions are being used not
only as a form of draconian punishment but as a tool to
suppress political opposition, to fight sectarian religious
battles against the Shi’a minority and to antagonise
regional rivals in the process.
It is just over six years since the then Foreign Secretary,
, declared that there
would be
“no downgrading of human rights under this Government”.
He went on to argue that
“pursuing a foreign policy with a conscience is…in the long
term enlightened national interest of our country.”
It is striking how far the Conservatives have strayed from
that commitment. When it comes to our relationship with
Saudi Arabia, it would appear that human rights concerns
are now of secondary importance to trade. This Government
have treated Riyadh’s human rights record as an
inconvenient embarrassment rather than a cause for serious
concern. Their reluctance to champion the values of human
rights runs counter to who we are as a country and risks
eroding our international standing, just when we need it
most. My party’s position on this matter is clear: the 14
executions—including those of two juveniles and one
disabled man—must not take place. I call on the Government
to use their influence to stand up for human rights and
unreservedly condemn these planned executions.
-
rose—
-
Mr Speaker
Order. Before the Minister responds, I must say in all
kindness to the hon. Lady that the fluency of her delivery
was unfortunately not matched by any conformity with the
expected procedure for the posing of an urgent question. I
allowed her to continue, but for future reference—this is
directed not only to the hon. Lady but more widely—an
urgent question requires a brief sentence or two in
response to the Minister, followed by a series of
questions. It is not an occasion for the setting out of an
alternative party position. It is not like a
debate—[Interruption.] It might very well have been very
good, as the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon.
Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry)
chunters from a sedentary position in a rather
inappropriate way, but unfortunately it was not very good
at complying with our procedure. I say good-naturedly to
the hon. Member for Heywood and Middleton (Liz McInnes)—and
I am looking at the Opposition Chief Whip too—that we
really must encourage compliance with the required
procedure. Now, I would like the Minister very briefly to
respond—30 seconds will suffice, I think—before we move on
to further questioning.
-
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the hon. Lady for her
remarks; I have got the gist of the points that she was
making. Saudi Arabia remains a Foreign and Commonwealth
Office human rights priority country, particularly because
of its use of the death penalty, its record on women’s
rights and its restrictions on freedom of expression,
assembly, religion and belief. No aspect of our commercial
relationship with Saudi Arabia prevents us from speaking
frankly and openly to it about human rights. We will not
pursue trade to the exclusion of human rights; they can be,
and they are, complementary. The United Kingdom will
continue to adhere to that.
-
(Torbay) (Con)
The Minister will agree that it is depressing how regularly
the death penalty is carried out not just in Saudi Arabia,
but in its neighbour Iran, which has already carried out
dozens of executions this year. Given the small likelihood
of persuading the Saudis to abolish the death penalty
completely, does he agree that it is best to focus on
getting them to adopt the most basic of standards, such as
not executing people for crimes they committed when they
were juveniles?
-
Absolutely. I concur with all my hon. Friend’s points and,
for brevity, I will leave it at that.
-
Mr Speaker
Splendid man.
-
(North East Fife)
(SNP)
I thank the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington
(Tom Brake) for raising this issue today. The death penalty
for political protest is something that horrifies any
democrat. With that in mind, we have serious concerns about
whether the Government are using their powers. The Minister
confirmed that the Prime Minister has raised this matter,
so was she satisfied with the response? If she was not,
what further action will be taken?
-
The Prime Minister will continue to raise concerns as long
as the United Kingdom has them. If we want to move to a
position that would satisfy all of us, I suspect that Saudi
Arabia is not yet there. Accordingly, the Prime Minister
will continue to raise concerns if she believes that they
are justified.
-
Ms (Wealden) (Con)
Will my right hon. Friend again confirm that the Government
oppose and abhor the death penalty in all circumstances and
in every country, including Saudi Arabia? Does he share my
concern that the death penalty is enshrined in Islamic
sharia law—the law of Saudi Arabia? With what force is he
is making our position known to our counterparts in Saudi
Arabia?
-
I can only repeat what I have said before. The United
Kingdom’s opposition to the death penalty, our carrying
that through by votes in this House and our adherence to
international conventions makes that clear, but not
everyone is the same. The United Kingdom cannot
unilaterally change the law elsewhere, but we can and will
stand up for the rights that we believe are correct, and
from the United States to Saudi Arabia we will make that
clear no matter which country is involved.
-
(Cynon Valley) (Lab)
We are constantly told by the Conservatives that we have
values in common with Saudi Arabia. What are they? They do
not involve human rights or international law, so what
values can we possibly share with Saudi Arabia when they
propose to crucify somebody and to use the death penalty
against minors?
-
In response to the right hon. Lady asking about what we may
share, we should not ignore Saudi Arabia’s important
contribution to regional stability. It has had its own
painful experiences as the victim of numerous Daesh
attacks, and collaborating with Saudi Arabia has foiled
terrorist attacks, potentially saving British lives. There
are areas where our interests work together in the
interests of the United Kingdom, but that is of course not
universal.
-
(North Dorset)
(Con)
Given the fact that—alas, perhaps—we are no longer an
imperial power able to send a gunboat to enforce our view
of the world, will my right hon. Friend confirm that, in
his considerable experience in the Foreign Office, a quiet
conversation to make our case and set out our views is far
more likely to be effective than shouting at people across
the railings?
-
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Different
approaches have different impacts. It would certainly not
be right for people to be silent on things that they think
are important; they should raise them publicly. It is also
true, however, that quiet conversations with states over a
period of time effect change, which is true in consular
cases as well as in the higher profile death penalty cases.
My hon. Friend is right that both approaches can have an
impact, but sometimes they do not.
-
Mr (East
Londonderry) (DUP)
In the Minister’s communications with the Saudi authorities
about this particular group of people, will he establish
whether reports are correct that others, again including
juveniles, are facing similar charges?
-
I will make what inquiries I can. Certainly from the media
reports we have, it will be important to find out whether
any juveniles are involved. Non-governmental organisations
in the west are normally quite good at finding out and
reporting this information, and the United Kingdom has
acted upon such information in the past. We will certainly
look for that information, and I will gather as much as I
can.
-
(Hornsey and Wood
Green) (Lab)
What impact does the Minister believe the 38% cut to the
Foreign Office will have on dealing effectively with human
rights in Saudi Arabia, or wherever?
-
All aspects of Government must pay attention to the need
for financial probity, but the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office has made sure that human rights is a key part of our
work, certainly for as many years as I have been there—that
now spans a few years—and human rights will remain a key
part of desk work here and of the work that posts do
abroad.
-
(Greenwich and
Woolwich) (Lab)
Among numerous others, my understanding is that the two
juveniles at risk of execution were charged under Saudi
Arabia’s anti-cybercrime laws. Is the Minister in a
position to confirm or deny that? Can he reassure the House
that any cyber-security assistance and training provided by
the UK to Saudi Arabia has not been used to facilitate
charges that lead to the death penalty?
-
I do not have the detailed information that the hon.
Gentleman asks for, but I will seek it. I will also seek
reassurances in relation to the collaborative work on
cyber-security, which is done to protect the United Kingdom
and our common interests, rather than anything else. I will
need further information before I can reply, but I will
write to him.
-
(Faversham and Mid
Kent) (Con)
Can my right hon. Friend confirm that our relationship with
Saudi Arabia enables us to raise our human rights concerns?
This House should also appreciate that the Government of
Saudi Arabia are taking steps to improve their actions on
human rights, and particularly to improve the opportunities
and rights of women in Saudi Arabian society.
-
My hon. Friend is right. A vision of Saudi Arabia, as with
a number of states in the area, is fixed in people’s minds,
but it does not always conform to the reality. Progress and
reform in some of these states is extremely slow. They are
very conservative societies, and sometimes their leaders
are ahead of popular and religious opinion. It is a
difficult process, but she is right. Objectively, it can be
seen that the position of women has improved in relation to
access to the Shura council and beyond, and there is more
to come. The 100,000 people educated abroad by King
Salman’s predecessor included women who were educated in
the west—in the United States and in Europe—and they were
not intended to return to a Saudi Arabia that would be
unchanging. [Interruption.]
-
Mr Speaker
Order. I am sure the Whips mean well in advising on these
matters, but they sometimes get the timing a bit wrong.
When an hon. Member is receiving an answer to her inquiry,
she should remain in her seat rather than beetling around
the Chamber because some Whip suddenly wants to relay some
piece of information. It is no doubt well intentioned, but
misguided.
-
(Edinburgh South West)
(SNP)
In response to the recent spate of executions, Amnesty
International has renewed its call on the Saudi Arabian
authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on all
executions as a first step towards abolition of the death
penalty. Can the Minister lend his support to Amnesty’s
calls?
-
As we are absolutely opposed to the death penalty in any
circumstances, a moratorium is, in a sense, immaterial
because we want to see the death penalty stopped
everywhere.
-
Mr (Jarrow) (Lab)
I hear what the Minister is saying about talking to, asking
questions of and advising the Saudi Government, but should
not the UK Government stop pussying around on this matter and
demand that these executions do not go ahead? Those people
were just protesting innocently and honestly for a fair
society.
-
I understand the force with which the hon. Gentleman speaks.
It is difficult always to convey to colleagues in the House
exactly what the ambassador or the Prime Minister say in
their conversations to convey, in a different form, exactly
the same degree of force and concern that the hon. Gentleman
conveys so eloquently.
-
(Glasgow Central)
(SNP)
How far does the Minister really believe the UK’s influence
extends over Saudi Arabia? If the UK Government’s supposed
leverage cannot stop the Saudi Government beheading their
citizens, why does he believe it is appropriate for the UK to
continue to license the sale of arms to that country?
-
It is impossible to give a simple answer to the question of
how much influence one state exerts on another. Let me point
to a long-standing relationship with Saudi Arabia. It is a
long-standing relationship on security and intelligence
matters, which has acted in our interests and for the safety
of our citizens. We have a common approach to dealing with
not only terror and extremism, but changes in Saudi society
over a period of time. As I say, it is not for those outside
to take credit for internal changes. This is a continued
dialogue with a state that we have known for a long time, but
one that is still relatively new and coming to terms with the
modern world. I think the relationship is the right one, but
we will continue to press for the best values.
-
(Hammersmith)
(Lab)
Does the Minister accept that executing individuals who were
under 18 at the time of the commission of the alleged offence
is in violation of not only international law, but Saudi
domestic law? He is therefore on very strong ground in
raising this matter. Will he do so in terms, because,
whatever the longer term relationship, minors have been
executed in the past year and many are now on death row
there? Will he say exactly what representation he is making
today or tomorrow? If he is in doubt about who is at risk,
will he talk to Reprieve about that?
-
I reiterate the point that the UK makes about the death
penalty, particularly in relation to minors. Where cases
involving minors are brought to our attention, we reference
them specifically, as we have done in several of the cases
raised by the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington
(Tom Brake). I am gaining more information about the matters
referred to in the newspaper report today, and if they do
involve minors, specific representations will indeed be made.
-
(North Dorset) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
-
Mr Speaker
Points of order normally come after statements; I made an
exception for particular matters earlier. Is this just
because the hon. Gentleman wants to beetle off to some other
commitment or is this urgent for the House now?
-
Sir, I would not presume to adjudge its urgency; I shall
leave that to the Chair. There appears to be some confusion,
which I certainly would not want, and I know that my hon.
Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately)
is of a like mind. Last week, when we had the opportunity to
question a Minister about matters relating to Saudi Arabia, I
conferred with one of the Clerks at the Desk to find out
whether my having been on a visit to Saudi Arabia was a
declarable interest. The advice I was given by the Clerk was
that it was entirely up to the individual Member but as I was
raising a question—rather than instigating an early-day
motion or debate, or giving a long speech—on our relations
with Saudi Arabia, there was no registrable interest to
declare. I understand that that might have changed today. I
would not, as I know my hon. Friend would not, have wanted to
have misled the House in any way, and I would value
clarification on whether we need to declare an interest when
merely asking a question of a Minister.
-
Mr Speaker
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his point of
order. As far as I am aware, nothing has changed today.
Although he may find this less than fully satisfactory, or
even a tad disquieting, I am afraid I must give him the
advice the Clerks tend to give: it is for each Member to
judge whether something requires to be declared in the course
of any parliamentary contribution. I put it to him that
certainly a relevant factor for him to consider is whether
such a visit was externally financed; I would have thought
that that was a germane consideration. Members go on Select
Committee trips on a very regular basis and, as far as I am
aware, they do not always, in the course of every question,
refer to the fact that they have been on a Select Committee
visit somewhere. If there is a question of outside financing
and an outside body, it might be thought to be prudent to
refer to it. I think that was the matter the hon. Member for
Faversham and Mid Kent had in mind, and if she wants,
briefly, now to make any declaration, I am happy for her to
do so.
-
(Faversham and Mid Kent)
(Con)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. It has been
brought to my attention that in asking a question a moment
ago, I perhaps should have drawn the House’s attention to my
entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
-
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker.
-
Mr Speaker
I am not sure there is a “further”, but the hon. Gentleman
has always seemed to be an amiable fellow, and therefore I
shall indulge him.
-
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Ditto.
-
Mr Speaker
We are very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I am sure the
House feels better informed.
|