Written question asked by David Drew (Labour) on Tuesday, 10 January 2006, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Thursday, 12 January 2006. It was answered by Ian Pearson (Labour) on Monday, 16 January 2006 on behalf of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Sudan

Question: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the use by the Sudanese authorities of amputation as a deterrent for crimes; and what representations he has made to them to end such punishment.

Answer: The UK believes that extreme punishments such as stoning, amputation and execution under Sharia law are wholly inconsistent with international human rights standards. We regularly raise with the Government of Sudan the need to respect human rights and abide by international human rights treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are also pressing the Government of Sudan, both bilaterally and through multilateral forums such as the EU-Sudan Human Rights Dialogue, to ratify and implement human rights treaties to which it is not a party, including the UN Convention Against Torture.Under the terms of the new Sudanese constitution, Sharia law, which allows for corporal punishment such as amputations, will apply in the states of Northern Sudan, but not Southern Sudan. The constitution also specifies that in the national capital non-Muslims shall not be subject to Sharia law, and that a Specialist Committee will ensure that Non-Muslims are not adversely affected by the application of the Sharia law in the National Capital. This committee was formed on 4 January 2006.

Secondary information