---

Civil Aviation Bill

My Lords, my noble and learned friend is assisting me in my argument. I accept that the Chicago convention does permit such action and therefore we do have the power to act, but of course we have to have credible evidence before we dare do so. My noble and learned friend will recognise that if in an arbitrary way we either forced an aircraft to land or investigated an aircraft on what was subsequently shown to be the flimsiest of evidence amounting almost to harassment and interference with other property, we would be open either to claims for compensation or the danger that the sovereign state so afflicted might carry out retaliatory activity on our own aircraft. That is why the evidence must be clear. I thank my noble and learned friend for his intervention and I hope he will accept that I am seeking to sustain the argument that the Chicago convention is helpful. On the wider issue of the transportation by air of persons deprived of their liberty, it was addressed in the recent investigation and report made by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. Her Majesty’s Government provided a full response to his inquiry, including information on the powers we already have. It is available on the Council of Europe website. The Secretary General’s report was issued on 1 March and acknowledges that the United Kingdom provided full answers to all the questions he had put. The Secretary General plans to make proposals, including a review of the current international legal framework for air traffic and the adequacy of safeguards to ensure that aircraft are not used for purposes incompatible with internationally recognised human rights standards. That is exactly the position of the British Government and we will work closely with the Council of Europe on its proposed review. Further, as we are dealing here with international law, any change is more appropriately made on a multilateral basis. So we would prefer to wait for the proposals that have been promised, and if it appears that changes are needed to the current arrangements, we will consider those in the appropriate international fora. I return again to the fact that criticism of foreign governments is free and a part of our parliamentary obligations if we think they are acting in a way open to criticism. That is entirely right.