Proceeding contribution from Hilary Benn (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 18 May 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Darfur Crisis.
Darfur Crisis
It is good to see so many Members here, despite business elsewhere in the House having finished. That reflects the deep interest that Members on both sides of the Chamber have in the tragedy that has affected the people of Darfur, particularly over the past three years. I should say frankly, at the outset, that the crisis is a test of the international community’s willingness to act when crimes against humanity are committed. I hope that our debate is very much set in that context. I commend the Select Committee for both of its inquiries into Darfur in the past 15 months; I also commend the hon. Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew), who is here and who ably chairs the all-party group on Sudan, and all other hon. Members for their continued interest in what has been going on. In three years of war, millions of innocent Darfuris have lost their homes, their livelihoods and, frankly, their dignity. As hon. Members will be aware, conflict has been rife in Darfur since the 1980s, but in the beginning of 2003 it reached new heights, with the rebel attack and the overt involvement of Government forces and the Janjaweed militia, following the formation of the Sudan Liberation Movement. The crisis has been littered with agreements signed and not honoured. I refer in particular to the humanitarian ceasefire agreement signed on 8 April 2004 by the Government of Sudan, the SLM, and the Justice and Equality Movement. I also refer to the security and humanitarian protocol signed on 9 November 2004 in Abuja. The truth is, however, that none of the parties that signed those agreements has abided by any of them, and insecurity has continued to hamper the huge humanitarian relief effort. As Members will be aware, in May 2004, the African Union Mission in Sudan—AMIS—was deployed, and it has been in the region ever since. Another thing to which it is important to refer, if just in passing, has taken place since then: the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement in January 2005 in Nairobi. That finally brought to an end the north-south conflict that had lasted about a generation in Sudan, claiming more than 2 million lives. That agreement has given Sudan a more representative Government than it has had for a very long time. The UK played an honourable part, both in supporting the negotiations and in the agreement’s implementation, including by providing political and financial support. The UK Government have also played an important role in the UN Security Council in pressing for action to be taken on the crisis in Darfur. Members will be aware that we co-sponsored Security Council resolution 1556, which called for the disarmament of the Janjaweed. We supported Security Council resolution 1591, which provides for travel bans and asset freezes on individuals involved in the Darfur crisis who have committed violations of international law or other atrocities, or who have in other ways impeded the peace process. We co-sponsored resolution 1672, which was adopted on 25 April this year, and which finally—I underline ““finally””—imposed targeted sanctions on four individuals from all sides of the conflict. The fact that it took so long was certainly not for want of effort on the part of the British Government; there was, of course, a process to be gone through. I, for one, unreservedly welcome the imposition of those sanctions, because it is at least a sign that the international community is serious about calling to account those who, by their actions, prolong the suffering of the people of Darfur. We have made it clear that we think that more names ought to follow. We are also pushing for an extension of the arms embargo to the whole of Sudan. If only every country represented on the Security Council had been as determined as the British Government to hold people to account for what they had done. The UK also sponsored UN Security Council resolution 1593, which referred the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court following the report by the UN International Commission of Inquiry. That was an historic moment, not only in the context of the crisis in Darfur, but more generally, because it was the first time that the UN Security Council had referred a matter to the ICC. That, too, was not achieved without a struggle. That moment will come to be remembered because it showed that although we fought hard for the principle of the ICC, with support from Members on both sides of the House, it is no good having the thing if it is not actually used to investigate people and call them to account for what they have done. I am glad to say that the ICC has already begun work on identifying the individuals who were responsible for the crimes against humanity and the war crimes that the International Commission of Inquiry said had been committed in Darfur. I now want to deal in slightly more detail with the challenge that we face.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 446 c339-40WH
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Death Armed conflict Casualties Sudan Internally displaced people Darfur
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:32:07 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324720
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324720
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_324720