---

International Tribunals (Sierra Leone) Bill [Lords]

I do know that, and that is a very strong message of, ““We will recognise your independence and support it, but we will continue to be an ally, a supporter and a practical aid in all sorts of ways for as long as you need and want it.”” My judgment is that the country will continue to want it for a long time. My last point is that the Bill is about a change that will allow us in this country to take another bit of international responsibility to imprison Charles Taylor if he is convicted. That is absolutely right and it is a very welcome initiative, but I take the view that, for people who are convicted of the sort of crimes that are on the indictment, there can be no conclusion other than that they serve their natural life in prison. No other message is acceptable. Heads of State, whether they get there by democratic election or by other means—in this case, other means were used—have a higher responsibility than anyone else to set a good example. Therefore, if they are responsible indirectly for the death, injury and rape of so many people by those under their control, they must pay the price. In a world where capital punishment is not generally regarded anymore as an acceptable price to pay, the sentence should be life imprisonment, which means life imprisonment. Then, bluntly, the difficult question of asylum and what happens on release does not arise. That has a cost implication to the United Kingdom, as set out in the papers connected with the Bill, but if that is the price that we must pay not just as our contribution to Sierra Leone but to send the message to the international community that the international rule of law will be followed by Heads of State and that they will pay the price if they do not do so, it is a price that I hope every taxpayer will think is worth paying.