Proceeding contribution from Lord Brett (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 29 October 2008. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on International Criminal Court (Remand Time) Order 2008.
International Criminal Court (Remand Time) Order 2008
rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the International Criminal Court (Remand Time) Order 2008. The noble Lord said: The International Criminal Court Act 2001 ensures that the United Kingdom complies with the requirements of the statute of Rome, which created the International Criminal Court, and can play a full part in the life of that court. Today, in an effort further to ensure that the UK plays a key role in the life of the court and continues to comply with all the court’s procedural rules, we seek to specify the total upper limit of time for which an individual arrested under Section 3 of the Act can be held on remand, along with the upper limit of time for which an individual can be held on remand on any single occasion following a Section 3 provisional arrest. The order intends to set those limits at 60 days and 18 days respectively. The UK believes it to be of fundamental importance to bring to justice perpetrators of international crime, including genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. We are rightly a signatory to the Rome statute, which, as I said, established the International Criminal Court, which has jurisdiction over the crimes that I mentioned, and we were among the court’s founding members. We have also supported the International Criminal Tribunal, which was established for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. The UK has legislated through the International Criminal Court Act 2001 to ensure that we comply fully with our obligations as set out in the Rome statute. It is now necessary to update the existing legislation in order to continue to fulfil our obligations to the court and to meet its procedural rules, specifically in the length of time an accused person can be held on remand following a request from the International Criminal Court for a provisional arrest. Under Section 2 of the Act, the UK can successfully execute non-urgent requests received from the court for the arrest and surrender of accused persons. In urgent cases, however, the court may request that the UK provisionally arrest a person alleged to have committed a crime over which it has jurisdiction. This arrest does not lead to surrender until a Section 2 request is received and is properly considered by a competent UK court. This is legislated for in Section 3 of the Act. When the International Criminal Court Act 2001 was adopted, the court had not yet decided the total length of time for which a person may be remanded in custody following his provisional arrest. This is because such rules were not to be adopted until the first meeting of the Assembly of States Parties, which itself took place only after 60 states had ratified the Rome statute. Such rules have now been adopted by the court and can be found in Rule 188 of the International Criminal Court Rules of Procedure and Evidence. This sets the upper limit for the total number of days a person can be held on remand as 60. Consequently, and as required by Section 4(4)(b) of the International Criminal Court Act 2001, an Order in Council is needed to update our existing legislation and ensure that the UK continues to meet its obligations to the court. At the same time it is advisable to update the International Criminal Court Act 2001 to reflect the maximum length of time a person can be held on remand on any single occasion following a provisional arrest under Section 3 of the International Criminal Court Act. This is again done through an Order in Council process as set out in Section 4(4)(b) of the Act. In relation to the equivalent provisions for the two other United Nations established courts I referred to earlier, the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, a limit of 18 days was adopted. This was done through the United Nations (International Tribunal) (Former Yugoslavia) Order 1996 and the United Nations (International Tribunal) (Rwanda) Order 1996. I see no reason to deviate from this precedent and 18 days is again the proposed limit that a person may be held on remand on any single occasion. Both these limits will ensure that a person arrested following a provisional arrest request from the ICC will not be held indefinitely and ensure that justice is administered in an expedient fashion. This is what the order seeks to achieve. I beg to move. Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the International Criminal Court (Remand Time) Order 2008. 27th report from the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.—(Lord Brett.)
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 704 c18-20GC
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Appeals Crime Arrest warrants Crimes against humanity Genocide International Criminal Court Remand in custody
- Legislation
- International Criminal Court (Remand Time) Order 2008
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:38:22 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504575
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504575
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_504575