Proceeding contribution from Bill Rammell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 March 2009. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Ashraf (Geneva Convention).
Ashraf (Geneva Convention)
If my hon. Friend provides the details to my office, I will ensure that I look into that specific case. I will come to his suggestion. As he and I have discussed, I am minded to do something about it. Notwithstanding the action, we believe that residents remain free to meet family members and other visitors outside the camp. The Red Cross is rightly monitoring such visits, and we are told that UN officials have also visited the camp as recently as 19 March this year. All of that is welcome. However, the British embassy in Baghdad is pursuing the possibility of a visit by a consular official to Camp Ashraf to confirm whether any of its residents are entitled to UK consular assistance. Importantly, that will also allow us to remind the Iraqi Government further of their earlier assurances regarding Camp Ashraf residents and of the amount of interest in the issue within the United Kingdom. I am not aware of the statement by Dr. al-Rubaie. Nevertheless, I can say that the Iraqi Government have repeatedly maintained assurances to respect the human rights of Camp Ashraf residents. We shall certainly remind them of that obligation as we pursue the consular visit. The hon. Member for East Dunbartonshire (Jo Swinson) mentioned de-proscription. There have been two court cases: the UK court case in respect of de-proscription of the MEK and the decision in the European Court of First Instance. In both cases, this Government—rightly, in my view, whatever opinion we might have of the MEK—sought to uphold the rule of law; certainly in the European Union case, we were instrumental in ensuring that. However, I agree with the hon. Lady that upholding de-proscription is not the same as saying that the MEK best represents the interests and views of the Iranian people. We certainly have reservations about the MEK's assertion that it represents a democratic opposition in exile. We see no evidence of popular support for the MEK in Iran, partly because of its responsibility for terrorist attacks resulting in the deaths of many Iranian citizens and partly because it fought alongside Iraqi forces against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. Nevertheless—this is the important point that cuts to the heart of the concerns expressed—the Government of Iraq have stated that no residents of Camp Ashraf will be forcibly transferred to a country where they have reason to fear persecution based on their political opinions or religious beliefs, or where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be tortured. We are satisfied that the Iraqi Government are working with international organisations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to ensure a humanitarian solution that will allow camp residents either to return home or to be resettled, if they choose, in third countries. We will do everything in our power, consistent with the recognition that Iraq is now a sovereign democratic state, to encourage that process. I congratulate hon. Members on raising these legitimate concerns. I hope that my responses have given some reassurance. Sitting suspended.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 490 c91-2WH
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Related items
- Subjects
- Armed conflict Geneva Conventions Iraq Protection Refugees Iran Ashraf
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:56:48 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543162
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543162
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_543162