Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Ratification of Convention) Bill — House of Lords, 2017-03-10
Topic: Civil Rights
Sally Rachel Hamwee (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): My Lords, I am grateful for that intervention. I was about to say that one often hears, "It does not happen here". The lack of understanding that what is happening is a crime is, sadly, shared among those who experience that crime I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which in 2015 undertook an inquiry to examine progress towards ratification. The noble Baroness referred to that. Its report told your Lordships that, "the Convention would have a strong indirect effect on the UK legal system", firstly in that it, "could be cited by the UK courts as persuasive authority", and secondly through the role of the European Court of Human Rights, given that the Government are bound by its judgment and, therefore, "the terms of the Convention could have a strong indirect effect on the UK legal system" The report also commented on some of the evidence that the committee had obtained. Witnesses had told the committee that ratification would, "help the UK’s position internationally in tackling violence against women and girls and would encourage other countries to follow suit" The Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales said that ratification would emphasise the state’s positive duty and it would, "provide a further basis in law for those who wish to persuade the state to provide adequate and meaningful resources to construct an effective mechanism to protect women from gender violence and harm" That raises the question of whether there is a resource issue behind this which may not have been acknowledged in the same way as the concerns about the devolved institutions. I hope that the Minister will assure us that there is no resource component precluding ratification. The evidence from the Minister to the Committee referred to ratification being a matter for the devolved Administrations. Let us not seek to avoid any responsibility ourselves in that area. The Government’s response to the JCHR’s report emphasised their commitment to the convention but referred again to the devolved Administrations We have heard about the international context but, as we have also heard, this is not just a third-world issue. Real commitment would put all the mechanisms in place. It would be a considerable achievement of Her Majesty’s Government both to be able to ratify the convention and actually to ratify it. It would be a solid expression of our commitment to preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. It would put the country’s legislation where its mouth is. According to the JCHR, the UK is in a good position to ratify. The then Home Secretary showed her personal commitment and only a single legislative change is required Last year, the JCHR visited Strasbourg. I recall a member of the Council of Europe strongly emphasising the importance of the UK’s example. The context was different—we were talking about compliance with the judgment of the court on a different issue—but the message was the same: the example set by a country which is respected and whose respect needs to be maintained. We support the Bill from these Benches.