Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of failing to include other faiths, including Sikhs, in the terms of reference for the Working Group on Anti-Muslim Hatred/Islamophobia Definition.
Answered by Lord Khan of Burnley - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
All forms of racial and religious discrimination are completely unacceptable, including that directed at Sikhs. Hate crime has no place in our communities. Our efforts to build a country of tolerance and inclusion apply to people of all faiths and none.
The government recognises that the common misidentification of Sikhs as Muslims can compound the burden of religious hatred and discrimination faced by Sikhs. The terms of reference for the group recognise that anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia can also impact communities that are perceived to be Muslim, and that cultural markers adopted by wider faith communities like Sikh, Hindu, Jain and Buddhists are often used to attack communities that are mistakenly identified as Muslim.
The group will consult with a wide variety of stakeholders to ensure that the voices of all relevant stakeholders are heard and considered.
Though the work of the Group will be independent, Ministers and officials will meet regularly to ensure the work is developing in line with the objective set out in the Terms of Reference. The Government retains the right to not accept the recommendations made by the Working Group.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to include Sikhs in discussions about a definition of Islamophobia, given Sikhs are frequently mistaken for Muslims in incidents of hate crime.
Answered by Lord Khan of Burnley - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
All forms of racial and religious discrimination are completely unacceptable, including that directed at Sikhs. Hate crime has no place in our communities. Our efforts to build a country of tolerance and inclusion apply to people of all faiths and none.
The government recognises that the common misidentification of Sikhs as Muslims can compound the burden of religious hatred and discrimination faced by Sikhs. The terms of reference for the group recognise that anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia can also impact communities that are perceived to be Muslim, and that cultural markers adopted by wider faith communities like Sikh, Hindu, Jain and Buddhists are often used to attack communities that are mistakenly identified as Muslim.
The group will consult with a wide variety of stakeholders to ensure that the voices of all relevant stakeholders are heard and considered.
Though the work of the Group will be independent, Ministers and officials will meet regularly to ensure the work is developing in line with the objective set out in the Terms of Reference. The Government retains the right to not accept the recommendations made by the Working Group.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of a reduction in prison chaplaincy service provision on the ability of faith advisers to provide an equitable service to prisoners and their families.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
There has been no reduction in prison chaplaincy provision or in the role of faith advisers, who continue to play a vital part in advising chaplains and staff on specific matters of faith or belief and the endorsement of nominated chaplains in HMPPS.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, following the sanctioning of Mian Abdul Haq as a human rights violator on 9 December 2022, what assessment they have made of whether that sanctioning has been successful in preventing the forced conversion and abduction of women and girls from minority communities, and what further representations they have made to the government of Pakistan in this regard.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The UK Government strongly condemns the forced marriage and forced conversion of women and girls in Pakistan. Designating Mian Abdul Haq sent a clear message to those responsible that the UK considers this behaviour unacceptable. We regularly raise our concerns about Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB), women and girls' rights and gender equality at a senior level with the Government of Pakistan. Through our Aawaz programme, we continue to tackle issues of gender-based violence and work directly with communities to raise their awareness of the harms of early and forced marriages.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government on what basis the Sikh community was not informed in 2014 that Hugh Powell was conducting the Heywood Review into allegations of UK involvement in the Indian Army's operation against the Golden Temple, with particular regard to the fact that his father was the Prime Minister's private secretary at the time of the operation.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The Heywood review of 2014 worked specifically to establish facts about the UK advice and assistance to the Indian Government during Operation Blue Star 1984. It concluded that UK assistance was advisory, ended several months before the operation and had limited impact on the tragic events that followed. The UK Government has concluded that there is no basis to challenge the conclusions of the 2014 review or to review the broader decisions of the government of the day.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether there were grounds for Hugh Powell to recuse himself from the Heywood Review into allegations of UK involvement in the Indian Army's operation against the Golden Temple considering his father's position as the Prime Minister's private secretary at the time of the operation.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The Heywood review of 2014 worked specifically to establish facts about the UK advice and assistance to the Indian Government during Operation Blue Star 1984. It concluded that UK assistance was advisory, ended several months before the operation and had limited impact on the tragic events that followed. The UK Government has concluded that there is no basis to challenge the conclusions of the 2014 review or to review the broader decisions of the government of the day.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impartiality of the Heywood review into allegations of UK involvement in the Indian Army's operation against the Golden Temple in the light of reports that the father of a senior member of that review was the Prime Minister's private secretary at the time of the operation.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The Heywood review of 2014 worked specifically to establish facts about the UK advice and assistance to the Indian Government during Operation Blue Star 1984. It concluded that UK assistance was advisory, ended several months before the operation and had limited impact on the tragic events that followed. The UK Government has concluded that there is no basis to challenge the conclusions of the 2014 review or to review the broader decisions of the government of the day.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the implications for the UK's commitment to human rights of their support for the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, to face a prison term potentially in excess of 50 years.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Shadow Minister (Business and Trade)
This specific case is subject to ongoing court proceedings, so we are unable to comment further.
Further information on the UK’s extradition processes can be found on www.gov.uk: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) discrimination against religious minorities and women, (2) the use of the death penalty, and (3) reports of extrajudicial killings, in Saudi Arabia; and on what basis they describe Saudi Arabia as a strategic partner.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
The UK and Saudi Arabia have a longstanding bilateral relationship based on trade; investment; defence; security; energy and shared concerns about regional issues. We have vital national security and economic interests in maintaining and developing our relationship with Saudi Arabia, including in how we work together to tackle regional threats. No aspect of our relationship with Saudi Arabia prevents us from speaking frankly about human rights. We monitor a range of human rights issues in the Kingdom, including those pertaining to women, religious minorities and the continued use of the death penalty in the Kingdom.
Asked by: Lord Singh of Wimbledon (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the cost of hosting the International Ministerial Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief in July; and whether any binding commitments were made by participating countries to prohibit discrimination against minority faiths and beliefs.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
We anticipate that the total budget for the Conference will be in the region of £3.3million. The Conference explored the many facets of freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) through seventeen themed panel sessions and gave a platform to those persecuted for their religion or belief. Forty-seven governments, international organisations and other entities made pledges to take action in support of FoRB. Thirty-four countries joined the UK in signing up to one or more of a set of non-legally binding statements protecting and promoting FoRB for all. The statements and co-signatories are available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/international-ministerial-conference-on-freedom-of-religion-or-belief-2022-conference-statements