Transnational Repression in the UK (JCHR Report)

Baroness Blackstone Excerpts

Thursday 26th February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Blackstone (Lab)]

My Lords, I want to start by congratulating my noble friend Lord Isaac on his excellent maiden speech, and particularly on what he had to say about education, creative industries and the arts.

I also want to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Alton, and his committee members for their excellent report on this issue. It has had all too little attention. Indeed, many people probably have absolutely no idea what transnational repression actually means. In fact, the committee noted that there is no widely agreed definition, but that it amounts to

“certain foreign state-directed crimes against individuals”.

The best-known example is probably the Salisbury poisoning of the Skripals by agents of the Russian Government. Besides Russia, other countries which have been cited for intimidating and harassing—sometimes very violently—their subjects in the UK include Iran, China and Eritrea, all of which have been mentioned.

Also on the list, though less frequently cited, is Pakistan. I want to devote my speech largely to a current case concerning a Pakistani human rights lawyer who is living in exile in the UK. Shahzad Akbar was called to the Bar in the UK and subsequently had a distinguished career in Pakistan, working on human rights issues such as forced disappearances and the death penalty. He then became a Minister in Imran Khan’s Government and was responsible in particular for anti-corruption. When Khan was removed from office, Akbar fled to the UK in 2022, fearing what would happen to him if he stayed in Pakistan.

I am grateful to Reprieve for briefing me on the appalling attacks to which Akbar has been subjected since coming to this country. Unknown assailants have thrown acid at his face outside his home, assaulted him physically, and tried to set fire to his house, forcing him and his wife and children to go into hiding after gunshots were fired through the windows of his house. Counterterrorism police consider the attacks to be highly targeted and have arrested several people. It appears to be a recent example of a sophisticated plot to intimidate him and to assault him.

The response by the police is of course very welcome, but the committee report rightly contends that treating each case of this kind individually is not enough. Law enforcement can pursue the perpetrators, but what is needed is a commitment to address the behaviour of foreign Governments who are determined to destroy opposition to them by truly vicious means, and who are certainly denying those targeted their right to freedom of expression.

In the specific case of Shahzad Akbar, first, can the Minister tell the House what action the Government have taken to put pressure on the Pakistani Government? Does he agree that addressing the root causes in a political and diplomatic response is needed in cases of this kind? Secondly, what reassurance is Mr Akbar being given from a senior level in the Government that his safety is a matter of concern and that everything possible will be done to protect him and his family?

A number of dissident communities are at high risk of transnational repression, such as the critics of the Iranian regime, as has been mentioned by other speakers. They have escaped from the likelihood of imprisonment without trial in Iran, but can the Minister elaborate on what special measures have been taken to protect them?

When the Minister replies, I hope he will be able to give a positive response on a number of the issues the committee report identified, including better data collection, the co-ordination of interagency responses to TNR, and the possibility of specific sanctions against it. We need to address these questions to maintain our reputation as a country which does not tolerate the denial of free speech through violent intimidation.