Source · Select Committees · Human Rights (Joint Committee)
Recommendation 25
25
Rejected
We repeat our call for barriers to the exercise of universal jurisdiction to be removed,...
Recommendation
We repeat our call for barriers to the exercise of universal jurisdiction to be removed, and our proposed amendment to the Bill to achieve this appears in the Annex to this report. (Recommendation, Paragraph 167) 59
Government Response Summary
The government rejected the recommendation to remove barriers to universal jurisdiction and amend the Bill, stating that its current approach focuses on specific crimes, supports prosecution closest to perpetration, and relies on the International Criminal Court for broader cases.
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
As the Government set out in its response to the Committee’s report “Accountability for Daesh crimes”, the UK applies universal jurisdiction only to a few very specific international crimes. Our approach to universal jurisdiction is designed to ensure that those suspected or accused are investigated, charged, and tried fairly and impartially at every stage, with access to all available evidence. This is in accordance with local, constitutional and legal frameworks. Where there is no apparent link between the UK and the crime, in general we support the principle that international crimes are best investigated and prosecuted close to where they are perpetrated. This is because of the advantages in securing evidence and the witnesses necessary for a fair investigation and prosecution, as part of a credible judicial process. In some cases where the UK does not have jurisdiction, we seek to build domestic capabilities. For example, in Ukraine, we support the work of the Office of the Prosecutor General to ensure allegations of war crimes are fully investigated by independent, effective and robust legal mechanisms. The most serious international crimes not covered by our universal jurisdiction policy are generally already subject to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is better placed to prosecute such offences where they are not being dealt with by the relevant domestic authorities. The UK is a strong supporter of the ICC and its mandate to end impunity for the most egregious crimes. As such, we do not feel that an amendment to the International Criminal Court Act 2001 is warranted at this time.