News & Views Monday 16th November to Sunday 22nd November 2015

Escort And Removal Of Detainees To Nigeria, Ghana
And Pakistan – Reasonably Safe But Still Some Concerns

The treatment of detainees being removed from the UK was reasonably safe, decent and professional, but there were still some avoidable weaknesses, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons. Today he published two reports of inspections of escort and removals of detainees to Nigeria, Ghana and Pakistan.

Operation Majestic is a regular removal flight to Nigeria, often including an additional leg to Accra, Ghana. Inspectors previously inspected this flight in April 2011 and November 2013. In November 2013, inspectors noted a few improvements and said that escorting staff were, on the whole, calm and confident, but some ways of working had become entrenched. These included keeping handcuffs on for much longer than necessary, holding detainees by the arm in secure areas, denying privacy to detainees using the toilet and withholding facilities such as blankets and hot drinks during an overnight flight without regard to evidence of risk in the individual case. This more recent inspection repeats many of the same points.

Inspectors were pleased to find that:

experienced escort staff did their core job satisfactorily and the detainees were on the whole positive about the care that custody officers and health care staff provided;

officers no longer routinely held detainees' arms within secure detention centres; and

staff now received use of force training.

However, inspectors were concerned to find that:

waist restraints belts had replaced handcuffs, and there was a risk that they were being overused; and

the length of the journey was avoidably extended at both ends of the process.

Nick Hardwick said: "The treatment of detainees on these removal operations was reasonably safe and respectful, but it was a concern that a number of issues, which these reports have consistently pointed out, have not been addressed in two years. We are concerned that standards have reached a plateau, and that there appears to be little aspiration to improve further."

Operation Monroe is a regular removal flight to Pakistan which was previously inspected in December 2013, when inspectors noted some positive features which had been sustained during this inspection. The operation was generally carried out calmly and safely, most staff interacted well with detainees and detainees were dealt with swiftly and courteously when they arrived in Islamabad. Detainees' treatment and conditions had also improved since the previous inspection.

Inspectors were pleased to find that:

all staff had received training on the use of force within confined spaces;
none of the staff displayed an inappropriate attitude either when they spoke to detainees or in the way they behaved; and

detainees were kept informed about the process and in one IRC, they received a particularly good help to prepare for removal.

However, inspectors were concerned to find that:

in 2013, some staff fell asleep almost as soon as they sat down in the coach, while in 2015, no-one slept on the coach but after a couple of hours in the aircraft, many escorts were asleep beside their charges;

staff still depended entirely on other detainees to interpret for those without good English; and

restraints, whenever applied, were still only ever removed after the take-off period.

Nick Hardwick said: "During this removal operation, detainees were removed in a reasonably decent and efficient manner by staff who did a professional job. But that picture was still marred by too many avoidable weaknesses."

Notes to Editors:

1. A copy of the reports can be found on the HM Inspectorate of Prisons website from 20 November 2015 at

2. HM Inspectorate of Prisons is an independent inspectorate, inspecting places of detention to report on conditions and treatment, and promote positive outcomes for those detained and the public.

3. This inspection of escort and removals to Nigeria and Ghana was carried out on 28-29 July 2015. The aircraft was chartered by the Home Office and Tascor was the escort contractor.

4. Inspectors accompanied a charter flight removal of 55 detainees. The aircraft went first to Lagos, Nigeria. Forty-four detainees travelled to Lagos and 11 to Ghana, one of whom was to be escorted onwards to Gabon. The operation was inspected from the point at which detainees were collected from Immigration Removal Centres – Brook House, Colnbrook, Harmondsworth, Tinsley House and Yarl's Wood. The records of three previous flights to West Africa in April, May and June 2015 were also examined.

5. The inspection of escort and removals to Pakistan was carried out from 30 June-1 July 2015. The aircraft was chartered by the Home Office and Tascor was the escort contractor.

6. Inspectors accompanied a charter flight removal of 33 detainees. The aircraft went to Islamabad. The operation was inspected from the point at which detainees were collected from the IRCs – Colnbrook, Brook House, Harmondsworth and Tinsley House - to arrival in Islamabad.

R (application of Ali) & R (application of Bibi and another) v SSHD

On appeal from the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) (England and Wales)
These cases related to an immigration rule which requires the spouse or civil partner of a British citizen or person settled in Britain to pass a test in English before coming to Britain, if they want to stay here. The appellants are British citizens. Their husbands want to stay with them here, but are required to pass a test in English before coming to Britain but it is not be feasible for them to do so. The wives claim that this requirement breaches their right to a private and family life under art.8 ECHR. The Court of Appeal agreed with Mr Justice Beatson that it did not, because the interference was proportionate to the aims of improving immigrants’ job prospects and ability to access health services. The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court unanimously dismisses the appeal in respect of the finding that the Rule itself does not infringe article 8, but it invites further submissions from the parties on whether a declaration should be made that the operation of the Guidance in its present form is incompatible with article 8 rights where compliance with the requirement is impracticable.

Download the full judgement here . . . .

Robert Must Stay; A Right To Be Gay!

Online Petition:: Robert Kityo is a young gay man from Uganda who is seeking sanctuary in the United Kingdom due to the homophobic Ugandan regime's treatment of LGBT people which imprisons us for life simply for how we love.  The Home Office believe he can live discretely in Uganda despite him being an out and proud member of Manchester's LGBT community.

For the last two years Robert has been an active member of the LGBT community in Manchester. He's been a volunteer for the LGBT Foundation- helping staff two Pride festivals, volunteering in the office and even being a model in some literature on gay men's health. He is a member of the city's gay Metropolitan Congregation of the United Reformed Church; a group for black LGBT people, Rainbow Noir; has helped produce programmes for Gaydio - the city's LGBT radio station and is involved in a variety of projects for LGBT people in Salford.

The Home Office were given a huge bundle containing details of Robert's community involvement, legal arguments and witness statements from many people - including the Anglican Bishop of Manchester - yet they don't think there is enough material to put before a judge! The Home Office don't think that Robert is openly gay so would not be at risk on return to Uganda! A glance at his Facebook page shows how ridiculous this argument is.

Worse, the Home Office made their decision on 8th October but didn't inform his solicitors so they could make representations but served the decision on Robert today, 10th November, before detaining him. They are now preparing to remove him from the UK and return him to the homophobic hell which is Uganda.

Robert's lawyers are making legal moves to compel the Home Office to reconsider or, at the very least, refer the matter to the courts where an impartial decision can be made and where Robert's many friends and supporters will be able to give evidence on his behalf.
Please sign the petition to the Home Secretary asking her to both accept Robert's submissions as a Fresh Claim for Asylum (which gives him the right to appeal to a court) and to grant him asylum in the UK.

EDM 711:  Government Departments and the Living Wage

That this House notes with concern that a number of government departments are still not paying all their staff, including contractors, the living wage; observes that departments which pay staff rates below the breadline include the departments of Work and Pensions, International Development, Education, Health, Business Innovation and Skills and the Home Office; applauds those departments which do pay a living wage, including Energy and Climate Change; believes that there can be absolutely no justification for government departments paying poverty wages; further observes that those being paid at such low rates carry out essential work without which the departments could not operate, including contracted cleaners and security staff; further believes that government departments have a duty to pay all their staff, including contractors, the local living wage, both in Whitehall and across the UK, and must also provide holiday pay and sick pay; further notes with great concern reports of staff being penalised and even dismissed for asking for a living wage; believes that it is utterly wrong for the Government to pay staff too little to survive on; and urges Secretaries of State to take urgent action to accredit their departments as living wage employers to ensure that their staff are not living in poverty.
House of Commons, 18/11/2015

Asylum Research Consultancy COI Update Volume 113
This document provides an update of Country Guidance case law and UKBA publications and developments in refugee producing countries between 3rd November & 16th November 2015 - Volume 113 here . . . .



Criminalisation of People On Grounds of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Across the Commonwealth

Early Day Motion 715:: That this House is very concerned that 41 out of 53 Commonwealth nations still criminalise people on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity; understands that this is over half the total number of countries that criminalise LGBT people; is further concerned that criminalisation severely impacts people's ability to access and receive safe, non-discriminatory health services, which increases vulnerability to HIV; further understands that this highlights the need for the Government to continue its work in a coordinated way across departments and with civil society to promote the rights of LGBT people and to call for decriminalisation across the Commonwealth; notes that hon. Members have a role to play in promoting non-discrimination and ensuring no-one is left behind; and commends the International HIV/AIDS Alliance's efforts and its current campaign, Paradise or Persecution, in raising awareness of the scale of criminalisation across the Commonwealth and pushing for change.

• Sponsors: Lucas, Caroline, Bottomley, Peter, Durkan, Mark, Day, Martyn, Edwards, Jonathan, Campbell, Ronnie

House of Commons: 17/11/2015

Early Day Motion 729: Refugee Crisis Winter 2015-16

That this House notes with great concern the appalling situation facing refugees from war-torn countries and failed states, who have survived the dangerous journey into Europe only to face the prospect of having to survive the winter in inadequate camps; is extremely worried at the prospect of vulnerable people, including women and children, left traumatised and ill after years of war and long journeys and being left to freeze after seeking asylum in some of the world's wealthiest countries; believes that the UK has a responsibility to accept a much greater share of these refugees than it has done so far; notes that refugees fleeing countries such as Syria are not in any sense economic migrants, but have instead been forced to leave a home country run by a regime which tortures, murders and bombs its own citizens, as well as suffering the brutality of ISIS; applauds the generosity of UK citizens who have donated to help refugees and called for the UK to accept more refugees; and calls on the Government to take urgent action to ensure that refugees in Europe and the UK are adequately housed and clothed this winter and that there are no deaths from cold or exposure.
House of Commons: 18/11/2015

Stand up to Murderous Attacks and Hatred but Also Racism and Islamophobia Against Muslims

Statement from Stand up to Racism, Saturday 14th November 2015

In response to the Paris and Beirut attacks and the incident at Gatwick airport, campaigners with Stand up to Racism issued the following statements:

Sabby Dhalu, Stand up to Racism Organiser said: "We condemn the horrific attacks in Paris. We send condolences to and our thoughts are with and the loved ones of those that lost their lives and those injured. We must do all we can to root out such murderous attacks and hatred.

"We must also challenge attempts to portray all Muslims, refugees and immigrants as terrorists. President Hollande's statement regarding closing the borders in France implies all refugees are terrorists. There are almost one million refugees in the EU - if they were all terrorists there would be no one left in the EU. Terrorist attacks cannot be used to justify the refusal to take refugees.

"Too often the response to such attacks is to hold responsible and scapegoat all Muslims despite widespread condemnation of terrorism by Muslims, simply because a few carry out terrorist attacks in the name of Islam. Muslims are always portrayed as the perpetrators and never the victims of terrorism, even though many Muslims were also the victims in yesterday's attacks. This is the narrative that is leading to increasing anti-Muslim hate crimes. According to the West London Muslim Cultural Centre, already a Muslim woman has been attacked with a glass bottle today, following the Paris attacks.

"We must stand up to such attacks and also the racism and Islamophobia that follows. Don't let the racists divide us."

Maz Saleem, Daughter of the late Mohammed Saleem who was murdered in 2013 in an Islamophobic attack said: "My deepest sympathies and condolences go to all those that lost loved ones and were injured in the attacks in Paris and Beirut. I feel very strongly about such incidents because my father was murdered by a Ukrainian fascist terrorist and I am still struggling to cope with this tragic loss in my family.

"I also feel strongly about these events because my father was a Muslim and he was murdered by a fascist terrorist who bombed Mosques in the West Midlands and became known as "The Tipton Bomber". Quite rightly we do not equate all white people with this terrorist, but why are all Muslims treated as potential terrorists?

"My father and my family are Muslims and the victims of terrorism. In August Mushin Ahmed an 81 year old Muslim pensioner was murdered in Rotherham. I fear there could be more similar attacks if the approach of depicting all Muslims as terrorists continues."

Weyman Bennet, Unite Against Fascism Joint Secretary said: "Our thoughts are with all those affected by the recent terrorist attacks. It is crucial that politicians and the media do not concede to a narrative that portrays all Muslims as terrorists. Firstly because it is not true. Secondly because we do not adopt the same approach when the perpetrators are white racists and fascists. Scapegoating all white people for Anders Breivik's attacks in Norway seems ridiculous, but this is exactly the response when terrorist attacks occur in the name of Islam somehow all Muslims are held responsible.

"Thirdly this is the climate in which far right and fascist organisations grow. France is one of the most concerning countries with the growth in support for Marine Le Pen and the Front National currently topping the polls, who could use these attacks to build further support. We must also be vigilant about groups like the English Defence League and Britain First who could use these attacks to stir up Islamophobia in Britain."

Notes to editors:

1. Stand up to Racism has called a public meeting in Parliament in response to these attacks, Islamophobia and the forthcoming Extremism Bill on Thursday 26 November at 7pm.

2. For interviews and information please contact Sabby Dhalu on 07794 633 097 or Weyman Bennett on 07734 032 314.

United Nations Human Rights Committee - Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Principal matters of concern

Immigration detention

21. The Committee is concerned that no fixed time limit on the duration of detention in immigration removal centres has been established and that individuals may be detained for prolonged periods. It also notes that the detained fast track system in the asylum process suffers from a number of apparent deficiencies, including failure to prevent torture survivors from entering the detained fast track system and failure to provide effective access to justice, and that it has been criticized by domestic courts and was suspended by the Immigration Minister on 2 July 2015 pending a comprehensive review that is ongoing (arts. 7, 9, 10 and 13).

Right of entry and deprivation of citizenship

15. While noting the authority of States to establish laws regarding the acquisition, renunciation or loss of nationality, the Committee is concerned about the introduction of temporary exclusion orders and the use of citizenship deprivation orders in the terrorism context. The Committee is concerned about the possibility of persons being rendered stateless as a result of such measures (arts. 12 (4) and 24 (3)).

Applicability of Covenant and the domestic human rights framework

5. The Committee notes that the Covenant is not directly applicable in the State party and throughout its overseas territories and Crown dependencies, and recalls that several Covenant rights are not covered by the Human Rights Act 1998. It is also concerned about the slow progress in introducing the Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland and about the lack of a comprehensive mechanism for reviewing existing gaps and inconsistencies between the domestic human rights legal framework and the rights as set forth in the Covenant. Finally, the Committee is concerned about a reported plan to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to replace it with a new Bill of Rights for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and that such a development will weaken the degree of protection afforded to the rights enshrined in the Covenant, within the domestic legal order (art. 2).

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

7. The Committee is concerned that the reduction in the budget of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission may undermine the fulfilment of its mandated activities (art. 2).

The State party should provide the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission with adequate funding to enable it to discharge its mandate effectively and independently and in full compliance with the Paris Principles (General Assembly resolution 48/134, annex),

Accountability for conflict-related violations in Northern Ireland

8. While welcoming the adoption of the Stormont House Agreement, the Committee remains concerned (see CCPRlCIGBRlCO/6, para. 9) about the quality and pace of the process of promoting accountability in relation to "the Troubles" in Northern Ireland and about the absence of a comprehensive framework for dealing with conflict-related serious human rights violations. The Committee also notes with concern (a) the multiple independence and effectiveness shortcomings alleged in relation to the Police Ombudsman's ability to investigate historical cases of police misconduct; (b) that the Legacy Investigation Branch established within the Police Service of Northern Ireland to carry out the work of the closed Historical Enquiries Team may lack sufficient independence and adequate resources; (c) delays in the functioning of the Coroner's inquest system in legacy cases; (d) the retention in the Inquiries Act 2005 of a broad mandate for government ministers to suppress the publication of inquiry reports and the lack of safeguards against abuse of those executive powers; and ( e) that the review relating to the murder of Patrick Finucane (i.e. the de Silva Review) does not appear to satisfy the effective investigation standards under the Covenant. The Committee, while welcoming the proposed establishment of an Historical Investigations Unit to deal with outstanding cases related to the conflict in Northern Ireland, is concerned that the quality of investigations to be conducted may be affected by the passage of time, given that the unit would become fully operational only in 2017 (arts. 2 and 6).

Accountability for human rights violations committed by British forces abroad

9. The Committee, while welcoming the mechanisms in place to investigate allegations of serious human rights violations, including torture, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances, committed by British forces operating overseas, is concerned about (a) the slow progress in proceedings before the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament in relation to the Detainee Inquiry; and (b) the adequacy of the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament as an investigation mechanism, inter alia in view of concerns about its independence from the executive and about the power of the Government to withhold sensitive information from it. The Committee is also concerned about the slow progress of the Iraq Historical Allegations Team and the very small number of criminal proceedings completed so far. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned about the lack of information on what investigations, if any, took place into allegations about British special forces personnel handing over detainees into United States custody at Camp Nama, a secret prison at Baghdad International Airport (arts. 2, 6, and 7).

Racism and xenophobia

10. While acknowledging the measures taken by the State party to combat hate crimes, the Committee notes a recent increase in the number of hate incidents and crimes on the basis of race, nationality or religion. The Committee is also concerned about the prevalence in the media and on the Internet of racist and xenophobic expressions that may amount to incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. In this regard, the Committee notes with concern the publication of material containing extremely negative stereotypes of ethnic, religious or other minorities, including persons of African descent and Muslims and particularly migrants and asylum seekers, such as the article entitled "Rescue boats? I'd use gunships to stop migrants" published in the Sun newspaper on 17 April 2015 (arts. 19 and 20).

Non-discrimination and gender equality

12. While noting the steps taken by the State party to increase the representation of women in the civil service and in the judiciary, the Committee is concerned about the currently low proportion of women in the civil service, particularly in Northern Ireland, and in the judiciary, where women are concentrated in the lower-instance courts (arts. 2, 3 and 26).

Violence against women

13. While welcoming the array of measures taken to address violence against women, the Committee is concerned about continued reports of violence against women, including domestic violence and rape, particularly in the United Kingdom and Bermuda, mainly affecting black and ethnic minority women (arts. 2, 3, 7, and 26).


14. The Committee is concerned that the State party has maintained the broadly formulated definition of terrorism in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 that can include a politically motivated action which is designed to influence a government or international organization, despite the concern raised by the two Independent Reviewers of Terrorism Legislation and endorsed unanimously by the Supreme Court in R v. Gul (2013) that the definition is "unduly restrictive of political expression". While taking note of the State party's need to adopt measures to combat acts of terrorism, including the formulation of appropriate legislation to prevent such acts, the Committee is concerned that the new Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015 (a) introduces wide-ranging powers designed to promote public safety allegedly without putting in place sufficient safeguards; (b) further extends the power of police officers to seize and temporarily retain travel documents if there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a person intends to travel abroad to engage in terrorism-related activities; and (c) extends the actions that can be taken under a Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measure, including forced relocation of terrorist suspects as far as 200 miles from their current home. The Committee is also concerned that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 maintains the 14-day limit on pre-charge detention in terrorism cases and also allows for an extension of up to 28 days in response to "urgent" situations. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned about the potential misuse of arrest powers under section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (arrest without warrant of a person reasonably suspected to be a terrorist), in light of the low charge rate of those arrested under section 41. It is also concerned about the blanket denial of bail to persons arrested under section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (arts. 2, 9, 10, 12, 17, 19 and 26).

Self-inflicted deaths, including in custody, and self-harm in custody

16. While noting the various measures taken to prevent and to reduce the numbers of self-inflicted deaths (suicides), the Committee remains concerned about the persistently high number of suicides in Scotland, about the increased number of suicides in custody, particularly in England and Wales, and about other cases of self-harm in custody. The Committee notes that young adults are a particularly vulnerable group in this regard, and that the Independent Review into Self-inflicted Deaths in Custody of 18-24-year-olds (the Harris Review) presented its findings in July 2015 (arts. 2, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 24).

Termination of pregnancy in Northern Ireland

17. The Committee is concerned about the highly restricted circumstances in which termination of pregnancy is permitted by law in Northern Ireland and about the severe criminal sanctions for unlawful abortion, which put women's life and health at risk and force them to travel in order to seek an abortion. The Committee notes with concern that the Department of Justice for Northern Ireland, after having held a consultation on the possible decriminalization and legalization of abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality and pregnancy as a result of rape or incest, indicated in April 2015 that it would propose legislation to legalize termination of pregnancy only in circumstances of fatal foetal abnormality, due to "complex issues" raised by pregnancy occurring as a result of sexual crimes (arts. 3, 6, 7 and 17).


18. While noting the State party's argument that the definition of torture in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 is broader than that in the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Committee is concerned that the defence of "lawful authority, justification or excuse" to a charge of official intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, as set forth in sections 134 (4) and (5) of the 1988 Act, is broadly worded, and could allow for wide application, including to the absolute prohibition of torture (art. 7).

The State party should review its legislation with a view to ensuring that any possible defences for torture are repealed, in accordance with article 7 of the Covenant and other internationally accepted standards,

Diplomatic assurances and non-refoulement

19. The Committee is concerned that the State party continues to rely on its "deportation with assurances" policy to justify the deportation of foreign nationals suspected of terrorism-related offenses to countries where it is reported that they may face a real risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment and notes that, while there are no plans to abandon the policy, its framework is under review by the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation. Despite the memorandums of understanding on deportation with assurances that have been concluded with a number of countries and the arrangements for post-transfer monitoring, the Committee remains concerned that these measures may not ensure that the individuals affected will not be subjected to treatment contrary to articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant (arts. 2, 6 and 7).

Corporal punishment

20. The Committee remains concerned that corporal punishment is still not fully outlawed in the home and certain educational and alternative care facilities in the United Kingdom and in almost all British Crown dependencies and overseas territories. It is also concerned about the lack of an explicit prohibition on corporal punishment in the home and about the existing legal defences of "reasonable punishment" in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and "justifiable assault" in Scotland (arts. 7 and 24).

Fair trial and administration of justice

22. The Committee is concerned that the Justice and Security Act 2013 extended the use of closed material procedures to civil proceedings involving sensitive material, the disclosure of which would damage national security, including to civil claims for damages and to historical conflict-related cases in Northern Ireland. The Committee notes the serious concerns in relation to the adequacy of the safeguards in place, notably the special advocate system, which has been widely criticized, including by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, for not securing sufficiently the rights of the affected parties, including equality of arms. The Committee is also concerned that the new test for miscarriage of justice, introduced in 2014, may not be in compliance with article 14 (6) of the Covenant. It is further concerned about the impact of reforms to the legal aid system on access to justice, including cuts to legal aid in Scotland, the shortcomings in the exceptional funding scheme

Government surveillance and interception of communications

24. The Committee is concerned that the State party's current legal regime governing the interception of communications and communications data allows for mass interception of communications and lacks sufficient safeguards against arbitrary interference with the right to privacy. It notes, inter alia, reports that Amnesty International's e-mail communications had been intercepted by the Government under a general warrant. The Committee is concerned (a) that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, which makes a distinction between "internal" and "external" communications, provides for untargeted warrants for the interception of external private communications and communications data that are sent or received outside the United Kingdom without affording the same safeguards as apply to the interception of internal communications; and (b) about the lack of sufficient safeguards in regard to the obtaining of private communications from foreign security agencies and the sharing of personal communications data with such agencies. The Committee is also concerned that the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 provides for wide powers for the retention of communications data, and that access to such data does not appear to be limited to the most serious crimes (arts. 2, 17, 19 and 26).

Prisoners' right to vote

25. The Committee, recalling its previous concern (CCPRlCIGBRlCO/6, para. 28), regrets the lack of progress in reviewing the State party's legislation denying the right to vote to any prisoner serving a custodial sentence (art. 25).

Dissemination of information relating to the Covenant

26. The State party should disseminate widely the Covenant, the text of its seventh periodic report and the present concluding observations, among the judicial, legislative and administrative authorities, civil society and non-governmental organizations operating in the country, and the general public.

27. In accordance with rule 71, paragraph 5, of the Committee's rules of procedure, the State party should provide, within one year, relevant information on its implementation of the Committee's recommendations made in paragraphs 8 (accountability for conflict-related violations in Northern Ireland) and 9 (accountability for human rights violations committed by British forces abroad) above.

28. The Committee requests that the State party submit its next periodic report by 24 July 2020 and that it include in it specific up-to-date information on the implementation of all its recommendations and of the Covenant as a whole. The Committee requests that the State party, in preparing the report, broadly consult civil society and non-governmental organizations operating in the country. In accordance with General Assembly resolution 68/268, the word limit for the report is 21,200 words

Last updated 20 November, 2015