Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

100034

	registered interest
	date	21/10/2014
	answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept id	16
	answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	hansard heading	Unmanned Air Vehicles
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to support the formulation of United Nations guidance on the application of human rights law to drone use.
	tabling member printed	Lord Judd
	uin	HL2240
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/10/2014 answer text <p>The Government believes that international law on the use of military force is absolutely clear. There must be a lawful basis for such force to be used and activities must be conducted in accordance with the law of war or international humanitarian law. This is as true when considering the possible use of remotely piloted aircraft systems as it is with any other military asset or weapon. Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems are a relatively new military asset, and their use, whether armed or unarmed, will continue to evolve. However, the existing international legal framework is clear and robust; and, as with any other weapons system, it is fully capable of governing their use. We do not need to rewrite the laws of war in order to be confident that, when used in such lawful circumstances, remotely piloted aircraft systems operate in the same legal environment as other military means. We have set this position out previously including at the UN Human Rights Council in response to the report of the Special Rapporteur.</p> answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 28/10/2014 16:39:08 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
	tabling member	1660 label Biography information for Lord Judd

164524

	registered interest
	date	24/11/2014
	answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept id	16
	answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	hansard heading	Unmanned Air Vehicles
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of the Birmingham Policy Commission's report <i>The Security Impact of Drones</i>; and whether they will make a statement on a national policy on the use of lethal drones.
	tabling member printed	Lord West of Spithead
	uin	HL3117
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/12/2014 answer text <p>We have studied the Report, which is a useful contribution to discussion of issues around the use of armed drones. <br><br>The UK has repeatedly set out its policy position on the use of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS), including at the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council. The UK’s fleet of armed RPAS are operated by highly trained Royal Air Force personnel in accordance with International Humanitarian Law and UK Rules of Engagement. The same strict Rules of Engagement that govern the use of conventional manned military aircraft also apply to RPAS, this includes robust criteria on establishing positive identification and requires commanders to do everything feasible to verify that the target is a military objective. The UK believes that existing international law sufficiently covers the use of RPAS, which are subject to the same legal considerations as other weapons systems.</p> answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 03/12/2014 15:00:26 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
	tabling member	3834 label Biography information for Lord West of Spithead

521797

	registered interest
	date	26/05/2016
	answering body	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept id	16
	answering dept short name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	answering dept sort name	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
	hansard heading	Unmanned Air Vehicles
	house id	2
	legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
	question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government in the light of Omar al-Bashir’s visit to Uganda on 12 May and the warrant issued by the International Criminal Court for his arrest, what their position is when other countries host the Sudanese President; and whether it is their policy that he should be denied access and opportunities for international travel.
	tabling member printed	Lord Alton of Liverpool
	uin	HL363
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/06/2016 answer text <p>We are disappointed that President Bashir was able to travel to Uganda to attend President Museveni’s inauguration. Together with our international partners we raised our concerns with the Government of Uganda.</p><p>The UK remains a strong supporter of the International Criminal Court. We continue to make clear that we expect compliance with the arrest warrants for all those indicted, including President Bashir, and remind concerned countries of their legal obligations.</p> answering member printed Baroness Anelay of St Johns question first answered 08/06/2016 13:55:59 answering member 3474 label Biography information for Baroness Anelay of St Johns
	tabling member	738 label Biography information for Lord Alton of Liverpool