Statement from the Foreign Secretary: Bahrain and Freedom of Speech

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
Statement from the Foreign Secretary: Bahrain and Freedom of Speech
Statement from Her Majesty's Foreign and Commonwealth Office

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office notes that The Kingdom of Bahrain has detained Sayed Nazar Alwadaei, Mahmood Marzooq Mansoor, and Hajar Mansoor Hassan, relatives of Sayed Ahmed Alwadaei, a Bahrain-born asylum seeker who has been given asylum in the United Kingdom for protesting against the King of Bahrain.

Our Office likewise notes that the United Nations has recently published a report ruling that the detainment was an arbitrary retaliation to Mr Alwadaei's legal protests in the United Kingdom.

The United Kingdom considers the Kingdom an important ally in the region, and has indeed worked well with the goverment on economic and military matters. Additionally, we recognize that the Kingdom is a sovereign state and we do not wish to interfere in their domestic affairs. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom also would like to stress our belief in the rule of law and the freedom of speech, and does not believe the legal actions of an exile within the United Kingdom would lead to the indefinite detainment of his relatives in the Kingdom.

Our Office urges the Kingdom to consider either formally charging the detainees in accordance with their national law, or release them in the light of the new United Nations ruling.
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
And once again the hypocrisy of the government is shown, I shall once again refer back to their refusal to condemn Iran for their wide ranging breaches of freedom of speech, in particular in their violent suppression of anti-regime protests
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
Nothing disagreeable there.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
In other words: "Oh no please don't detain them".

Quality Government Statement.:yes:
0
Saunders16
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
And once again the hypocrisy of the government is shown, I shall once again refer back to their refusal to condemn Iran for their wide ranging breaches of freedom of speech, in particular in their violent suppression of anti-regime protests
In fairness, that is not relevant to British citizens. The unfair detention of a British citizen's family is.
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by Saunders16)
In fairness, that is not relevant to British citizens. The unfair detention of a British citizen's family is.
Except they aren't a British citizen. This is also the same party that refused to condemn Poland for their questionable judicial practices because that would mean interfering in the affairs of another country.

The statement itself is contradictory too, stating no wish to interfere in domestic affairs while demanding Bahrain change course with their internal affairs.
0
Mr T 999
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
"Additionally, we recognize that the Kingdom is a sovereign state and we do not wish to interfere in their domestic affairs."

Our Office urges the Kingdom to consider either formally charging the detainees in accordance with their national law, or release them in the light of the new United Nations ruling."

Is this contradictory or what?
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by mr T 999)
"Additionally, we recognize that the Kingdom is a sovereign state and we do not wish to interfere in their domestic affairs."

Our Office urges the Kingdom to consider either formally charging the detainees in accordance with their national law, or release them in the light of the new United Nations ruling."

Is this contradictory or what?
Shhhhh, don't tell them they've been silly, it might upset them
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by mr T 999)
"Additionally, we recognize that the Kingdom is a sovereign state and we do not wish to interfere in their domestic affairs."

Our Office urges the Kingdom to consider either formally charging the detainees in accordance with their national law, or release them in the light of the new United Nations ruling."

Is this contradictory or what?
Conflicting but not contradictory. "Urging" isn't actually "doing" anything meaningful that might be called interfering.
0
El Salvador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
And once again the hypocrisy of the government is shown, I shall once again refer back to their refusal to condemn Iran for their wide ranging breaches of freedom of speech, in particular in their violent suppression of anti-regime protests
As an openly gay person myself, I would of course be personally be wary of Iran's many human rights violations. Nevertheless, as the Foreign Secretary, as long as those are not related to British nationals, it is not my place to comment on them from the Office.

But you will also note that the Prime Minister himself has made a statement on Iran not too long ago.
0
El Salvador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Except they aren't a British citizen. This is also the same party that refused to condemn Poland for their questionable judicial practices because that would mean interfering in the affairs of another country.

The statement itself is contradictory too, stating no wish to interfere in domestic affairs while demanding Bahrain change course with their internal affairs.
There is no demand and no threat.

Also, you're just doing whataboutism overload. We are not the news, we don't comment on every single thing that's happening in the world.
0
El Salvador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by mr T 999)
"Additionally, we recognize that the Kingdom is a sovereign state and we do not wish to interfere in their domestic affairs."

Our Office urges the Kingdom to consider either formally charging the detainees in accordance with their national law, or release them in the light of the new United Nations ruling."

Is this contradictory or what?
We wish we wouldn't have to do anything, but alas, we have to. And we "urge" them to "consider" using "their national law", or recognize the "United Nations ruling".

It cannot be any softer than this.
0
Jammy Duel
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by The Champion.m4a)
As an openly gay person myself, I would of course be personally be wary of Iran's many human rights violations. Nevertheless, as the Foreign Secretary, as long as those are not related to British nationals, it is not my place to comment on them from the Office.

But you will also note that the Prime Minister himself has made a statement on Iran not too long ago.
A completely seperate statement on Iran, and checking the voting record we see that both yourself and the PM voted against condemning Iran for the violent supression of anti-government protest, why is it okay for a foreign government to violently suppress many but not a few?

(Original post by The Champion.m4a)
There is no demand and no threat.

Also, you're just doing whataboutism overload. We are not the news, we don't comment on every single thing that's happening in the world.
It isn't expecting you to comment on every single thing happening in the world, it is looking at specific motions that have been put before this house. Violent suppression of protest in Iran: Opposed condemnation in the name of anti-interventionism; condemning Poland for changing the constitution and appointing a load of judges to ensure that the government is unchallenged in the courts: opposed in the name of anti-interventionism.

Why has it suddenly become the policy of this govenrment to intervene in unimportant matters of the running of sovereign states which have no bearing what so ever on Britain or its citizenry?
0
El Salvador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
A completely seperate statement on Iran, and checking the voting record we see that both yourself and the PM voted against condemning Iran for the violent supression of anti-government protest, why is it okay for a foreign government to violently suppress many but not a few?


It isn't expecting you to comment on every single thing happening in the world, it is looking at specific motions that have been put before this house. Violent suppression of protest in Iran: Opposed condemnation in the name of anti-interventionism; condemning Poland for changing the constitution and appointing a load of judges to ensure that the government is unchallenged in the courts: opposed in the name of anti-interventionism.

Why has it suddenly become the policy of this govenrment to intervene in unimportant matters of the running of sovereign states which have no bearing what so ever on Britain or its citizenry?
Iran wasn't conducting a violent supression on British nationals or their relatives, nor was it doing it due to something that was happening within the United Kingdom and its dependencies.

Poland didn't change its constitution to affect British nationals or their relatives directly or individually, nor was it doing it due to something that was happening within the United Kingdom and its dependencies.

I should think I had already made myself clear with my previous responses, but this comment should make it crystal-clear even for you. If you simply refuse to listen, and keep going on raising the same question over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, I'm afraid there's little need for me to comment further other than referring you back to my earlier comment(s).
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#15
Debate on this statement has concluded.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

New lockdown - Do you agree schools and universities should remain open?

Yes (50)
37.31%
No (70)
52.24%
I don't know (14)
10.45%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed