Ukraine: International Claims Commission Convention
House of Lords · Grand Committee · 30 Jun 2026 · 22 speeches · Official Report
Motion to Take Note
Moved by
That the Grand Committee takes note of the Convention establishing an International Claims Commission for Ukraine. Relevant documents: 1st Report of the International Agreements Committee
My Lords, I thank the main drafter of this report, Samantha Granger, who worked tirelessly to produce this scrutiny document against a very tight deadline. I also thank Dominic Walsh and his team-I am sure I say that on behalf of all the committee-who provide first-class support to the committee. Of course, I also thank my colleagues and members of the committee, some of whom are here today; we just finished our weekly meeting. Everyone engaged thoroughly with the process and contributed fully to the report’s final conclusions in one way or another. I pay a special tribute to the witnesses, who gave up their time to assist us with this inquiry. I will be honest: my initial thoughts around this treaty were that it was potentially a symbolic gesture but that it would yield little fruit. Although we would welcome compensation for those damaged by the actions committed by the Russians over the past few years, I thought that no real money would be forthcoming for the foreseeable future and that the exercise would have little real impact. However, I was struck, when listening to those who spoke to us, by the importance of maintaining a record, assessed against clear evidence, of the harm and atrocities committed by the Russians on the people of Ukraine. The recorded claims submitted so far to the registry run to more than 150,000 in number, but the statistics, as is often the case, mask the systematic brutality of the Russian state against defenceless civilians and their property....
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Johnson, and all other members of the committee for the work that they have done on this issue. I also thank the witnesses who came forward. I declare my unpaid interest as an ambassador for the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. We have done an enormous amount of work with women and men from Ukraine. We have had a number of delegations come here to meet the Government and other people of influence. That has been very important. I welcome the Convention establishing an International Claims Commission for Ukraine, as well as the Government’s support for its swift ratification. As noble Lords know, I have a long-held interest in the women, peace and security agenda. I believe that the establishment of this commission matters a great deal. Lasting peace in Ukraine cannot be built on a foundation where the victims are asked to carry the human and economic costs of aggression without recognition or redress. We know that the scale of the task is immense. The register of damage has already received 150,000 claims-indeed, even more as we speak today. The suggestion is that the final number of claims could go as high as 10 million. I have met organisations from both inside and outside Ukraine that are keeping lists of all these claims. The way in which people-including men, women and young boys-have been abused is disgraceful. I will mention later in my speech something I would like to look at. I know that the Treasury has heard...
My Lords, the report from your Lordships’ International Agreements Committee, on which I have the honour to serve, might seem something of a no-brainer in recommending support for the Government’s intention to join the Council of Europe’s Convention establishing an International Claims Commission for Ukraine. Indeed, it is, and our chair has very ably introduced our feeling that it is a no-brainer. There is no serious doubt about Russia’s aggression against Ukraine regarding both its surreptitious seizure of the Crimea in 2014 and the more blatant invasion in 2022. Both were contrary to the UN charter and many other binding international agreements, including the Budapest memorandum-signed by Russia itself, along with this country and the US-which guaranteed Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. There can be no serious doubt either, as both noble Lords who spoke before me made clear, about the massive material losses resulting from these acts of aggression, not to speak of the loss of life. Is this attempt to assess and compensate for those material losses through an international commission unprecedented? No, it is not. After Saddam Hussein’s aggression against Kuwait in 1990, just such a compensation commission was set up by the UN Security Council in 1991, which brought about massive compensation for the damage done. Only Russia’s abusive threat of its Security Council veto stops that route being followed again in this instance, and the pattern set in 1991 has...
My Lords, I too thank the committee for this excellent report and agree that the claims commission is not perfect-I was involved at the initial stages of its inception-but I am very glad that we are supporting this initiative as a nation. The claims commission is an integral part of the web of comprehensive accountability that Ukraine is weaving. As I have been fortunate enough to observe over the past four years how this is being done, I want to share an up-to-date brief that I have received from the Office of the Prosecutor General-so, the Attorney-General-of Ukraine which gives some further information about the web that is being woven. I was involved first as Attorney-General and, since the election, I have been involved deeply as a volunteer teacher of Ukrainian lawyers in international law, which is something I continue to do. I want to praise those lawyers, all of those whom I have taught have active war crimes cases, for their fortitude and openness to concepts of international law which are not necessarily taught to them at university or which they have necessarily practised in their careers. They are pursuing this international justice to a high level and it is very impressive. There are various pillars to go with the claims commission, which are important to the way that this work is carried out. First, 99% of these war crimes prosecutions will be national investigations. They will be prosecuted in Ukraine and documented, investigated and prosecuted in local...
My Lords, that was a powerful and valuable speech from the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Prentis, relying on her experience and her contacts. I was particularly impressed by the personal examples. We probably all know individual Ukrainians in this country who have suffered. As the last Back-Bencher in the debate-story of my life-I fear that everything that can be said has been said, but not everyone has said it, so here goes my contribution. I begin by adapting Yaroslavsky: we are witnessing the grand patriotic war of the Ukrainian people. Patriotic? Yes. Putin claimed that the Ukrainians were just cousins, or indeed part of the Russian people, but they have shown that he has provoked a very profound patriotism among the people, who have shown enormous courage and resilience. I was at NATO headquarters on the eve of the aggression in 2022. I must admit to the Committee that the consensus appeared to be that, if there were an invasion, Russian troops-better resourced, and with a degree of morale-would be taking Kyiv within two or three days. That, happily, was not to be. This debate now is about making Russia recognise and possibly pay for its aggression. Two main areas of concern were mentioned by the committee. First, there is the geographic limit and whether we should extend it to 2014, to Crimea and the Donbass. On the grounds of justice, of course, that should happen and there is the possibility of an amendment to the convention. However, the demands of justice, in my...
Before the noble Lord sits down, I want to raise one point to which he referred: the large number of people who were compensated by the Iraq-Kuwait compensation commission set up by the UN Security Council. There were many hundreds of thousands of them, because workers from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and the Philippines were all grievously damaged and lost huge amounts of money, and they were all compensated by the commission. It was not the case that the Iraq commission dealt simply with the oil and the damage created by it being spilled, although it did do that; it also resulted in lots of very poor individuals receiving full compensation.
I hear the noble Lord, but I think he would agree that the amounts and numbers involved are vastly more in the case of Ukraine than was the case of the relatively simple-as compared with Ukraine-precedent of Iraq and Kuwait.
My Lords, it is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I appreciate the decision of the committee to ask for this matter to be debated. As President Zelensky said in 2023 in The Hague: “There can be no peace without justice”. The Council of Europe is on a twin-track at the moment regarding holding Russia to account through the creation of this commission for civil accountability, as well as the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, to cover criminal culpability, going beyond what the ICC can do, as my noble and learned friend Lady Prentis set out. My noble and learned friend has already received praise, but I will repeat some of that. I pay particular tribute to the work that she did when she was the Attorney-General in initiating a lot of the work that is going into this special tribunal. More broadly, we can all be proud of the fact that the British Government-whether the previous Conservative one or the current Labour one-have been a leader on accountability. I am a member of the delegation to the Council of Europe-I must say that I am slightly surprised that I am the only one here today debating this-and I can assure your Lordships that this really matters to the Ukrainian delegates. We had our plenary session last week, and, understandably, after the UK Government led the action to kick out Russia from the Council of Europe, this is a really important place for Ukrainian MPs to vent their concerns and to inspire us to keep going. That is why earlier...
My Lords, I am grateful for the indulgence of the chair and the committee for the opportunity to speak in the gap in this important debate. I express at the outset gratitude to our chair for his role in the presentation of this report as well as for his opening remarks, and of course to the secretariat, which assisted us in the course of our deliberations. The establishment of an International Claims Commission for Ukraine strengthens a broader moral and legal principle. Where aggression causes mass harm, victims should have a structured route to truth, recognition, compensation and restitution. The Ukraine mechanism builds on a Council of Europe register of damage, and it is intended to assess claims for damage, loss or injury caused by Russia’s internationally wrongful acts. That is the first point that I want to draw to the attention of the Minister and to seek a response from her on. The role of the Minister’s department and her personally in driving forward this treaty and all that flows from it is a welcome one. However, it is important to recognise that Russia’s wrongdoing is international. She has been at the forefront-she spoke on this only this week and indeed last week-of highlighting the tragedy currently unfolding in Sudan. Russia is an active participant in that country, with a view to obtaining access to its gold and rare minerals. The fact of the matter is that the reconstituted Wagner Group is playing an active role on the ground, fomenting and fuelling the...
My Lords, I thank the International Agreements Committee for its work and its chair for his introduction; I also thank the members of the committee who have contributed. Following on from the noble Lord, Lord Boateng, looking at the wider international issues that flow out of this is something we should definitely acknowledge. I was privileged to be a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe between 1999 and 2005. That is a long time ago, I know, but where we are now started then. At that time, I was a rapporteur in the release of political prisoners from Azerbaijan-we were somewhat successful, at least for the time being-and a co-rapporteur on the investigations into the Khodorkovsky and Yukos affair. I also witnessed the extinction of opposition among Russian parliamentarians. When I arrived in 1999, there were members of Yabloko-the liberal party-as well as independents and opposition communists. All of them spoke out against the Russian Government freely in the Council of Europe. By the time I left, though, they had all gone. They disappeared. The only ones there were Putin’s stooges. I have to say, at the time, I was also shocked that the Conservative Party left the Conservative group in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and joined Putin’s group, which was under the leadership of one of Putin’s members of parliament. I found that shocking. It was actually reversed by David Cameron when he was the Prime Minister. As noble Lords will...
The secretary-general of the Council of Europe recently made a speech to the assembly stating in terms that, to be a member of the Council of Europe, you must be a member of the convention.
That is my understanding-that it is a mandatory requirement. We will hear from the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, regarding the Conservative position. We have also heard from Conservative Members who are supportive. I get that: I am quite certain that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Keen, is supportive. What we need to know is: if they are supporting this convention, how is that consistent with the policy they are adopting? I am not suggesting that those who have spoken are not sincere in their support-I am sure they are-but there is an issue to be addressed. This is an initiative by the Council of Europe that gives real hope to the people who have suffered damages: it provides the ability to quantify the harm and damage, and gives a clear understanding that it may never be resolved and they may never get the money. In the end, there will be time to say whether we have or have not achieved it. But the Russian money is there and, if there is a will, at least some if not all of it could be diverted to this cause. That would make this a real and worthwhile outcome, rather than just an optimistic hope. I hope that the Government will use whatever good offices they can, both in terms of UK resources and influencing others. I believe in international law. It should be possible to prove that the damage done by Russia justifies the seizing and confiscation of those assets and does not compromise the international banking system.
My Lords, I also thank my noble friend Lord Johnson for securing this important debate. The whole committee is to be congratulated for its hard work on the scrutiny of this convention. I am grateful to all noble Lords who have contributed, particularly my noble and learned friend Lady Prentis, whose grim litany of statistics was truly horrifying. I am very happy to confirm to the noble Lord, Lord Bruce, that it is our policy to leave the European Convention on Human Rights, and we all know the reasons for that. I am not going to pursue that point now because it would break the spirit of unanimity that there has been on this important subject. As noble Lords across the Committee know, we have been steadfast in our support for Ukraine both in government and in opposition, and that reflects the UK people’s support for the people of Ukraine in the face of Putin’s illegal invasion. It is something of which we should all be proud. We are one of the few countries in the world where there is genuine cross-party collaboration and support for the people of Ukraine, against this horrific invasion. We are delighted to see the latest news, which looks a little more encouraging for Ukraine, but we will see how that pans out. The measures of support have commanded cross-party backing and show what can be done if we unite as a nation. We must continue that work. We will support this Government or the next if they continue to support Ukraine in its fight. We need to redouble our commitment....
Baroness Chapman of Darlington
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Johnson of Lainston, for making sure that we are here today to discuss this and to all those who have contributed. I particularly thank the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Prentis- I have always liked her-for her work over many years and as AG. The fact she has continued that, when she does not have to, in support of the rule of law in Ukraine is really commendable. I hope the noble and learned Baroness knows how admired she is for that across the House of Lords. I am also grateful to the International Agreements Committee for its careful scrutiny under the noble Lord’s chairmanship. Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has caused immense suffering and destruction. We saw this again on the night of 14 and 15 June, when Russia launched 611 drones and 70 missiles at Ukraine. More than 60 of those missiles were fired at Kyiv, in one of the largest barrages the capital has faced in the war so far. These strikes hit residential areas and civilian infrastructure. They damaged and destroyed homes and struck one of Ukraine’s holiest sites. Eleven civilians were killed and a further 53 were injured across the country, including four first responders killed in a single strike in Kharkiv. As I know noble Lords are well aware, these are far from isolated incidents. The scale of destruction and loss underlines why a just and lasting peace in Ukraine must have accountability at its heart. I tend to agree with the noble Lord, Lord Anderson, who said that we...
I thank the Minister for her exceptionally helpful and thorough response. There was one small point that I asked about UK citizens and the processes around that.
Baroness Chapman of Darlington
That is my mistake. At the moment, this is for Ukrainian nationals only but, as with other issues that were raised, there is the potential for that to change in the future. But for now, it is for Ukrainian nationals.
That is very helpful; I thank the Minister very much. I thank all the Members of the Committee who have contributed to this debate, particularly those who are not members of the International Agreements Committee but also, of course, the members of that committee. It would be wrong for me not to draw attention to the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, in the respect that he was the one who created the original Iraq-Kuwait compensation process. Having him on our committee was enormously helpful. Some of the comments around the similarities are also relevant but this is clearly a more significant and more destructive process. The noble Lord, Lord Boateng, raised a relevant point, which is about what we forget. This is a short debate-just over an hour-and I will not prolong it any more than is necessary. But the reality is that this is an enormously significant action and there is a terrible war happening not far from this House, and it is easy to forget about it. It is not simply about a conflict situation in another country. It is about a real geostrategic and geopolitical issue that this country faces, with a significant aggressor that is active on a global scale. It is important that Members of this House and people listening to this debate realise that this is not a simple technicality around compensation-this is not an insurance claim. It is an important part of making sure that we are properly defended in the nature of how we are engaging with these threats as well. I am grateful...
Motion agreed.
Committee adjourned at 4.55 pm.