House of Lords to Debate Amendments on Universal Jurisdiction

In a week, the House of Lords will debate important amendments pertaining to the principle of universal jurisdiction and to address a glaring justice gap.

The principle of universal jurisdiction aims to equip States with jurisdiction over international crimes when (1) they were perpetrated outside the State’s territory and (2) neither the victim nor the perpetrator is a national of that State at the time of the commission of the offence. Universal jurisdiction can be asserted over several crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, torture, and enforced disappearance, as a function of treaty implementation or permissive customary international law.

Unfortunately, in the UK, the principle of universal jurisdiction is a wonderful promise yet to be fulfilled. As it stands, universal jurisdiction is included, for example, in the Geneva Convention Act of 1957 and in relation to the crime of torture in Section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act of 1988. The International Criminal Court Act (ICCA) 2001 (and the International Criminal Court Act (Scotland) 2001), the very legislation which domesticates the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, includes active extraterritorial jurisdiction only. Sections 51 and 58 of the ICCA 2001 allow British courts to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes (as defined in the Rome Statute) committed abroad only if they were perpetrated by British citizens or residents. 

As it stands, universal jurisdiction is included, for example, in the Geneva Convention Act of 1957 and in relation to the crime of torture in Section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act of 1988. As such, British courts can prosecute breaches of the Geneva Convention or torture committed anywhere in the world, but they cannot do so in relation to international crimes defined in the Rome Statute. 

As a result of the legal gap, suspects of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity, as defined in the Rome Statute, who are not UK citizens or residents, are free to visit and transit through the UK, potentially for long periods of time, without any fear of prosecution by UK authorities.

In 2025, the Joint Committee of Human Rights (JCHR) published two reports which touch upon the issue of universal jurisdiction: the Daesh Inquiry report and the legislative scrutiny report on the Crime and Policing Bill. Both reports make a very clear recommendation to ensure that the current shortfalls concerning the principle of universal jurisdiction are addressed by way of removing the requirement of citizenship or residence of the suspect. 

To address this gap, Lord Alton of Liverpool KCSG, Lord Anderson of Ipswich KBE KC, Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws LT KC and Baroness Hodgson of Abinger CBE have tabled amendments which are to ensure that the UK rectifies its universal jurisdiction regime. 

These amendments, Amendments 472 and 473 to the Crime and Policing Bill, remove the requirement of citizenship and residence from the ICCA 2001, enabling investigation and prosecutions of the alleged genocidaries or perpetrators of conflict-related sexual violence. The amendments are now proceeding through the House of Lords, where they will be debated at the end of January. 

The UK needs better laws that ensure justice and accountability for all international crimes, and laws which do not allow the perpetrators to get away with some of the worst atrocities. 

Please see further resources:

NGO-Briefing-on-ICCA-Amendment-2-1.pdf

Download PDF • 580KB

IBAHRI_CGR_REDRESS_-Briefing_Amendments-472-and-473-to-the-Crime-and-Policing-Bill.docx.pd

Download PD • 901KB