BYM urges MPs to reject anti-boycott bill
‘We are concerned that the legislation will stop public bodies from divesting from companies involved in violations of international law or human rights.'
Britain Yearly Meeting (BYM) has asked MPs to reject the government’s controversial anti-boycott bill.
Seventy civil society organisations, including BYM, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, signed a statement saying that the new law would stop the use of the tactics that helped liberate South Africa from apartheid, stifling campaigns from fossil fuel divestment to arms embargoes. The Economic Activity of Public Bodies Bill, tabled two weeks ago, would stifle campaigns for justice, erode democracy, and threaten freedom of expression, the organisations said.
Paul Parker, recording clerk for BYM, said nonviolent tools such as divestment from unethical companies are vital in realising positive change in the world. ‘We are concerned that the legislation will stop public bodies from divesting from companies involved in violations of international law or human rights. We urge MPs to reject this bill.’
The government has said the bill is designed to stop public bodies, including councils and universities, enacting their own sanctions that are separate from those set by the government. But critics of the bill – which include several Conservative MPs – have expressed a range of concerns, including the fact that the bill singles out Israel, and the possibility that it will stop public bodies targeting other countries such as China.
The bill specifically names only one country, Israel, saying the legislation should equally apply to the occupied territories and Golan Heights. The government said this is designed to stop a future government excluding Israel from its remit. Campaigners against the bill, including the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians and Amnesty International, said this would give Israel a unique status in British law.
BYM said the bill is ‘the latest in a string of repressive legislation’, and represents ‘a threat to fundamental rights to hold government and institutions to account’. It would also ‘stifle campaigns’ and have ‘a chilling effect on those concerned with the arms trade and climate justice’.
The bill was being debated in the House of Commons as the Friend went to press.
Comments
Please login to add a comment
