Britain faces racism lawsuit from Caribbean nations over slavery

Caribbean states are preparing to sue Britain under international “racial discrimination” laws to secure slavery reparations, The Telegraph understands.

Mia Mottley, the prime minister of Barbados, is hosting a conference this week to discuss strategies for obtaining compensation, and has suggested legal action through the international courts as one option.

She told supporters that it was time to “stop being advocates in a movement, and start being advocates in a case”, adding that campaigners could have an “in” with the courts.

The Telegraph has learnt that legal experts in the Caribbean are looking into a potential reparations lawsuit against Britain on the basis of UN treaties covering racism.

This strategy, if pursued by the Caribbean Community or partners in Africa, would involve bringing a case to the International Court of Justice claiming Britain to be in breach of treaty obligations by not paying out compensation.

Caribbean nations have been seeking talks with the King that address the topic of reparations.

Delegates at the conference confirmed this week that Caribbean leaders would push reparations on to the agenda at the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in November.

The King is expected to attend the event in Antigua and Barbuda. Andy Burnham may also attend.

Diplomatic pressure on UK

Caribbean and African nations have sought to apply diplomatic pressure on the UK, including through a recent UN resolution insisting on the payment of reparations, but so far Britain has been protected from litigation.

This is because, despite being signed up to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, the UK secured a clause exempting it from lawsuits relating to issues that took place before 1987.

However, campaigners characterise slavery – which Britain abolished in 1834 – as a crime that needs redress, and the UK is also signed up to the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

A United Nations member state could sue Britain on the grounds that it has breached this treaty.

‘Ongoing harm’ argument

The convention states that reparations should be made for any examples of racial discrimination and other abuses.

Reparations campaigners believe that the harmful legacies of slavery persist in economic underdevelopment, poor health among the African diaspora, and contemporary racism against black people.

It may therefore be argued that, in refusing to pay reparations, Britain is neglecting a duty to offer redress for an ongoing harm.

This interpretation of the convention may depend on the UN committee that oversees the treaty’s application.

This is likely to favour campaigners as the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination said in August that the convention should cover “reparation for acts of racial discrimination linked to the continuing consequences of historical injustices”.

Such consequences could include abuse of people’s “dignity”, for example, through the consequences of “notions of inherent racial status”, or as a result of perceived “standing … relative to others”.

The committee also recommended measures such as building statues of notable Africans to highlight the positive contributions of the diaspora globally, and expanding teaching about the slave trade in schools.