01-08-2025
How David Lammy went from human rights lawyer to genocide apologist
You would be forgiven for thinking that I'm quoting a frustrated political commentator – someone who has witnessed the deconstruction of international law by the Labour Government over the last year, and who is exasperated by their inertia.
You'd be wrong. These are the words of Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, as he addressed the Bingham Centre for International Law in July 2023.
During this speech, he said: 'There should be no power beyond or above the law. The law applies equally to all people.'
READ MORE: Palestine Action gets green light for ban challenge
He lamented that too many international crimes go unpunished, that too many dictators escape justice, and promised "wholeheartedly" to strengthen protections for humanitarian access and put the UK at the forefront of international legal debates.
Well, he's certainly put the UK at the forefront of debates on international law. At best, because of his continued apology for Israel's war crimes. At worst, because of his active role in enabling these crimes.
How does a human rights lawyer go from 'standing up for human rights and challenging impunity' to 'I am a steadfast supporter of Israel's security' after the state with which he so steadfastly stands has been accused of genocide, has murdered over 60,000 humans, and has gaslit many into thinking that it is the calling out of these atrocities which is the crime. Is he playing a geopolitical long game? The deep pockets of the Israeli lobby? Genuine callousness?
As I write this, we have seen the bloodiest day in Gaza in 20 months.
And yet, nothing from the UK Labour Government to suggest that this is a Cabinet which has 'international law fundamentally in its DNA', as Lammy once stated.
When lawyers talk broadly about the UK breaching their obligations under international humanitarian law, they are usually referring to Geneva Conventions Common Article 1. This states that all High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and ensure respect for the convention in all circumstances. This means that states must act to prevent breaches of international law in every situation of armed conflict.
However, the UK – along with two others – interprets this as meaning that they only have an obligation to uphold international humanitarian law when breaches occur in their own territory. The other states are Israel and the US.
As well as Common Article 1, the ICJ confirmed that all states must act to prevent a genocide as soon as they are aware of a serious risk – mirroring the Genocide Convention – and reiterated by credible findings of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.
However, during the Al-Haq case, Labour confirmed that the reason that they are not acting to prevent a genocide is because they have found no credible evidence to suggest a genocide is ongoing. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits transferring a population within occupied territory and Article 59 demands that occupying states allow unimpeded humanitarian aid for all civilians, while Additional Protocol I prohibits the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare.
Yet, repeatedly Labour MPs and the UK Government have excused Israel's siege and failed to prevent the mass forced displacement of Palestinians. The latest announcement to airdrop aid into Gaza is simply a self-congratulatory distraction.
READ MORE: SNP to press ahead with Palestine recognition vote
The UK should have immediately and unequivocally suspended all Israeli trade arrangements, as they are prohibited from assisting situations created by breaches of international law, as per the ICJ and the ILC Articles on State Responsibility. Instead, Lammy and the Labour Government have sent a trade envoy to Israel, brag about their crucial trade partnerships, and still support Israel militarily.
All of these obligations apply to the UK Labour Government. All of them are being breached.
In January 2024, Lammy said that '…the rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in international law, just as in national law. Labour agrees.'
However, in July 2025, when speaking of Israel – a state accused of genocide –Lammy said he 'treasures the many connections between our peoples'.
Despite their legal obligations and public and parliamentary outrage, the UK Labour Government could not be further from the vision that Lammy established in 2023. When Lammy gave his speech, there were echoes of Tony Benn's anti-war speech from 1998. Lammy ended his address by quoting the Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations, as Benn had.
Lammy spoke of the responsibility of governments to make the right decisions to protect people, as Benn had.
He warned against the mistakes that led to the Second World War, as Benn had.
He praised the legacy of Britain in pursuing the international rules-based order in the 1940s, mirroring Benn's calls for continued progression towards peace.
Lammy's transition from Benn-to-barely-able-to-muster-up-a-sentence-without 'Israel's right to defend herself' is not just due to the grip of the Israeli lobby, but can be likened to a child who hasn't done their homework and is hoping that the teacher doesn't ask them a question in class. As though if his tone drips with enough condescension people will be distracted from the words coming out of his mouth.
Lammy has spent a year trying to convince us that the mass atrocities being committed against Palestinian civilians is normal.
He has gone from forging a 'foreign policy underpinned by a fundamental belief in the rule of law' to facing claims that he is perpetuating Israeli war crimes.
David Lammy has reduced himself from an eminent human rights lawyer to a genocide apologist.
The support for Israel's genocide will be this Labour Government's legacy, just as the illegal Iraq war was the legacy of the 1997 Labour government.
David Lammy will always be the Foreign Secretary who forgot about international law because he was too busy trying to sound clever.
The Foreign Secretary that condemned the Palestinian people to genocide because he liked the sound of a speech more than he liked the idea of implementing it.
Lara Bird-Leakey is a senior policy researcher for foreign affairs in Westminster for the SNP group
