Holding Daesh accountable in the UK: Parliamentary Committee Supports Key Reforms Proposed by REDRESS and the Clooney Foundation for Justice

By Natalia Kubesch

Legal Officer

The UK Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights, a cross-party committee made up of members of the upper and lower houses of the UK Parliament, recently published a report examining how the UK has responded to atrocities committed by Daesh in Syria and Iraq, particularly in relation to fighters who have returned to the UK. The report brings together the conclusions of a two-year inquiry conducted over two parliamentary sessions. They highlight a troubling fact: although the UK government has officially acknowledged that Daesh committed genocide, and that hundreds of British Daesh members have come back to the UK, not even one has been successfully prosecuted in UK courts for international crimes committed in Syria and Iraq.

As might be expected, the report concludes that the UK has fallen short of meeting its international obligations to punish genocide, protect children from trafficking, and support British nationals, including children, who remain detained in camps in Syria.

To address this, the Joint Committee recommends key changes to UK policy and law, including on universal jurisdiction, to achieve greater accountability of Daesh fighters for their crimes.

The report incorporates several recommendations put forward by REDRESS and the Clooney Foundation for Justice in our report, including a call to remove nationality and residence requirements for prosecuting genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. This post further analyses the findings of the Joint Committee’s report.

Daesh Atrocities and the UK’s Accountability Gap

Daesh, also known as Islamic State, ISIL, or ISIS, has been designated as a terrorist organisation. It emerged from al Qaeda in Iraq in the early 2000s. During its reign of terror in Syria and Iraq, it systematically targeted religious minorities, especially the Yazidis, with the intent to destroy their identities.

Thousands were killed, abducted, and many more remain unaccounted to this day, while hundreds of thousands are estimated to have been displaced. The crimes committed by Daesh against the Yazidis and other religious minority groups include genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Despite the severity of these violations, and the UK’s legal obligations to investigate and prosecute persons alleged to have committed crimes under international law, no Daesh fighters have been prosecuted in the UK for these crimes under the International Criminal Court Act (ICCA 2001). Instead, prosecutions have been limited to terrorism offences – charges that fail to capture the nature and gravity of the atrocities or provide recognition for survivors.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights aimed to assess how the UK can better comply with its human rights obligations and play a more active role in securing justice for survivors of Daesh crimes.

Inadequate legal and institutional framework

REDRESS has long argued that the UK’s legal and institutional framework for prosecuting international crimes is inadequate. The Joint Committee’s recommendations validate this view and closely align with key proposals in the Global Britain, Global Justice report, including:

1. Removing nationality and residence requirements under the ICCA 2001.
2. Expanding structural investigations and international cooperation.
3. Improving coordination between UK bodies in international crime investigations.

1. Removing the Nationality and Residence Requirements under the ICCA 2001

One of the Joint Committee’s most important recommendations is to amend the ICCA 2001 to allow prosecutions of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity regardless of the suspect’s nationality or residence.

Under current law, UK courts can only prosecute these crimes if the suspect is a UK national, resident or subject to UK service jurisdiction. This creates legal inconsistency, as other offences such as torture, can already be prosecuted under UK law based solely on the suspect’s presence in the UK. The Joint Committee on Human Rights found no principled justification for this disparity and noted its support for reform, stating the proposal would “streamline things and make it a lot easier for prosecutors to provide advice on jurisdiction”. Significantly, they endorse the introduction of an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, currently before Parliament, that would remove the requirements of UK nationality and residency under the ICCA 2001. This amendment reflects proposals REDRESS has previously submitted to Parliament and advocated for in partnership with the Clooney Foundation for Justice, Amnesty International and other organisations. If adopted, it would empower UK courts to prosecute the gravest international crimes, regardless of the perpetrator’s nationality or residence.

2. Strengthening the Use of Structural Investigations and International Cooperation

The Joint Committee also recommends greater investment in structural, or thematic, investigations, which allow authorities to collect evidence of international crimes over time, even before suspects are identified or arrested. It also welcomes the UK’s first such investigation into the Yazidi genocide in 2021 and calls for wider use of this model.

REDRESS has similarly advocated for the expansion and proper resourcing of this approach, which enhances proactive evidence collection and encourages meaningful engagement with civil society and affected communities throughout the investigative process.

On international cooperation, the Joint Committee on Human Rights raised concerns about the impending closure of the UN Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Daesh (UNITAD), whose mandate ends in September 2025. It urges the UK government to ensure that UNITAD’s extensive evidence on Daesh’s crimes in Iraq is preserved and to deepen its engagement with other mechanisms including the International, Impartial, and Independent Mechanism (IIIM), which supports the investigation and prosecutions of serious crimes committed in Syria.

Likewise, the Global Britain, Global Justice report flagged the UK’s lack of robust mechanisms for international cooperation in the investigation of international crimes. We recommended that the UK ratify the draft Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity, which would clarify States’ obligations in relation to crimes against humanity and establish a formal framework for cross-border cooperation on such crimes.

3. Improving Coordination Between UK Investigative Bodies

Finally, the Joint Committee echoes REDRESS’ concerns about limited coordination between UK investigative and prosecuting bodies, such as the War Crimes Unit of the Metropolitan Police. It calls for a more coherent, structured approach to inter-agency collaboration.

While the Joint Committee stops short of making detailed proposals, our Global Britain, Global Justice report recommended the creation of a dedicated focal point – modelled on the US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice – to facilitate coordination amongst national bodies, and encourage a consistent policy approach towards international justice.

Conclusion

REDRESS welcomes the Joint Committee on Human Rights’ report and its clear, practical recommendations to strengthen the UK’s ability to deliver accountability for Daesh crimes – many of which reflect proposals REDRESS has long championed.

We are particularly encouraged by the Joint Committee’s endorsement of an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill to remove the ICCA 2001’s nationality and residence requirements – a move that could finally unlock the UK courts’ ability to prosecute international crimes regardless of the suspect’s connection to the UK, and to ensure that survivors of Daesh crimes have meaningful access to justice and accountability.

Photo of Raqqa, Syria. Daesh captured Raqqa and made the city its capital in 2014. Credit: Mahmoud Bali/VOA.