Betrayed Over Human Rights

Mehrangiz Kar, Rooz Online:

For years, Iranian judiciary officials were kept engaged in human rights issues in the context of Europe’s “critical dialogue” negotiations and strategy with Iran. But the issue was pushed aside when the subject of Iran’s access to nuclear energy became the topic of the day and Europeans focused on it.

Priorities have changed and nowadays we only occasionally hear of a resolution or declaration by the European Union addressing Iran’s human rights situation. Whatever is the case, we know that these days human rights have no place in the talks between Iran and Europe. Talks revolve around the nuclear issue.

Europeans have a negative memory from their “critical dialogue” with Iran. This, while the Islamic Republic is proud in believing that it has won the “game.” It’s political and judiciary officials proved during the talks that they have learned the skills of negotiating with the Europeans. They understand the weaknesses of the other side and they have in fact become so skilled that while continuing to engage Europeans, they also continue to violate human rights at home. READ MORE

Four years ago, this game had one center in Iran: The Judiciary’s Human Rights Commission. Mr. Javad Larijani, who is said to be educated both in cleric and secular schools, also benefits from education in the West and speaks fluent English, took control of the international relations of the Judiciary established the Commission. I, along with other simple minded individuals thought that bright individuals inside the Islamic Republic had eventually come to realize and decided to improve the country’s dismal human rights situation – even though carried out from the top - with the goal of restoring Iran’s international credibility and image, and improve its relations with other countries. Mohammad Khatami was the president then and the sixth Majlis (Parliament) had a reformist majority both of which showed an interest in human rights discussions, with the exception of some issues relating to women’s rights. The Commission, led by Larijani, took the initiative in human rights issues and organized seminars, meetings, workshops etc. It exclusively took it to itself to respond to international criticism, requests and explanations and would not allow independent human rights groups to engage in the process in any form. They filtered invitees and labeled whoever they wanted as an NGO member. Two years passed this way, but no changes were made in Iran’s laws regarding human rights. Even the Judiciary stopped presenting drafts for legislature to the Majlis (Parliament). The Guardians Council also would not change its policies and attitude towards these issues. Only a handful of political prisoners who were on the verge of death did the Judiciary extend prison leaves. The European Union got a promise from the Iran’s Judiciary not to execute minors younger than 18 years of age, and end the punishment of stoning.

With the domination of the nuclear issue in international circles, the Commission too was no longer in the spotlight. Nobody talked about the, nobody referred to them and few remembered it. It was as if the players had completed their tasks and had now retired. Larijani’s final words about a year ago were that international human rights principles were not compatible with those of Islam. Down went the hopes of millions. The hustle and bustle that surrounded the human rights issues all ended.

Soon the reformers lost their majority in the Majlis and following that even Khatami’s era ended. The raison d’etre of the Commission too evaporated. Talks turned to the nuclear issues and Iranian human rights activists were denied access to any forums in Iran that were engaged in the issue.

In conclusion, despite all the energy, money, campaigning, participation, etc, of the Commission, Iranian laws continue to discriminate against women, stoning continues as a form of punishment, a woman’s legal age starts at 9, a boy of 15 years can legally chose their wives, the murder of a non-Muslim if also not a Christian, Zoarastrian or Jewish is not a major crime, the law allows certain individuals to be murdered and only after the fact will investigate to conclude whether the victim justifiably deserved death or not, the press law of 2005 that left no room for freedom of the press continues to rule, a judge continues to deny an accused person his rights to be part of an investigation, etc.

These are on only the tip of the iceberg in Iran’s counter-human rights laws and regulations. With that said, one can only conclude that the Europeans were taken for a ride in their talks with Iranians on human rights issues. It spent much energy and time in discussing human rights issues with the Commission but eventually left the scene with no accomplishments, now giving room to the nuclear talks.

Of course the real loser in the “game” is the Iranian nation. A nation that has now learned not to rely on such talks and activities. It has also learned to live with laws and regulations that do not meet its needs and maturity. In society and community, everybody looks at a 9 year old girl as a child, except the law.

But there are more than just a few clerics who say that many laws can be reformed through modern interpretations of Islam without negating the religious decrees. But nobody in the government listens to this. Iranians too do not care about these inhuman laws and break them at every corner and with every act, and continue their lives.

One of the consequences of the “critical dialogue” was that Iranian human right activists were endangered. In short, the issue of human rights has now given its place to defense of the lives of human rights activists. Another is that pressure on the Iranian government to observe human rights of people has subsided and turned into pressure to observe the rights of just a few human rights activists.

A few days ago, a news report appeared in the press that the Commission has not being doing its job of meeting once every month with only three meetings over the 1st four years! In response, director of the international division of the Judiciary wrote back “the Commission is led by the head of the Judiciary and comprises other high ranking state officials but their preoccupation has deprived them of having their weekly meetings, … “

One would imagine that if people follow these events, they would ask so who do you file your complaint when high ranking state officials do not perform their duties? But unfortunately they are not monitoring such events. Only a few do, and when they write or talk, it is already too late because the players are busy with another game. It would not be surprising that the new game may continue for years, thus closing the human rights commission altogether. Under these circumstances, human rights advocates too will be forced to switch their energies to protecting their lives, leaving them no time or energy to address the human rights of the citizen.