In Wednesday's Live Coverage, we noted the submission of a 34-page report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Iran, Ahmad Shaheed, on human rights violations in the Islamic Republic.
We now post the full document, which is damning in its general portrayal of injustice and curbs on freedoms and in its specific denunciation of repression pointing to a "fraudulent" Presidential Election in 2009. Shaheed, who was not allowed into Iran and was not given access to Iranian officials, concludes, "The Special Rapporteur has catalogued allegations that produce a striking pattern of violations of fundamental human rights guaranteed under international law."
(Hat tip to Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, which also provides footnotes for the report.)
Human Rights Council, Nineteenth session
Agenda item 4
Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention
Summary
The present report, the first to be submitted to the Human Rights Council, is submitted pursuant to Council resolution 16/9 and covers the human rights developments since the commencement of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on 1 August 2011. The Special Rapporteur e presented his first interim report to the General Assembly (A/66/374) in October 2011.
The present report outlines the Special Rapporteur‟s proposed methodology and highlights the recent trends in the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran. While listing some of the most recent human rights concerns, the Special Rapporteur focuses on some of the cases that emerged during post-election unrest in 2009. Although the report does not cover all the violations of human rights in the country, it provides a picture of the prevailing situation in that regard. It is envisaged that a number of important issues not covered in the present report will be addressed in the Special Rapporteur‟s future reports to the Assembly and the Council....
I. Introduction
1. The Islamic Republic of Iran possesses the basic legislative framework and tools to promote respect for human rights. The country is a party to five of the nine legally-binding international human rights treaties, and many of the rights guaranteed therein are enshrined in the Constitution. International commitments and constitutional provisions notwithstanding, however, it is clear that elements of the legal framework, together with insufficient adherence to the rule of law, create systemic obstacles to the Government‟s ability to adhere to these commitments. As an original member of the United Nations system, the Islamic Republic of Iran has an important role to play in the global community but this has unfortunately become overshadowed by confrontation and tension. The Special Rapporteur believes that meaningful cooperation with United Nations human rights mechanisms could help the country to lessen potential for politicization, an issue about wh ich the Government has repeatedly expressed its deep concern.
2. Despite the statements made by representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the Government‟s interest in cooperation with United Nations human rights mechanisms and its standing invitation to thematic special procedures mandate holders of the Human Rights Council, the Government has not permitted visits since 2005. The Special Rapporteur regrets the fact that the Government has not addressed his request for a country visit issued on 19 September 2011, despite its stated intention to invite two special procedures mandate holders in 2012. The Special Rapporteur continues to urge the Iranian authorities to give positive consideration to his request, as well as those of the Human Right Council and the General Assembly to allow his unfettered access to the country to carry out his mandate. While the Special Rapporteur was not granted access to the country during the period under review, he fulfilled his mandate to the best of his ability on the basis of voluminous information collected from a variety of independent and reliable sources. The Special Rapporteur reaffirms that he maintained his independence, impartiality and objectivity in weighing the information provided to him.
3. The Special Rapporteur regrets the fact that a number of urgent appeals made by various thematic mandate holders, as well as several joint communications transmitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Special Rapporteur together with other special procedures mandate holders, also remain unaddressed. The insufficient engagement of the Government with the mandate holders was highlighted in a 2010 study, which concluded that the Islamic Republic of Iran held the highest number of pending visits requests of all countries that have issued standing invitations. Data also suggested that the Islamic Republic of Iran received the highest number of communications in the period 2004-2008 (594), and that 25 per cent of the allegations made in the said communications had been wholly rejected, 1.3 per cent resulted in steps taken to address concerns, and approximately 54 per cent of communications transmitted had received no response.
Special Rapporteur notes that the unwillingness to provide access to the country creates a void of information and only encourages the international community to imagine the worst, thereby intensifying the focus on the Government‟s human rights record.
4. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the statement made by the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran during consideration by the Third Committee of the General Assembly of a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in that country , that the Special Rapporteur “should be given time and opportunity to prepare his reports without external pressure or induced prejudices”.5 To this end, the Special Rapporteur was keen to develop a substantive dialogue with the authorities and is pleased to have at least been granted meetings with the Permanent Missions of the Islamic Republic of Iran in New York and Geneva.
5. In accordance with the code of conduct for special procedures mandate holders,6 the Special Rapporteur has forwarded the present report to the Islamic Republic of Iran, which made several observations. It stated that, inter alia, the establishment of a country mandate was the result of a “flawed process”, that the country had been cooperating with the United Nations human rights system, and that the Special Rapporteur was engaged in propaganda by participating in forums and gatherings that were contaminated by Western espionage agencies, Zionist elements and terrorist groups. It also stated that sources of information, such as reports or complaints, lacked credibility, and that no positive reference had been made to meetings with officials and representatives of civil society. The Islamic Republic of Iran further stated that more substantive comments would be forthcoming once these matters were addressed.
6. The Special Rapporteur would like to point out that the cooperation of the Islamic Republic of Iran with the human rights mechanisms has been found wanting in reports of the Secretary-General, General Assembly and Human Right Council resolutions, and also in the concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee. The Special Rapporteur highlights the fact that he declined to participate in any forums or public gatherings, except for United Nations press conferences and individual interviews with the media following the presentation of his first report. The Special Rapporteur believes that his information is credible and corroborated by a number of independent sources. Lastly, the Special Rapporteur met with two non-governmental organizations that are supportive of the Government and made adequate reference to their concerns (see paragraphs 40 and 43 below).
II. Methodology
7. Together with his proposed methodology, the Special Rapporteur presented 58 cases of human rights violations in his interim report (A/66/374) to the General Assembly on 19 October 2011. He drew no substantive conclusions, but presented allegations submitted to him as a platform for initial dialogue about the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
8. To date, the Special Rapporteur has not been granted the opportunity to engage with Government representatives in any substantive discussion about the cases presented in his interim report or to advance elements of his proposed methodology. The Special Rapporteur maintains that substantive engagement and access to the country would add real value to his work, and would allow the Government to communicate its views on specific issues raised in his reports. The Special Rapporteur will continue to make all efforts possible to encourage the Government to cooperate with the mandate holder and to allow him access to the country.
9. The Special Rapporteur undertook two missions for the purposes of the present report. From 3 to 7 October 2011, he travelled to Geneva and met with several non-governmental organizations, including two that were sympathetic to the Government‟s views on several subjects. He also interviewed 19 individuals, who submitted allegations of human rights violations. From 30 November to 8 December 2011, he travelled to France, Germany and Belgium to meet non-governmental organizations, members of the Iranian diaspora, diplomats and intergovernmental organizations. He also interviewed 80 people, including victims and witnesses of human rights violations. The Special Rapporteur wishes to thank the Governments of France, Germany and Belgium for facilitating his visit.
10. The Special Rapporteur reviewed dozens of reports submitted by non-governmental organizations and other relevant documents obtained during his missions, surveyed audio and video submissions, and monitored media reports emanating from inside and outside the Islamic Republic of Iran. He also interviewed an additional 42 Iranian citizens who reported violations of human rights from 19 October to 20 December 2011. Most of these cases were connected to developments in the weeks and months following the 2009 presidential elections. The accounts given during the interviews corroborated many of the allegations presented in the above-mentioned reports. The Special Rapporteur maintains that allegations communicated to him meet evidentiary standards that are appropriate to the non-judicial character of the reports and conclusions, as stipulated by the code of conduct.
11. The Special Rapporteur examined both the national report submitted by the Islamic Republic of Iran and the relevant report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review for the seventh session of the Universal Periodic Review. He examined the State party‟s third national report submitted to the Human Rights Committee, and various reports relating to that review, including the Committee‟s concluding observations and recommendations. He also examined the report of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran submitted to the General Assembly. Without prejudice to the matters raised in the above-mentioned reports, the Special Rapporteur shares the concerns raised by all three United Nations bodies, as well as the recommendations made thereby.
12. Many of the allegations received contend that the rule of law meant to protect human rights is frequently breached, impunity is promoted by a reluctance to hold violators accountable, and the space for public scrutiny of policies and actions that have an impact on the integrity of governance is severely restricted. Others complained of the inequitable application of laws, discriminating against women, religious and ethnic minorities, or exempting individuals of influential status from rules meant to restrain the abuse of power. Reports to the Special Rapporteur also reflected concerns over legislation that contravenes international human rights laws. Therefore, although the Special Rapporteur agrees that the Government should consider additional instruments that promote human rights in the country, the Government‟s insufficient enforcement of its current obligations is of immediate concern.
III. Legal issues
13. Every country places certain limits on freedom of expression, association and assembly, but it is essential that these restrictions be not misused by authorities to close the space for criticism, or advocacy of policies and actions that have an impact on the public interest. Allegations of human rights violations reported to the Special Rapporteur demonstrate that a number of vaguely defined security provisions within the Islamic Penal Code are applied in ways that contravene international human rights law and unduly limit freedom of expression, association and assembly. For example, articles 513 and 514 of the Code criminalize “insults” to any of the “Islamic sanctities” or holy figures in Islam or to the first leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Article 498 criminalizes the establishment of any group that aims to “disrupt national security”, while article 500 forbids “propaganda against the order of the Is lamic Republic of Iran or propaganda on behalf of groups or institutions against the order of the Islamic Republic of Iran”. Article 618 criminalizes “disrupting the order, comfort and calm of the general public or preventing people from work”. Article 610 prohibits “gathering or colluding against the domestic or international security of the nation or committing such acts”.
14. The Special Rapporteur maintains that the vague nature of these provisions contravenes international human rights instruments to which the Islamic Republic Iran is a State party, and allow for arbitrary application and the abuse of power; for example, the laws that prohibit “insults” do not specify the behaviour or expressions that constitute an insult; consequently, individuals and organizations that criticize policies have been arrested and prosecuted for activities that are protected by international law. Articles 498, 500 and 618-19 impinge upon the right to freedom of association, the right of those associations to publicize views that scrutinize the regime, and the right to assemble, or to support such assemblies. More than four dozen individuals interviewed by the Special Rapporteur asserted that these laws were used to violate their human rights or the rights of other dissenters, and that they have been intimidated, arbitrarily arres ted, detained and/or prosecuted for protected activities.
A. Concerns regarding legislation
15. A new bill, entitled the “Parties and Associations Law Reform Plan”, defines membership requirements for all political organizations, stating that “followers and associates of antagonistic groups that act or have previously acted against the Islamic Republic” are prohibited from membership of political parties. Those deemed ineligible would be denied operation licenses and therefore prohibited from forming a political party or association. In the Special Rapporteur‟s view, such a bill unduly restricts freedom of association and would marginalize a large segment of civil society.
16. Another bill, on the establishment and supervision of non-governmental organizations, would create a supreme committee to supervise the establishment and work of such organizations. The committee would be managed by the Ministry of the Interior and members would include, inter alia, representatives from the Ministry of Intelligence and security forces, such as the paramilitary Basij. The committee would be mandated to distribute registration permits to non-governmental organizations, exercise significant power over their boards of directors, and disband organizations. According to the bill, the committee‟s approval would also be required for activities by organizations, including participation in seminars and conferences and educational sessions abroad, and collaboration and/or contact with international organizations and agencies of the United Nations.
17. According to reports submitted to the Special Rapporteur, another bill aimed at the review and discipline of Members of Parliament would establish a supervisory committee empowered to conclude that any statement, speech or interview conducted by a member would violates the Moral Charter of Representatives or undermine national security. The bill would also allow for disciplinary action, including the suspension of salary, the suspension of parliamentary committee memberships, the imposition of travel restrictions and even dismissal from Parliament. The bill contravenes provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as articles 84 and 86 of the Constitution, which recognizes the rights of representatives to “express their views on all internal and external matters of the country”. The bill would further curb the independence and effectiveness of Members of Parliament by eliminating legal parliamentary im munities in the discharge of their duties, while its punitive provisions mandate an unelected and unaccountable body to remove members from office, which circumvents the public‟s right to select candidates of their choosing and to be represented by them.
18. The family protection bill seeks to amend article 22 a law, the Family Protection Act, which allows men to enter up to four marriages with the permission of their wives and a ruling from the court, by allowing men to enter into temporary marriages without the knowledge or permission of their wives. A man would only be required to register additional marriages with the court in the event of (a) pregnancy of his wife; (b) agreement of the two sides; (c) conditions of the marriage. The Special Rapporteur contends that this legislative development raises additional obstacles to the promotion of gender equality. since this bill would seriously curtail women‟s marital rights and ability to determine issues that have a significant socio-economic impact on their lives.
19. Lastly, the Special Rapporteur welcomes the omission of stoning as a punishment in the newly ratified Islamic Penal Code, but expresses his concern that severe punishments may still be issued at a judge‟s discretion in accordance with sharia law or fatwas. Moreover, the Penal Code still discriminates against women, girls, ethnic and religious minorities, increases the severity of punishments for individuals accused of crimes against national security, and still holds juveniles accountable for their crimes unless they can demonstrate that they have not fully understood the criminal nature of their actions.
B. Capital punishment
20. The Special Rapporteur wishes to draw attention to the alarming increase in executions since 2003 (see table below). In his interim report, the Special Rapporteur reported that more than 200 executions had been announced by mid-September 2011; he now regrets report that 421 executions have been officially announced, and 249 secret executions were reported to the Special Rapporteur as at December 2011.
21. According to a number of sources, 81 per cent of all cases of capital punishment in 2011 were related to drug trafficking, while 4.3 per cent and 4.1 per cent were related to Moharebeh (enmity with God) and rape, respectively. The Special Rapporteur continues to emphasize that drug offences do not meet the “serious crime” standard set by international law, and renews his call on the Government to implement a moratorium on the death penalty, especially in drug-related cases, to seriously pursue efforts to abolish the death penalty for juveniles, and to commute all capital sentences against them.
22. A number of individuals have been sentenced to death in recent years by stoning, despite announcements of a moratorium on stoning as a form of capital punishment by the judiciary. In its report on the subject, Amnesty International stated that at least 15 men and women are currently facing death by stoning sentences for “adultery while married”. The Special Rapporteur joins the Human Rights Committee in expressing its concern about the use of stoning as a method of execution, maintains that adultery does not constitute a serious crime by international standards; and strongly urges the Government to enforce its moratorium on stoning. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the fact that stoning has now been omitted from the new Penal Code and hopes all existing cases will be reviewed to ensure that such penalties are not carried out.
C. Free and fair elections
23. Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights calls for free and fair elections. Furthermore, according to the Constitution, “the affairs of the country must be administered on the basis of public opinion expressed by the means of elections, including the election of the President, the representatives of the Islamic Consultative Assembly and the members of councils”. A former Member of Parliament (wishing to remain anonymous) conveyed to the Special Rapporteur, however, that the scope for free and fair elections in his country is severely undermined by the Guardian Council‟s ability to select candidates. He stated that this power is frequently used to prevent individuals perceived as reformist from participating in elections, and also silences representatives who fear that dissent would invalidate their candidacies. The witness‟s account also described widespread fraud during the 2008 parliamentary electi ons and the 2009 presidential election, which the witness asserted was meant to target candidates deemed to represent a reformist agenda.
24. According to the witness‟s testimony, observers in the cities of Tehran, Shiraz, Tabriz and Mashad reported that polls were still open and that uncounted ballots remained in their unopened boxes when the Fars news agency announced the election results at 9 p.m. in the 2008 elections. This raised widespread concerns about fraud and incited a number of Members of Parliament to protest with members of the Ministry of the Interior. Hours following the protest, at midnight, the Ministry reportedly issued a communiqué stating that no media or news agency was allowed to publish results until the release of its official count later that morning. The witness stated that the results released by the Ministry at 8 a.m. that day were identical to those published by Fars prior to the vote count. The witness added that, despite the fact that candidates had three days to contest the vote, the elections were declared valid the Supreme Leader on the day the results were announced, and complaints submitted to the Guardian Council by candidates in the ensuing days were dismissed.
25. The witness also claimed that the Guardian Council also ignored reports of irregularities and fraud submitted by the presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi in the days following the 2009 election. The witness recalled that the first part of Mr Karroubi‟s report described irregularities prior to election day, including various partisan statements made in support of the incumbent President by members of the Guardian Council and the armed forces,17 despite legal prohibitions on advocacy for candidates by Government officials. The witness also maintained that the report described a lack of access to polling locations by opposition campaign representatives assigned to observe the voting process, and that, like in the 2008 parliamentary election, the early announcement of election results prior to the closure of polling places by Fars had raised concerns about fraud.
26. The witness further cited the interruption of telephone text messaging services (the main source of communication of campaigns during the election). The exceptional size of the winning margin nationwide (even in the hometowns of Mr Karroubi and Mr Mousavi), the breaches of rules governing the confirmation of election results, the existence of 3 million more votes than ballots distributed, and the arrest of three Mousavi campaign workers (Behzad Nabavi, Mostafa Tajzadeh and Mohsen Mirdamadi) and three Karroubi campaign workers (Abdollah Momeni, Issa Saharkhiz and Ahmad Zeidabadi) together with dozens of others on 13 and 14 June, respectively, indicate that the authorities conspired to commit electoral fraud and to allay suspicion and protests.
D. Administration of justice
27. Article 32 of the Constitution calls for the immediate presentation of charges to persons arrested in accordance with its criminal procedures. The rules that govern criminal procedure also prohibit arbitrary detention and require that families of the detained be informed. The law guarantees access to and representation by legal counsel, and prohibits temporary detention for non-violent crimes, unless there is flight risk. Moreover, article 38 of the Constitution prohibits torture and states that confessions solicited by coercive actions “have no validity whatsoever”. Furthermore, article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides for due process and fair trial guarantees, including the right of all persons to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. These rights are a mainstay of human rights protections and serve as a procedural means to safeguard the rule of law.
28. Reports recently conveyed to the Special Rapporteur, however, suggest that, despite these legal provisions, violations of due process rights are chronic, reducing the likelihood of a fair trial; for example, the majority of persons interviewed for the present report maintained that they were not presented with a warrant or reason for arrest during their interrogations. Several interviewees reported that they had endured unlawful searches and seizures, and had been held for weeks, even months, in solitary confinement without being informed of their charges. All interviewees stated that they had been blindfolded during transfer and their interrogation, and most were unable to contact family members to inform them of their whereabouts and did not have access to legal counsel after their arrest, and during their detention or investigations.
29. Furthermore, a number of interviewees stated that their lawyers only had access to them immediately prior to their trial and did not have access to evidence, case files or witnesses testifying against them. Some also reported that their lawyers had been prevented from presenting an oral defence during trial. In some cases, judges reportedly issued a verdict after a trial that lasted only a few minutes. Several stated that they had been subjected to coercive treatment that is tantamount to torture, including the excessive use of solitary confinement, electric shock, severe beatings, threats of rape and threats to detain and/or harm friends, associates and family members. People were also allegedly forced to make on-camera confessions.
E. Detention facilities
30. A compilation of prisoner interviews, public statements and letters submitted to the Special Rapporteur about circumstances in nine of the country‟s prisons described conditions that fall well below the minimum standards proclaimed by the United Nations, such as severe overcrowding, inadequate access to water, insufficient prisoner segregation practices, extremely poor quality and unhygienic facilities, hazardous ventilation conditions, insufficient access to medical services, paltry nutritional provisions and the perpetuation of violence and use of prisoners to facilitate punishment. The Special Rapporteur spoke with four detainees who had been arrested and detained at the Kahrizak Detention Centre in the days following the 2009 presidential election, and whose testimonies corroborated many of the allegations concerning prison conditions made in the the present report.
F. Impunity
31. Following the closing of the Kahrizak detention centre in July 2009, a parliamentary committee assigned to investigate allegations in January 2010 reportedly established the responsibility of the former Prosecutor General of Tehran, Saeed Mortazavi, for abuses at Kahrizak, and confirmed the death of three prisoners following beatings at the hands of their jailers. On 30 June 2010, the judicial organization of the Iranian Armed Forces announced that 11 members of the Kahrizak prison staff and one civilian had been indicted for their involvement in the above-mentioned crimes. The indictment submitted to the Head of the Military Courts in Tehran charged the defendants with several crimes, including “denying detainees their constitutional rights” and “violating their civil rights”. Of those convicted, two were sentenced to death for the deaths of Amir Javadifar, Mohsen Rooholamini and Mohammad Kamrani, and nine were suspended from se rvice, given fines and made to pay compensation, and sentenced to flogging and imprisonment. One of the defendants was acquitted.
32. Masood Alizadeh, Hatef Soltani, Taha Zeinali and a witness wishing to remain anonymous, who were all detained in Kahrizak detention centre, filed a lawsuit against the police for abuse. Three of the interviewees reported being repeatedly threatened and violently intimidated by Government officials to withdraw their claims. Mr. Alizadeh reported that he was attacked and stabbed by two men on 15 October 2010, losing his spleen as a result, and speculated that the incident was connected to his lawsuit. Mr. Soltani stated that he was repeatedly offered bribes, and his own family‟s safety was threatened. The anonymous witness claimed that he had been severely beaten to force him to withdraw his complaint.
33. In a joint statement, the International Federation for Human Rights and the Iranian League for the Defence of Human Rights maintained that the court‟s investigation was not comprehensive and was remiss in examining the death of at least two other detainees, Ramin Aqazadeh- Qahremani and Abbas Nejati-Kargar, who died as a result of torture soon after being released from the detention centre.24 All of the plaintiffs interviewed stated that a number of high-ranking officials, whose names were made available to the Special Rapporteur, enjoy impunity for their abuse of several detainees and for their complicity in the Kahrizak crimes.
34. In an open letter to the Special Rapporteur, the “Mothers of Laleh Park” requested that Special Rapporteur to investigate the deaths of their children – Neda Agha Soltan, Sohrab Arabi, Ashkan Sohrabi, Masoud Hashem Zadeh, Mostafa Karim Beigi, Kianoush Asa and Ali Hsan Pour – during the 2009 elections. To date, the Special Rapporteur has only been able to examine one of these cases.
35. The disappearance of Sohrab Arabi during the 2009 election protests received significant media attention. The exact circumstances surrounding his death are still unclear and initial reports suggested that he might have been shot in the streets during peaceful protests, and either died later in hospital or while in police custody. After 26 days of intensive searching and enquiring with officials, the family discovered that Mr Arabi‟s body was being held by the authorities. The judiciary initially refused to share any information with the family and insisted that Mr Arabi was alive and would eventually be released from prison. The authorities eventually returned his body, which had several bullet wounds. Mr Arabi‟s mother and other family members have been constantly harassed and threatened following their call for an investigation. Authorities have reportedly raided his family‟s home and confiscated photos and other belongings. Family m embers and close friends have also been prevented from visiting Mr Arabi‟s grave site and are reportedly prohibited from marking the anniversary of his death. The Government has reportedly taken responsibility for the killing of Mr Arabi. In April 2011, the family reportedly received a verbal offer of diyah (blood money), and were subjected to considerable pressure to accept the offer and abandon their call for an investigation. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government to assist him in obtaining further information regarding this and other unsolved cases relating to the post-election protests of 2009.
36. The Special Rapporteur shares the concern of the Human Rights Committee that, to date, a full, impartial and independent investigation into allegations made during and following the presidential elections of 12 June 2009 has still not been conducted. He also shares its concern that responsible high-level officials have not been held accountable. Reports containing allegations of egregious human rights violations that took place in the days and months following the 2009 presidential elections continue to emerge, demonstrating that breaches of the rule of law have not been addressed and that impunity continues to prevail.
37. One such report described the events surrounding the widely publicized raid of Tehran University dormitories aimed at dispersing protestors that gathered on 13 June 2009. A student activist (wishing to remain anonymous) claimed that plain-clothed and regular security forces – who are legally prohibited from entering university campuses – raided dormitory buildings using sticks, daggers, chains, metal rods, Molotov cocktails, teargas, white phosphorous pellets and electrified batons. Dormitory rooms were vandalized and students were beaten. The witness reported being thrown on the ground and beaten with electrified and regular batons by the police, and later arrested and transferred with a group of 50 other students to Shapur Police Station in central Tehran. The students were allegedly deprived of food and water for 24 hours and subjected to beatings.
38. Several organizations also requested the Special Rapporteur to investigate the death of those killed “as a result of individual or mass executions inside and outside the prisons” during the 1980‟s. In this regard, he was presented with a catalogue of some 20,000 cases of individuals, including juveniles, affiliated with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), who have been allegedly executed, abused or tortured by Government authorities since 1980. He also received information from the Habilian Association, which claims to represent 17,000 victims of violence at the hands of MKO members since 1980.
39. The Special Rapporteur is not in a position to examine the above-mentioned cases, but would like to point out that the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran reviewed the matter of mass executions and violence during the 1980‟s in 1989, concluding that the allegations of mass murder deserved to be the subject of detailed investigation and information from the Government concerned in conformity with international practice.
40. The Special Rapporteur notes, however, that the failure to resolve thousands of cases of torture and extrajudicial execution is indelibly etched into the consciousness of the Iranian people and should be the subject of a comprehensive examination.
IV. Situation of human rights
A. Women’s rights
41. The Special Rapporteur met with representatives of the Communication Network of Women, which claims to represent 1,600 women‟s non-governmental organizations across the country. They conveyed their concerns about the Special Rapporteur‟s impartiality and expressed their view that gender equality had significantly improved since the establishment of the Islamic Republic, noting that the matter required a comprehensive study of data for the past 30 years. Like the Human Rights Committee, the Special Rapporteur has taken note of the impressive improvements in literacy rates and statistics that show a marked increase in female enrolment in educational institutions since 1990. He also acknowledges reports that that the Islamic Republic of Iran is on track for reducing the maternal mortality ratio by 75 per cent between 1990 and 2015.
42. Other reports that focus on women‟s rights suggest that additional efforts must be made to facilitate the socio-economic equality of women in the country; for instance, two former female university students explained during an interview that, although the number of women enrolling in Iranian academic institutions is high, women continue to be subject to discriminatory practices that hinder equal access to all the academic and professional opportunities that exist in the country. They pointed out that quotas had been put in place to limit the number of women that can enrol in medicine, Masters and PhD programmes, thus discriminating against women that scored higher than males on entrance exams when female enrolment has exceeded the quota. Furthermore, eight universities have reportedly implemented gender segregation policies on their campuses, some of which have barred women from attending free day classes, forcing them to attend evening classes, w hich charge tuition fees.
43. According to Fars, eight children were severely burned (some suffering limb loss) on 5 December 2006. The Ministry of Education and Development was found guilty of negligence in the case of the fire, but the legal counsel for the children stated that the final ruling from the court allocated twice as much diyah (see paragraph 37 above) to the male victims than the female victims. After public outcry about the discriminatory outcome, State media reported that girls would be paid an equal amount. The Special Rapporteur commends the recent decision to overturn a court ruling to pay girls half the diyah allotted to boys for burns and injuries sustained in a school fire. He encourages the Government to reassess all laws that discriminate against women and girls, especially those that place unequal value on their lives and bodily parts.
44. In a report submitted to the Human Rights Committee, the Government noted that efforts to ensure equal representation in high Government offices, such as for judge, had resulted in 614 female judges being approved.33 The Special Rapporteur also wishes, however, to highlight other reports according to which women do not hold positions as presiding judges in courts of law and that they are deprived of the right to hold various offices of the State. The Special Rapporteur urges the Government to make an effort to improve female representation in decision-making positions of the judicial system and in other Government offices where they are underrepresented.
B. Labour unions
45. Despite the ban on independent unions, some workers have reportedly formed small independent unions for the purpose of advocating for workers‟ rights; these include bakers in Kordestan, sugar workers in Khuzestan, bus drivers and metal workers in Tehran, and teachers nationwide. Many of these workers and their representatives have allegedly been harassed, intimidated and arrested for their activities. For example, authorities reportedly arrested more than 200 people in Laleh Park after forcibly dispersing a peaceful rally for International Labour Day in May 2009. All are believed to have been released by September 2009.
46. On 24 October 2011, the International Transport Workers‟ Federation expressed its concern for the former treasurer of a bus drivers‟ union, Davood Razavi, who was summoned and appeared before the sixth branch of the Evin prison prosecutors office on 24 October 2011. The summons related to a 2006 case involving his organization‟s accounts and its newsletter. Reportedly, Mr Razavi has been notified that the charges have been dropped. The bus union treasurer, Reza Shahab Zakaria, was charged with “acting against national security”. It was reported that Mr Zakaria is currently awaiting the end of his trial. The deputy head of the union, Ebrahim Madadi, who was also arrested and sentenced to three and half year on charges of “acting against national security”, was released on 1 December 2011.
47. According to Amnesty International, the President of the Haft Tapeh Trade Union, Reza Rakhshan, was detained for six months and released on $150,000 bail on 19 January 2010. The President of the Union of Workers of the Tehran and Suburbs Bus Company, Mansour Osanloo, who was serving a five-year sentence on charges of “acts against national security” and “propaganda against the system” was temporarily released on 2 June 2011.
C. Human rights defenders and prisoners of conscience
48. The Special Rapporteur wishes to express his disappointment at the recent conviction of Sohrab Razzaghi, former Allameh Tabatabaee faculty member, human rights advocate and Head of the Volunteer Actors Institute. Mr Razzaghi was tried in absentia and sentenced in January 2012 to 20 years in prison and a fine of $760,705 on charges of “forming a group with the intent to overthrow the regime and act against national security”, “keeping top-secret information in order to make the same available to foreigners”, “collusion with the intent to overthrow and act against national security”, and “receiving funds from international organizations”. Mr Razzaghi‟s attorney, Abdolfattah Soltani, is currently in prison on security-related charges.
49. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned for the safety of human rights defender Kouhyar Goudarzi, who was arrested on 31 July 2011 and has been held incommunicado in Evin Prison ever since. It has been reported that neither his family nor his legal counsel has had access to Mr Goudarzi. Several reports maintain that his mother, Parvin Mokhtareh, was arrested and tried on 6 September 2011 on charges relating to her advocacy for her son. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government to disclose the location of Mr Goudarzi, to allow him access to his family and a legal counsel, and to immediately release him as well as his mother.
50. Elham Ahsani, a university student and active member of Mourning Mothers, was arrested together with her brother Nadar Ahsani by security forces on 8 February 2010 at her home in Tehran, then taken to section 209 at Evin Prison. She was blindfolded, subjected to threats against her family and was threatened with rape and execution throughout her detention period. The charges brought against her included “propaganda against the system”, “acts against national security”, “membership of an illegal group”, participation in clashes during Ashoura 2009 and dissemination of information outside the country. She was denied family visits and had no access to a lawyer. She spent 40 days in detention before being released on bail. Her case file remains open, and a judgement has yet to be issued. She has since fled the country. Mr Ahsani was given two years imprisonment.
51. Lastly, the Special Rapporteur wishes to highlight reports about Ayatollah Seyyed Hossein Kazemyani Boroujerdi, who remains in prison for his political opinions. Recent reports allege that Mr Boroujerdi‟s health has continued to deteriorate and that he has insufficient access to medical treatment. In November 2011, his cellmate reportedly made an attempt on his life, an attack allegedly orchestrated by authorities; reports maintain that Mr Boroujerdi remains in danger. The Special Rapporteur reiterates his call for urgent adequate medical access for Mr Boroujerdi and for his immediate release.
D. Journalists
52. The Islamic Republic of Iran has detained more journalists that any other country in the world, with 42 journalists currently imprisoned. According to reports received by the Special Rapporteur, at least 150 journalists have fled the country since the presidential election of 2009 owing to fear of repression and persecution. In a letter to the Special Rapporteur, Reporters without Borders stated that approximately 50 publications had been suspended since the election, and that most press trials are conducted in private, despite the fact that the Constitution stipulates that press trials must be judged by a jury. It was also reported that journalists are frequently barred from appearing at their trials and are often informed of their sentences in prison.
53. In an interview, two recently detained journalists (who wish to remain anonymous) reported increasing censorship in the country. One stated that “authorities used to tell us before what not to write, and now they are telling us what to write as well”. The reporters claimed that the Ministry of Cultural Guidance and/or the National Security Council often directly censored newspapers by telling them what issues to cover through memos or telephone calls. One interviewee stated that newspaper editors were called and threatened to refrain from writing about reformist politicians, and that the Office of the Supreme Leader had instructed the press to refrain from reporting on allegations of widespread corruption in the country. They reported that press offices were raided and searched, and equipment was often confiscated. Reporters are frequently banned from journalism in the absence of court rulings, which forces journalists to practice self-censo rship.
54. Mohammad Reza Yazdanpanah, a journalist who works for reformist newspapers and websites, was arrested on 7 July 2009 for his support for and role in post-presidential election protests. He was held incommunicado, and spent 18 days in solitary confinement and interrogated for giving interviews to foreign media outlets, establishing relations with the diplomatic community, and participating in the post-election unrest. Throughout his detention, Mr Yazdanpanah was threatened with rape and subjected to treatment amounting to torture, and to certain humiliating practices. He was forced to stand for 48 hours without food and water. He was released after posting bail equivalent to $200,000. Two weeks after his release, Mr Yazdanpanah was summoned by the Ministry of Intelligence, where he was allegedly forced to make a confession.
55. Another journalist (also wishing to remain anonymous), reported having been arrested during the post-election protests in 2009 and taken to Ward 209 in Evin Prison. The journalist described detention in solitary confinement and interrogations by individuals that possessed reco
Posted via email from lissping
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.