Tears; the New Guest on the Haft Seen Table

This survey was conducted by Mohammad Tahavori and includes responses from Massoud Noghrekar, Said Afsar, Abdollah Momeni. and Mohsen Nezhad. Massoud Noghrekar is a writer, researcher, and physician based in the United States with articles published in many Iranian webzines, including Shahrvand, Iran Emrooz, and Akhbar-e Rooz. Abdullah Momeni is the spokesperson for Advar-e Tahkim-e Vahdat (the alumni association of the Office for the Consolidation of Unity) and former president of Tahkim-e Vahdat as well as being a human rights activist. Said Afsar is an Iranian journalist who worked for the Reformist Daily Journal and is now living in the United Kingdom. Mohsen Nezhad is a member of the Iranian democratic-republican movement.

According to an Iranian tradition, sitting at the Haft Seen table during the turn of the year and reciting prayer and wishing well for oneself, one’s family, friends, and country are worthy and admirable customs. But what has been added to this tradition in the last few years are “the tears” of mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, and children who have become the victims of the organized violation of human rights. If Norooz was the harbinger of happiness and peace in the past, it has now turned into an opportunity for visits that, instead of being an occasion for expressing good wishes, provides people with a chance to utter their sympathy and support for those who spend their Norooz beside the graves of their dearest ones, behind the walls of Evin or Rejayee Shahr prisons, or are filled with regret about the forced migration of their children and friends. This is the only “hope” and consolation they can offer each other.

The year of 1387 (March 2008-March 2009), as its spring had already signaled, left many bitter memories behind as the unholy alliance between the escalation of violation of human rights and the spread of poverty became even more pronounced. To list all these memories is beyond the scope of this survey, but their most disturbing aspects are the suppression of student, ethnic, and labor activists, the intensification of religious, ethnic, and sexual apartheid, and the arrest, trial, and imprisonment of women activists in the “Campaign for One Million Signatures.”

At no other time has the regime, in its totality, and especially the person of the Supreme Leader, responded to people’s demands in such a violent and unrestrained manner. The beating of students of Amir Kabir University after the issuance of an edict by the Supreme Leader to bury “the martyrs” in campus yards, the closure of “the Association of Defenders of Human Rights” in the wake of the Basijis’ assault, the implementation of “the Social Security Plan”[1] which resulted in the beating of young people in city streets by the police that, as part of the armed forces, operate under the direct supervision of the Supreme Leader, and the suspicious death of Amir Heshmat Saran in prison, are only some of the instances of this naked confrontation. We can add to this list the spread of the assaults on civil society activists from the political sphere to the social sphere. This new trend has led to the arrests of doctors and filmmakers accused of orchestrating a “velvet revolution.” Many Baha’i leaders and activists have also been accused of espionage while the attacks on dervishes[2] show only the extent of this unparalleled onslaught on social forces.

The situation of human rights in Iran in the past year, the analysis and prediction of what will occur in the coming year, and whether the forthcoming presidential election can change the current situation, are the three questions that Mohamamd Tahavori, an Iranian journalist living in the United State, has put to some civil society activists.

In your view, what were the most significant incidents that took place in the sphere of human rights in Iran in 1387 (March 2008-March 2009)?

Massoud Noghrekar, a writer and human rights activist says: “On the part of the Islamic Republic and in the camp of the regime, no positive incident has happened in the sphere of human rights in Iran, and we cannot expect anything else. The Islamic Republic has made its position on human rights clear by initiating an outlandish scheme called “Islamic Human Rights.” This is a phenomenon that is inspired by the words and behaviors of Khomeini, Asadollah Lajevardi, Mesbahe Yazdi, Ahmadinejad and Said Mortazavi. Relying on the theoretical and practical principles of Islam, especially the Shiite Sharia, it defines and interprets human rights in a way that is incongruous with modern and humanist definitions and interpretations of human rights. In fact, the Islamic and modern approaches to human rights, like night and day, are in complete opposition to one another. In the departing year, “Islamic human rights,” which only masks a shameless violation of human rights in Iran, and the systematic violence against human rights triggered the protests of all respectable and impartial international organizations which condemned it without reservation. In any case, we cannot expect the Islamic regime to alter its attitude toward human rights because this regime pays no heed to protests and warnings. On the other hand, political, social and cultural activists and promoters, as well as free-thinking and freedom-seeking individuals, have accomplished many positive tasks in this area. One can mention the struggles of Iran’s human rights society, and especially the travails of Shirin Ebadi, who have performed their duties in this area courageously. “The Association of Iranian Writers” and the general movement of writers inside Iran, the women’s movement, the student and labor movement, as well as other segments of society, have all worked significantly to promote human rights in Iran. Outside Iran, the true critics of the Islamic regime have also played a valuable role in both exposing the violations of human rights and advancing human rights inside the country. To stamp out these efforts, the Islamic Republic has resorted to the “institutionalized” approach in its warp and woof which consists of intimidation, beating, imprisonment, torture and execution.” In Noghrekar’s view, the continuation of the Islamic Republic’s rule has been the most negative incident in the sphere of human rights in Iran.

Said Afsar, a journalist, offers another response to this question. Although he criticizes the current conditions, he prefers to highlight the government’s initiative to reduce the violation of human rights. From Afsar’s perspective, the approval of “women’s share in inheritance” by the Iranian Parliament, a law that allows women to inherit the entire portable and non-portable patrimony of their husbands, is a positive development. He says this law, which made headway by the approval of the government and Parliament, is the past year’s most important incident in terms of improvement of women’s rights and eradication of gender inequality. Although this is a relatively small progress, it is still a step forward by the Parliament, albeit under the pressures of women’s movement.

Abdollah Momeni, the spokesman for “the Office for Consolidation of Unity” and a human rights activist, responds to the question in this way: “In the sphere of human rights, Iran has passed through an eventful year. When we speak of violation of human rights, we should note that any violation of human rights is unfortunate; but some of the events that occurred in the past year had a bitter taste to me personally, including the implementation of “the Social Security Plan.” In my view, what took place during the execution of this plan was the worst form of violation of human rights. Arbitrary and brutal interference in people’s most private affairs and the police’s violence against women and youths, which caused sad and regrettable scenes in streets, are the terrible results of this plan. The organized and systematic intrusion on citizens’ private sanctuaries has created an atmosphere of terror, anxiety and insecurity in society. In addition, the erratic and arbitrary arrests of citizens and the execution of tens of people as “hoodlums and thugs,” while they were deprived of just trials and even the right to have a lawyer, were some of the sinister products of “the Social Security Plan,” a plan that, in the name of promoting social safety, led to unbearable insecurity in citizens’ private lives. Beside its extensive violation of citizens’ inalienable rights, this plan has disregarded the principles of “the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” and the Country’s own Constitution which compels government institutions to observe the rights and freedoms of individuals.

“The act of depriving students of education, the prevention of peaceful and critical student activities, especially the activities of “the Office for Consolidation of Unity” as the broadest democracy-seeking student institution in Iran, the closure of “the Association of Human Rights Lawyers” as one of the most serious defenders of human rights in Iran, the threats against Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, and finally the restriction of religious and ethnic activities, followed by the harsh treatment of Gonabadi dervishes[3] and the Baha’is, have been among the most disturbing incidents of the past year. What was even more unfortunate was the widespread collective arrest of the Polytechnic students in the finals days of this year.”

In Momeni’s view, a number of positive incidents have also occurred in the past year. He speaks favorably about the Parliament’s approval of an amendment to the Women’s Inheritance Law and the removal of certain clauses from the Family Law which clearly discriminated against women: “Although these achievements are not enough, they are an encouraging step forward; the annulment of controversial aspects of the Family Law by the Parliament, which resulted from the untiring and admirable struggles of activists within the women’s movement and the defenders of equal rights for men and women, was one of the most praiseworthy incidents of the past year. But the execution of children and teenagers and a few cases of stoning to death have been among the most horrific, harsh, and distressing news that have wounded the human rights-oriented and moral conscience of Iranian society. Nonetheless, I personally become very happy when I hear the news of someone, even a criminal, who was saved from execution, and we have witnessed this incident in some cases this year. The last unfortunate and troubling example of a violation of human rights was the bitter fate of Hamid Heshmat Saran after bearing many years of imprisonment for legal opposition to the regime. Mr. Saran was suffering from physical problems for many months, but the officials ignored his condition completely and deprived him of the right to take sick leave to be treated outside prison. This blatant disregard for Mr. Saran’s right to live led to his death.”

Mohsen Nezhad, an activist within the democrat-republican and secular movement, believes that not only has the Islamic Republic refused to do anything to improve human rights, the situation of human rights is also worsening day by day. He says: “The regime has put immense pressure on intellectuals and other-thinking individuals, including university students and writers. Ethnic minorities, such the Arabs of Khuzestan, the Azarbaijani Turks and the Baluch, are experiencing unprecedented pressures, and religious minorities, especially the Baha’is, and leaders and activists of labor movement are harassed and imprisoned on a regular basis. The women’s movement activists, especially the members of “the Campaign for One Million Signatures,” are also jailed at an increasing rate. These pressures culminated in the mistreatment of Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, the closure of “the Association of Human Rights Lawyers” and the murder of Amir Heshmat Saran in prison.”

He adds that in the last six to eight months the regime has tried, in a dangerous way, to pave the way for oppression of its critics by intensifying its ideological propaganda and imposing its ideology on society.

What is your analysis of the condition of human rights in Iran? And what do you predict will happen in the approaching year?

Asking analysts to predict the condition of human rights in the coming year may be unnecessary, especially since the regime does not show any signs of positive change in its behavior and seems determined to continue the suppression of civil society activists. But the approach of presidential election and the possibility of an end to Ahmadinejad’s era and the hope for the return of reformists justify this question.

Answering this question, Massoud Noghrekar says: “As long as the Islamic regime exists with the same makeup, structure and behavior, we will witness the Sharia-sanctioned murder of human rights in Iran. Therefore, no hopeful future looms before us in this sphere unless the Islamic Republic is replaced by a democratic regime. We should not overlook the role of international events, especially the election of Barack Obama, in relative improvement of human rights in countries such as Iran. But Mr. Obama and his administration must constantly be reminded that the violation of human rights in Iran should not be overshadowed by other issues.”

Mohsen Nezhad believes that violation of human rights will continue in a more widespread and uninhibited way in the New Year. He considers any predictions difficult because a regime with the characteristics of the Islamic Republic is not understandable within the parameters of the modern world. The leaders of this regime may change their behavior at any juncture according to practical necessities, but they will revert to their former methods as soon as they leave a crisis behind. Within this pattern, they may give people an opportunity to breathe at certain stages of the coming year, but that does not mean a change in behavior.

From the viewpoint of this political activist, the coming year will be a tough year for Iran’s civil society, because the crises that have plagued the Islamic regime will only compel it to resort to arms and suppress its critics even more ruthlessly. That is why no reform in the situation of human rights seems to be imminent. On the other hand, some factions within the system that support Ahmadinejad can stay in power only in critical and military conditions. Therefore, it is not inconceivable that Ahmadinejad try to push the current crisis toward war to justify a more widespread oppression of dissidents.

In Said Afsar’s view, prediction of the future of human rights in Iran is at once easy and difficult. He explains this point by saying, “It is easy because, despite many centuries of existence, human beings, who are God’s favorite creation and possess reason and understanding, have not been able to live justly. The struggle over justice and its manner of implementation still continues on and will drag on. In this sense, no particular change will happen and we should not expect any cataclysmic transformations either. But prediction is also difficult because history is constituted of small and continuous steps, and development is not an overnight affair. That is why we should be hopeful about the coming year as a time in which more humans, even if on a miniscule scale, will benefit from justice.”

Like other analysts, Abdollah Momeni is also optimistic about some improvements in the New Year. He says, “During the first three months of the next year, when the presidential election will be underway, the pressure on society will probably decrease. This, however, does not guarantee that the regime will not use extreme violence against certain critical political forces. But on the whole, the weakness of civil society, the vulnerability of the institutions that defend human rights, and the security approach that the regime has taken up toward civil organizations and human rights activities, make any significant improvement unlikely. In any case, since no assurance for the observation of human rights by the regime exists, there is no alternative for civil activists but to compel the regime to respect the rights of its citizens by a serious and systematic defense of human rights.”

At the same time, Momeni expresses his optimism about international endeavors to diminish the violation of human rights. He adds: “Apart from this problem, the increasing sensitivity of international community toward the violation of human rights should be a propitious sign to human rights activists in Iran. The issuance of arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the Sudanese President, for committing crimes against humanity in Darfur has created hope among human rights activists throughout the world; it is an indication of the heightened alertness of international community to unhindered and systematic violation of fundamental human rights. Such sensitivity toward the assaults on human rights by despotic regimes makes the systematic violation of human rights for these powers costly and dangerous. The actions of international community have given rise to the hope that, in current conditions of the world, the defense of elemental human rights will not be sacrificed, or at least will be sacrificed on a much smaller scale, to economic and political interests of great powers.”

Do you think the forthcoming presidential election will affect the conditions of human rights in Iran?

Massoud Noghrekar says, “Human rights are the Achilles’ heel of the Islamic Republic. Undoubtedly, the election of reformists will be in the relative interest of Iranian people, a people who seem to be always condemned to choose between the bad and the worse. The experience of the reformists’ eight-year government proved that they respected human rights as long as it would not transgress or undermine Islam. During a speech in 1997, Mr. Mohammad Kahtami had asserted that “freedom of expression in the Islamic Republic is limited to and conditional on non-interference with the principles of Islam.” The meaning of this statement, which is a repetition of Ayatollah Khomeini’s words, is in practice nothing but a discarding of human rights. Thus, even the election of the reformist faction within the regime will not lessen the violation of human rights or advance democracy in Iran. We have to be vigilant not to fall prey to a passing euphoria.”

Said Afsar believes that “elections in countries like Iran have always been afflicted with fluctuation between hope and hopelessness and being and not-being. At one point, with the emergence of Mohammad Khatami, people were hoping for the rise of democracy after a century since the Constitutional revolution, but Ahmadinejad’s election eight years later crushed this hope completely. Consequently, the fundamentalists succeeded in demolishing the minimal bases that were being formed for the creation of civil society. The regime also eradicated any traces of freedom of expression and wiped out the elementary and equal rights of humans before opportunities. It will be unrealistic to expect the election of an intellectual and freedom-seeking individual in the present circumstances. As Iranians, the best we can hope for is the realization of our minimal demands and the election of a moderate personality who respects the collective reason. In that case, human rights may improve beyond its present miserable conditions.

Mohsen Nezhad responds in this way: “Basically, democracy and human rights have no place in the discourse of presidential candidates, and since the candidates do not pursue these objectives, the idea that this election can affect the situation of human rights and democracy in Iran is absurd. It is true that there are differences between the candidates and their viewpoints, but the common goal of all candidates is to preserve the Velayat-e Faqih (the rule of the Islamic Jurist) and the structure of the Islamic Republic. When the dismissal of human rights is the precondition for candidacy in elections, you cannot expect any improvement in the conditions of human rights, no matter who will win.”

The response of Abodollah Momeni focuses on the structure of power in Iran and lack of balance between elective and appointed institutions. He is convinced that “the real and legal structure of power in the Islamic Republic and the current configuration of forces in the country’s political scene are arranged in such a way that even the election of a reformist president will not alter the sad state of human rights in any noticeable way. Although a reformist president may introduce some improvements on certain levels, he essentially lacks the necessary legal-political tools to prevent the violation of human rights. We had this experience during the presidency of Mr. Khatami. During his tenure, Mr. Khatami was unable to stop arbitrary arrests, closure of the press, assault on parties and political activists, and violence against peaceful demonstrations and gatherings, even music concerts. You remember that no one was sentenced to imprisonment after the assassination of Said Hajarian and the perpetrators of chain murders[4] and attacks on student dormitories remained immune to legal prosecution.”

He adds, “Taking into account the structure of power in Iran and the position of elective institutions, it is also probable that the condition of human rights will deteriorate further. In the case of the reformists’ victory, if the tension and differences between the reformists in office and the fundamentalists in power rise to a new pitch, the violation of human rights may escalate. Certainly, the faction that controls the powerful and effective levers in the structure of power has all the tools at its disposal to do so. We should not forget the point that, according to the Constitution, the President has no power over the armed forces, and the security institutions, despite legal appearances, are controlled by conservatives.”