In particular, he cited the regime practice of using exceedingly vague and undefined charges like “acting against national security” and “insulting” officials that are very elastic and can be applied whenever and wherever the regime wishes.
Unlike in the past, the Islamic Republic responded formally to Shaheed’s draft, rebutting its criticisms by asserting that Iranian law forbids torture and discrimination while guaranteeing the accused access to lawyers. But that sidestepped the point that Shaheed’s report asserted that many of Iran’s human rights failures were violations of Iran’s own laws.
The Islamic Republic also complained that Shaheed had based his report heavily on interviews with people outside Iran—people who had fled Iran and were thus biased against the Islamic Republic. That complaint was legitimate, but sidestepped the fact that Iran has refused to allow Shaheed to enter Iran.
The report was published last Thursday in New York for distribution to the UN General Assembly. Shaheed, a former foreign minister of the Maldives, is scheduled to present it to the Third Committee of the General Assembly on October 24, at which time the Iranian delegation will have an opportunity to respond.
Shaheed says he has “catalogued a wide range of human rights violations” and “asserts that these violations are products of legal incongruities, insufficient adherence to the rule of law, and the existence of widespread impunity.”
Shaheed, whose UN title is Special Rapporteur, concludes, “The submissions and interviews considered for this report provide a deeply troubling picture of the overall human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, including many concerns which are systemic in nature.”
Shaheed urges a moratorium on all capital punishment, especially that of juveniles, pending demonstration of fair trial standards.
Before the 23-page report was finalized, a copy of it was submitted to Iran for its response, according to UN protocol. Unlike the two previous reports, where instead of responding, Iran questioned the Special Rapporteur’s mandate and his character, the government did respond this time. However, it did not address the specific citations of violations of human rights, attempting instead to discredit the resources used to prepare the report.
Iran referred to the report’s conclusions as “based on unfounded claims.” Iranian authorities stated that the Iranian Constitution guarantees the rights of all Iranians regardless of their gender, religion, ethnicity and race. They further claimed that the instances documenting a lack of due process are “fabricated,” as Iranian laws prohibit prisoner abuse and the use of forced confessions, and facilitate access to defense attorneys.
The Special Rapporteur characterized the Iranian government’s failure to review the numerous, specific cases of violations of human rights as indicative of “a culture of impunity.”
Shaheed says Iran does indeed have a legal framework and the required mechanisms for respecting human rights. Shaheed emphasized, however, that the existence of such mechanisms does not discredit the testimonies of the 221 individuals he has interviewed since taking his post in 2011. He also expressed regret about the Iranian government’s failure to note and review the numerous instances of human rights violations cited in the report.
In a covering note, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said the report does not contain all instances of human rights violations, but rather “an overview of the prevailing human rights situation, with a focus on systemic issues that pose obstacles to the ability of the Islamic Republic of Iran to comply with its international obligations.”
According to the new rules of the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee, UN reports like the Special Rapporteur’s must be around 10,000 words in length. Previously, the Special Rapporteur included details of various cases in report appendices. But according to the new rules, the appendices are now also included within the 10,000-word limitation
In this report, therefore, the Special Rapporteur announces the creation of a website to present all the information and details used to compile the reports, as well as responses submitted by Iranian authorities. The website will soon be available at: http://www.shaheedoniran.org/english/reported-cases/index.1.html.
The latest report places special focus on systematic trends and legal impediments which violate the rights and liberties of Iranian citizens.
The Special Rapporteur expresses concern that “some elements of the Press Law and more recent legal developments undermine the rights to freedom of expression and to information. Despite legal provisions for public press trials in ‘the presence of a jury,’ dozens of journalists have told Shaheed their trials were conducted behind closed doors, and that trial deliberations were always undertaken by judges and not juries.”
The report also discusses the issue of “blasphemy,” one of the subjects addressed by the new Islamic Penal Code. According to the report, “Article 263 of this law states that any person that insults the Prophet of Islam or other Great Prophets shall be considered assabb al-nabi and punished by death.”
The Special Rapporteur states that “acts of insult and defamation do not constitute ‘serious crimes’ for which the death penalty may be permissible” under Iranian law.
“Despite attempts to refine the Code’s blasphemy provisions, the law remains vague on what constitutes an ‘insult,’” the report continues. The Special Rapporteur states that the general reference to “insults” in the Islamic Penal Code without clarification is inconsistent with Iran’s international commitments.
Shaheed says there is a serious need for an explicit definition of vaguely worded crimes such as “acting against national security.”