UNITED
NATIONS
Economic
and
•
Social
Distr.
GENERAL
Council
E/CN.4/1988/24
25 January 1988
.
.
.
E LISH
Original: E LISH/FRENCH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Forty—fourth session
Item 12 of the provisional agenda
QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS
IN ANY PART OF THE WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL AND
OTHER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES
Report on the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran by
the Special Representative of the Commission, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohi ,
P pursuant to resolution 1987/55
-- - -
BP0005 14
GE. 8 8—10275/2246G
page ii
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. ACTION TAKEN BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
III. INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
1. Oral i nformatjon..
2. Written informatior
IV. CONSIDERATION OF VIEWS OF THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT
1. Compatibility of international law with
Islamic law
2. Replies to Alleged Violations of Human Rights
V. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Annex
Paragraphs Page
1—4
1
5—6 2
7-23 3
7 — 1]. 3
24—71 7
27—59 7
60 — 71 14
72—82 17
22
1 By its resolution 1987/55 of 11 March 1987 the Commission on Human Rights
decided to extend the mandate of its Special Representative, as contained in
Commissibn resolution 1984/54 of 14 March 1984, for a further year, and
requested the Special interim report on the
situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran to the
General Assembly at its forty second session, and a final report to the
Commission at its forty—fourth session
2 In compliance with the above mentioned resolution, the Special
Representative presented an interim report to the General Assembly (A/42/648),
and submits herewith his final report to the Commission.
3 The interim report concentrated on items and issues appropriate to give
the General Assembly an overview of, the evolution of human rights and
fundamental freedoms in the Islamic Republic of Iran durinq the period from
September 1986 to October 1987 The final report updates the situation to
January 1988 and considers some issues that were purposely not discussed in
the interim report. The two reportè may thus be considered as two parts of a
whole, whith the interim report being the first part of the final report and
its indispensable frame of reference
4 The final report contains five sections Introduction, Action taken by
the Special Representative Recent information, both oral and written, on
alleged violations of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
Examination of contentions presented by the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran n several 1r portant issues; and Gener?1 considerations nd
conclusions. ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ - - - ‘ ‘ ‘ .
I. INTRODUCTION
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 1
/1
‘I
., .—. . . . ..; .— - -.. . . ..
E/CN.4/l 98 8 / 24
.page 2
II. ACTION TAKEN BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
5•. On 4 November 1987, after being informed of the appointment of.
Mr. Sirous Nasseri as Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the
:. Is•l mic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva the
special Representative addressed to him a letter which read as folldws:
“I have just been informed of Your Excellency's appointment as
Ambassador and Permanent Representati-ve to the United Nations at Geneva.
while transmitting to you my sincere congratulations, may I also express
the hope that we shall now be in a position to enhance Our contacts and
further develop the constructive dialogue upon which we embarked in
Geneva last July.
As you may know, I plan to visit New York between 16 and
27 November 1987 in order to present my interim report to the
General Assembly. I also plan to visit Geneva between 11 and
15 January 1988, in connection with the preparation of my report to the
Commission on Human Rights. I do hope that, on the occasion of these
visits a meeting may be arranged between us in order d1ärify
our respective views
6 On 20 January 1988, after having conducted a series of informal hearing s
in the course of which 11 persons who claimed to have first—hand k iowI dge
and experience of various aspects of the human rights situation. in.thé.
Islamic Republic of Iran described to him their experience, th& Special
Representative addressed a letter to the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic
of Iran communicating to him the sununary of oral and written information
reflected in Chapter III below and in the annex to this report The le€ter
read-ab--fo1- Dws — - —
“As you may know, during my visit to Geneva from 11 to
15 January 1988 I conducted, in the framework of my mandate tinder
Commission on Human Rights resolution 1987/55a serie.s' of informal
hearings with eleven persons who claimed to have firsthand, knowledge and
experience of various aspects of the human rights situation i.n the
Islamic Republic of Iran. A summary of the allegations made in the
course of these hearings is enclosed herewith for your information.
A summary of allegations which were contained in documents provided
to me in recent months by various org.ani.zatipns and bodjes c:oncerned, is
also enclosed herewith. I would greatly appreciate receiving any
information or comments that Your Excellency's Government may wish to
provide with regard to these ai1egatiOUS. . .. - ‘ _.;,
I would like to seize this opportunity to express my sincere hope
that the constructive dialogue upon' which we. embarked last'year will
continue and further develop in the future
1.. j.:. E/CN.4/1.988/24
page 3
(. III. INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
1 Oral information
7. On 12, 14 and 15 January 1988, the Special Representative., conducted a
serie of informal hearings in the course of which 11 persons who claimed to
have first—hand knowledge and experience of various aspects of the human
rights situation in. the Islamic Republic of Iran described their experience.
Ten of the persons received by the Special Representative were followers of
the Baha'i faith and one person described himself as not affiliated with any
political or religious movement, but a supporter of the “National Council of
Resistance of Iran” Of the followers of the Baha'i faith, three indicated
that their name could be mentioned in the report They were Mr Etemadi,
Mr Fereydoun Somali and Mr Abdul Shoghi Tebyani The person who described
r 1 himself as not—affiliated to any movement was Mr Fereydoun Guilani
8 Mr Guilani worked in the editorial board of the Persian language
newspaper Keyhan until three months after the coming to power of the Islamic
Government and is also a poet and..autho . He spent two years, from 1981
uritil 1983, in the Eviri prison in Teheran for alleged anti—Islamic activity
and for publishing articles and poems hostile to the Government He described
in detail conditions prevailing in that prison overcrowding, insufficiency
of food, inadequacy of hygienic conditions and medical treatment, and, above
ali . tortt.ire and ill—treatment of detainees. Aàcordiñg to Mr. Guilani guards
in the Evin prison tortured him for three months, under the guise of
inflicting religious punishment, or “Taazir”. He describe&'in detail the
torture to which he was subjected. While he was blindfolded up to seven
persons beat him with bars andoables, kicked h m on al1 p s pf., is o y
tied him to a “Taazir bench” and beat the soles of his feet — resulting in
extremely painful and swollen feet Mr. Guilani described his trial It took
place before a religious judge, named Haji Mohasheni, with a prosecutor and a
guard also attending It lasted for only a few minutes, during which 36
charges were read out He had no attorney and had only a few minutes to
defend himself. The verdict was nOt announced immediately, and he found out
later that he had been sentenced to three years' imprisonment. After his
release- from prison he resumed ‘his'writing activity and .waS consequently.
rearrested for six months, for having written articie describing the
cOnditions in..the Evin prison.. The publication of:books he wrote •after.'his
second release was prevented by censorship
9 The followers of the Baha'i faith who appeared before the Special
Representative described their experience and that of their family members and
. . Most of them spent periods of various dura.tion in pri.son. and some
iad members of their families executed All of them had allegedly been
5uhjected .to harassment and, discriminatory measures.,.. such-as denial of
ducation, dismissal from jobs, confiscation of property, extreme economic
‘3:dship and brutal searches and arrests Those of them who had been
irnorisoned invariably described the conditions in prison as extremely harsh
They also described the physical and psychological torture to which they were
1b1ected. The latter sort of torture included threats of execution and of.
.;exual abuse. . . ‘
1 ”
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 4
1O. One person described the case of an elderly woman, Mrs. Sharghieh Imanian,
with whom she shared a cell, who had allegedly been whipped a hundred times on
her feet and, as a result, had deep Cuts and was bleeding. The prison
authorities nevertheless denied that woman permission to see a doctor and put
her into solitary confinement for three months without giving her any
treatment The same person was also shown the body of Mr Markazi, a mem e
of the Baha'i Council of Iran who was executed on 23 September 1984 His rios
and most of his bones were allegedly broken and his body was severely wounded
11 Mr Fereydoun Somali described an incident at the end of 1984, in which a
f ire broke in a factory in which he and 30 other Baha'is were employed The
fire was allegedly started deliberately, as the doors of the factory were
locked from the outside Consequently, Mr Somali was severely burnt and had
one eye seriously injured Several months later, following six months of
hospitalization and surgical operations, his eye condition required an urgent
operation for a cornèatrañspl nt. But on the eve of the operation the
hospital informed him that the office of the. Islamic Committee had not.
authorized his surgery, stating that an eye of a Moslem could not be given to
a Baha'i, and that he had to find an eye from another Baha'i for his
transplant Mr Somali presented a photocopy of a document originally written
in Persian, with its English translation, signed by an Islamic Committee,
stating that “following our telephone conversation, since Mr Fereydoun
Shomali has personally confessed his connection with the Zionist Bahai
faction, the cornea graft is not to be performed for religious reasons”
2 Written information
12 Subsequently to the completion of his interim report to the
_General Assembly (A/42/648) the Special Representative received written -
information contained in various documerrts, reports and letteLs, - which
referred in par.ticular toalleged violations of th ight to life,-the right
to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
and the right to liberty and security of person, as well as information
concerning the economic situation of followers of th Baha'i faith and the
treatment of Kurdish civilians
Information concerning the right to life .
13. In -November -1987.-the Special Representative received a list published by
the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran-containing names and particulars -
of 14,028 persons who were allegedly killed by Iranian government agents
during the years 1981—1987 The list contained 2,000 names of persons that
had not been previously published.. Out- of that list the Special Repres ntative
submitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran 60 names of
persons who were allegedly executed or tortured to death during the years
1986—1987 The Special Representative requested the Government to provide him
with any information or comments regarding those alleged cases of execution
and death. The names and particularsincluded in that list are reproduced in
the annex to this report. .
14. In addition, it was alleged that a prisoner named Hossein Sabbaqi, was
tortured to death in the prison of Babolsar, north-of Iran, in September 1987.
I
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page5
15. The People t s Mojahedin Organization alleged on 27 November 1987 that 36
persons, described as political prisoners, had been secretly executed in
recent months. According to that source a group of 26 persons were executed
in the Evin prison, Teheran.. The names of the alleged victims were reported
as follows: Khalil Ramezarii, Cyrus Abbasvand, Fereydoun Aqdoust, Farchild
Nemati, Seyed Mohammad Heydari Ghahi, Soulmaz Chahidi Af fan, Mohammad Ali
Abranki, Ardechir Abtari Rad, Amir Hossein Naderi, Qassem Khalidi, Mahmoud
Zakipour, Anouchirvan Ebrahimi, Alizadeh, Moloud Rahmani, Hassari—Moradi,
Alireza .Pjahani, MassoudAnsari,.Alireza ChahrakiFarahani, .Madjid Pazira,
Omid Reza Qomachi, Massoumeh Seddiq, Karim Hal Au Mohammadi, .
Mohammad Firouzi, Rahmat Tchaman, Ara, 'Mahsour..Qomàchf Làngueroudi,
Qolamreza Separqami, Au Taher Djouyan, Sheyla Mokhtarzadeh, Madjid SafaI,
HosseinMoafi, Seyed Djalai ChafiI,:BaqerChekoftehGohari, Alileza Dja na1i,'
Kioumars Chahi,Maziar Lotfi and Fère'doun Hassan—Dolat.
16. It was further alleged that two follàwers of the Baha'i' faith, Ardishihr
Akhtari and Amir Husayn Nadiri, were executed on 28 September 1987 in Teheran.
Information concerning the right to fréedom'frorn' tdrtu”re or cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment ‘ . S , .
17., Allegations regarding the conditions prévailiñg in Iranian prisons
continued to be communicated to the Special Rëprésentative. Several,
communications were received from families' of ‘political prisoners in Iran,
alleging ill—treatment and torture ofsuch prisoñer .ás well as extreme1y poor
cànditions in prisons in which they are held. Acco ding tO acómmunicátion
from several mothers and wives of Iranian political prisoners, received in
October. 1987, Iranian Government agents harrassed, ill—treated and detained
political prisoners' x elati es who demon tTatdi f or t f the United NatiOns
Office in Teheran on 10 September l987 , onthe eve Of the visit to Teheran by
the United,Nations Secretary—General. Many of the participants in that'
demonstration were allegedly sent to three prisons and were ill—treated'.” Some
were released after several days while the whereabouts of others were still
unknown. . ‘ . . ‘ .
Information concerning the right to liberty and security of person' '
18. In . October 1987 the Baha'i international Community transmitted two lists
of persons detained in Iranian prisons and beIieved to be in'dangerof
execution. The first list contained 12 names ‘of Baha'is, most of whom had
already spent periods of one to five years in prison. They were th'e
following: Ihsanu'llah A'yadi: Faraju'llah Sa'adati; ‘Suhrab Dustdar;
Ramidan—Ali Amu'i; Bihnam Pasha'i; ?4uhammad Dihqani; Izzatu'llah Rhurram;
Mihran Tashakkur; Farid Dhakiri; Vahid Qydrat; Shahruk'h Huvayda'i and
Mrs. Parvin Fana'iyan—Idilkhani.
19. The second list contained five names of prominent Baha'is who were
arrested on 21 October 1987 and were reported to be held in Evin prison,
Teheran. Two of them, Jamaiu'd—Din Khanjani and Hasan Mahbubi were reportedly
former members of ‘the National Baha'i council of Iran, and were said to be in
danger of execution. The other three Baha'is arrested on that date were named
as Changiz Faria'iyan, Suhrab Hajiyan and Bahman Samandari. The Special
Representative was subsequently informed that these five persons had been
released without any conditions.
E/CN.4/1988/24
page 6
20. It was further alleged in October 1987 that a prisoner named Seyed Au
Taherdjouyan, described, as a member of the People's Mojahedin Organization,
burned himself to death in the prison of Gohar—Dasht, in Karaj, Western. Iran,
allegedly in protest over the torture and poor conditions suffered by
political prisoners in Iranian prisons
Information concerning the economic situation of followers of the Baha'.i. faith
21. According to information received in January 1988 the Ira ian ' Governm nt
has, in recent months, increased its economic pressure on followers b ' the
Baha'i faith This pressure allegedly manifested itself in various manners,
such as the cancellation of. business licenses, the confiscation of shops , .
farms. and other: Baha'i-owned properties and thedenial of membership” in'':
co—operatives to Baha'i farmers. By way of illustration of such p essure: the
Special Representative received the English translation of a letter originally
written in Persian, dated 5 July 1987, by which the Islamic Revolutionary
Committee of Abbas—Abad, Tunukabun,. informed a Baha'i tailor that”.bécause of
your membership in the misguided Baha'i sect, your business licencé”is hereby
revoked and declared null and void”. The Special Representative alsoreceivéd
a photocopy of a communication originally written in Persian, and its English
translation, dated 9 June: 1987, which contained a guide—line signed by
Ali Samadi, Commander of. the Iranian Revolutionary Committee of.Abbas—Abad,
stating that “according to the decision made by the high authorities. ‘for .the
security and order, it is forbidden to hire or to give any licen es for work
to the members of the aberrant Baha'i group. It is recommended. to cancel.all
the previous authorizations and licenses, previously issued to them”..
22. It was further alleged that thousands of Baha'is who had been dismissed
.f rom their positions .j “1..:” . : :
continued to be denied their jobs and pensi ns, and that they had been
instructed to repay all salaries received during, their period of government.
employment.. ,. . . , ..
Information concerning treatment of Kurdish civilians
23. The Democratic Party of. Iranian Kurdistan alleged! in a Communication
dated October 1987, that the'tr njan authorities had ordered the evacuation
and resettling of 23 kurdish villages, with a population of 3,680 people,
located in the Bolfát regioh south—east of ‘Sardasht 1 (Iranian Kurdistan)'. The
villages affected by that measure were reported as follows: Doiatou,
Dawdaweb, Halesha, Sawan, Mam Kaweh,, Mazra, Darmakon, Pashghabran, S'pidareh,
Siramerg, Baizainara, Ayshadina,. Bardassour, Kodaleh, Mamandaweh, Zaleh,
Newtchwan, Souraban, Ahmad Briw, Guerdena, Doli Khanwan, Guilkank and Wardeh.
IV. CONSIDERATION OF VIEWS OF THE ‘IRANIAN GOVERNMENT
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 7
24. The. Special Representative has taken into account the views expressed,'
both orally and in writing., by the Iranian Government. Some of those views
were extensively quoted in the Interim Report, whenever appropriate, in
accordance with the international practice and the terms of the mandate.
Other views •have provided material for the considerations concerning general
substantive parts of the reports, and a few have been considered as
contrasting points for the clarification of the approaches and the actions
taken by the Special Representative in the discharge of his duties.'
25. In his Interim Report the Special: Representative indicated the points
with respect to which he was unable ‘to agree with the positions adopted ‘by the
Iranian Government, Differences on the interpretation of pertinent provisions
and on the accepted international practice have added obstacles, doubts or
incertitudes to the discrepancies based on. disparate original perceptions
regarding international law and Islamic law. The discussion of those points
may therefore play a paramount role in the process leading ‘to the satisfactory
operation of the system of human ‘rights in Iran.
26. It therefore seems timely and necessary to clarify the reasons supporting
the opinions expressed by, the Special Representative in his reports and the''
motivations of his actions, in the discharge of his duties. It may be for, the
benefit of all concerned to explain why and how the Special Representative,
though using flexible,'approaches and criteria and willing to take into account
the peculiarities of the Iranian situation, was directed and guided by
international instruments and by his. mandate to adopt those' actions and
positions The peculiarities of the Iranian situation present problems of
application that are-,- to some extent, new, and, -as sucIT enr ich the practice
in this field and involve novel views and arguments regarding the protection
of human rights at' worldwide leveL'.' . . ‘. . ‘
1. Compatibility of international law with Islamic law
27. After scrutiniiing the explanations and the arguments presented by the
Iranian Government, it may be stated that the main source of divergence in the
interpretation of international instruments concerning human rights derives
from the question ofcompatibility between international law and Islamic law.
This issud concerns the” social, legal and historic' role of religion in general
and the. peculiar place of religion in the Islamic Republic ‘of Iran in
particular. This seems to be one of the most important questions or even the
fundamental one regarding some of the difficulties the Iranian Government
encounters with respect to the international instruments on human rights.
This has been apparent in various official statements quoted in previous
reports and in particular, in “The Viewpoints of the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran on Commission on Human Rights resolution 1987/55
md on the issues contained in document E/ N.4/l987/23”, (E/CN.4/l988/l2 —
E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/35), hereafter referred to as “The Viewpoints”.
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 8
28. The radical difference results from two significantly distant
approaches: whereas the General Assembly of the United Nations and the
Commission on Human Rights, and therefore the Special Répresentatisie, regard
treaties and solemn declarations of the United Nations as •the fundamental
framework to examine the prevaiIing.situation in respe' t to human rights, the
Iranian Government regards Islamic law as. paramount, and int'ernational'la as
merely supplementary to, or corroborativ.e of Islamic law.
29. “Islamic law is founded on the very original concept that divinity reigns
supreme and divine law is pre—eminent to human law. The Declaration (that'is,.
the Universal Declaration on Human Rights) is genuinely secular in its theme
and essence and, as such, differs from Islamic. law in its origin. There may
be similarities or even perfect compatibility on some provisions, in.,:'
particular, those that meet the condition of jus cogens , but the originél
perceptions remain widely apart” (“The Viewpoints”, p. 7, para. 6). The
Universal Declaration on Human Rights discards any distinction with ‘respect to
religion, and calls for freedom to manifest religion in all its realms. “ In
contrast, “in the, case of Islam, manifestation of religion is inclusive' of
operation of the State apparatus. It alsO constitutes the origin of ‘law”
(“The Viewpoints”, p. 7, para. 7).
30. This conception ‘has practical implications:, as it has been stated by
Iranian, representatives. It is pertinent to refer to the official statèñient
of the Iranian representative at the 673rd meeting of the Human Rights
Committee on 10 April 1986: ‘“... relevant human rights”instruments'sucFi as
the Covenants and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights contained
provisions whose implementation would be contradictory in a country wherë'
Islamic law is observed”. “.... for example, the right to religious fréédom in
• an- - ‘slamic--soci.ety -where-persons -‘could-' not: embiace - -any other-”re -lig'io is reed:
The lamé i ould ap l 'td the . Covenant:' ‘ p ohibition. 6f corporal puni hmeht '
which would be contradictory to justice under Islamic law” (CCPR/C/SR.. . 673,
p. 13)
(a) Absence of religious and philosophical foundations in the Universal
Declaration on Human Rights
31. Those crucial statements deserve some comments, It is true that the
Universal Declaration on Human Rights. is a secular document. This ‘a'asertiOn
should be understood with some qualifications inorder to put the Declaration
within a frame corresponding to the, history of its preparation and' adoption.
It is secular in the sense that it. does not contain or reflect, at least in a
direct, way, religious standpoints. This omission was intentional and
responded to the definite objective to get support from all quarters of
beliefs, philosophies and cultures. For instance, the foundation of human
rights and freedoms on the doctrine of natural law, consistent with the
Christian teaching, was deliberately avoided, although some of the authors of
the Declaration firmly adhered to the theory of natural law.
32, Jacques Maritain, the respected scholar who wrote the introduction to the
texts by eminent persons consulted by UNESCO in 1947 and who synthesized the
common denominator of the enlightened replies, advised to avoid speculative
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 9
and theoretical thinking as the only way to get wide support for the
Declaration on the making. He stated that justifications though
indispensable, were unable to lead to general agreement ( Autour de la Nouvelle
Declaration Universelle desDroits de l'Homme , textes r4unis par l'tJNESCO,
Paris, Editions du Sagitaire, 1949) Maritain was a proclaimed and practising
Christian and a follower and innovator of the old natural law tradition
33. The delegations that discussed and finally adopted the Universal
Declaration in the General Assembly of the United Nations followed Maritain's
advice. They thus avoided the questions of ultimate origin, remote causes and
philosophical foundation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, either
religious or secular, rational or empirical, idealist or materialist, and
concentrated on rules for action, that is, adopted a pragmatic approach.
Professor René Cassin, one of the most influential contributors to the
Universal Declaration remembered circumstances under which the question of
religion was dealt with (R. Cassin, “Les Droits de 1'Homme”, Academie de Droit
International, Recueil des Cours, 1951, vol II, pp 284 et al )
34. States from all continents and geographical groups agreed on the norma
for action embodied in the Universal Declaration, in spite of disparate
cultural backgrounds and antagonistic socioeconomic structures and
ideologies A universal consensus was thus created on the meaning and scope
of the human rights to be protected at worldwide level, as direct effect of
the obligations acquired through the Charter of the United Nations
Consequently an authoritative interpretation of the pertinent provisions of
the Charter emerged Membership of the United Nations necessarily carried
obligations on human rights as defined by the Universal Declaration, and some
— - of tbe provisions of - t-his -i-ns -tr-u nent may be sai-d to- be--appl--i.cabl-e to - - -. -- -
non—members of that Organiiation
35. There is no legal challenge or* obstacle of principle to the operation
that would reintegrate to the Universal Declaration the ultimate supporting
elements that were discarded in order to avoid the wreckage of the goal to get
unqualified backing to a univeral system of human rights This operation,
that could be undertaken from a religious and philosophical perspective, could
not provide a universal foundation, and certainly would not get the
unqualified adherence of all States and peoples. But such limited result will
not belittle in any way the significance and the necessity of that exercise
for certain cultures and countries Surely it will have to be coherent with
the current system of international protection of human rights, and
consequently would not be permitted to jeopardize, alter, supersede or
derogate from existing norms Of international law on human rights.
(b) Adherence of Islamic Countries to the Covenants and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights
36. The Iranian Government contended that the two Covenants on Human Rights
and the Universal Declaration were ratified during the ruling of a secular
régime by legislators who did not have the competence and knowledge nor the
will to examine them against the tenets of tslamic law, and that the Iranian
Parliament would have to take up this task in the future. “Meanwhile we
continue to adhere to the provisions of the Declaration and the two Covenants
which are consistent with, or at least not contradictory to Islamic law” (“The
Viewpoints”, p. 8, pars. 10).
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 10
37. The selective adherence to certain international norms concerning human
rights may be consistent with the Tranian lega1 system hut is lncomoat]ble
with international law Even if leqislatorR did not have knowledge of the
tenets of Islamic law, duly acquired State obligations remain unaffected and
unchallenged International legal obligations are acquired by States, and
Governments act as their representatives International obligations of States
do not break down with the change of government or regime This is a
fundamental principle derived from the absolute necessity to provide security
to international relations
38 Iranian representatives as well as representatives of other Islamic
States accepted those instruments The views expressed by representatives of
other Islamic countries at the time of the adoption of the Universal
Declaration make it possible to state that there are different views on the
question of compatibility between international law on human rights and
Islamic law It is indeed difficult to accept that all Islamic States did not
pay attention to those instruments The more consistent explanation of the
fact of generalized acceptance of those instruments would be that there are
different pnderstandings of the problem and its resolution.
39 At the meeting of approval of the Universal Declaration of Human Riqhts
by the General Assembly of the United Nations, the representative of Egypt,
Mr Raafat, made reservations regarding articles 17 and 19, on account of
limitations Islamic countries put to the contract of marriage of Muslim women
with persons belonging to another faith, and the proclamation of man's right
to change his religion or belief (art 19) In his opinion the Declaration
could be understood as “encouraging, even though it might not be intentional,
the machinations of certain missions, well known in the Orient, which
relentlessly pursued their efforts to convert to their own beliefs the masses
of the population of the Orient” (United Nations, General Assembly, third
session, first part, 1948 Plenary meetings, Official Records, V 6, p 913)
40 The delegate of Pakistan, the well known diplomat Sir Zafrullah Khan
stated full support of his country to article 19 “Pakistan was an ardent
defender of freedom of thought and belief and of all the freedoms listed in
article 19” Afterwards he voiced reservations with respect to this article,
not in regard to the rights it consacrated but to a possible abusive use of
them Sir Zafrullah quoted the Koran as saying “Let he who choses to
believe, believe, and he who choses to disbelieve, disbelieve” He added that
Moslem religion was missionary because “it strove to persuade men to change
their faith and alter their way of living, so as to follow the faith and way
of living it preached, but it recognized the same right of conversion for
other religions as for itself”.
41 Sir Zafrullah expressed anxiety at the possible abusive use of article 19
of the Universal Declaration on grounds of the actions of certain' other
religions (obviously Christian), whose activities had sometimes assumed a
political character and had given rise to objections (United Nations,
General Assembly, Ibidem )
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 11
42. Those reservations resulted from possible misuse of some provisions of
the Declaration but they did not criticize the recognition of the rights
listed in article 19. The delegations of Egypt and Pakistan did not oppose
the Universal Declaration and voted for its adoption. So the reservations
were not sufficiently important to separate those countries from the consensus
that had been built through the reduction of the instrument to rules for
action Other Islamic countries that were at the time members of the
United Nations voted in favour of the Declaration: Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran,
Lebanon (a country with strong MosIem influence), and Syria. Saudi Arabia
abstained, and Yemen did not pa rt.iôipate in the vote.
43. The Universal Declaration merged as the authori 'ative uhderstanding ard
the agreed interpretation on the meaning and scope of Tthe human rights and
fundamental freedoms whose proted tion was provided for by the Charter of the
United Nations. From then on the int rnatioria] protection of human rights
from excess or misuse of power entered international law and complemented and
strengthened national protection. The Universal Declaration was acclaimed and
accepted by countries of all cultural, religious, and economic and social
systems
(C) Absence of Islamic sëholárs i n the EIaboràtjon of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights
44. The Iranian Governrnèiitjta téd that “no I larniè sdho.1ar or Muslim
jurisprudent had a chance to participate (in the preparation of the Universal
Declaration).. Therefore Islamic States do have the right to reserve their
views on the validity or applicability bf those p ovisions. Many Islamic
States have ratified the Declaration and this does ive rise to
responsibiLity, bQt ratification is not synonimous with satisfaction” (“The
Viewpoints”, pp 7, 8, para 8)
45. The participation of Islamiá. schOlars in the pre ration of the Universal
Declaration was indeed limited, and may even be considered extremely limited
considering the extent and importàncé of Islamic culture. NOnetheless it was
not entirely absent. At least one Muslim scholar was consulted by UNESCO:
Mr. Huinayun Kabir. (Textes r unis par 1'UNESCO, “Les droits de l'homme, la
tradition de l'Islam et les probl mes du monde actuel ”, 1 pp. 158—161).
Mr. Kabir favàured a universal sy stem of human rights under a world
authority. Furthermore it may be assumed that representatives of Islamic
countries at the United Nations were conversant with Islamic teaching and were
professed Moslems.
46. The argument and criticism referred to above may be considered of
political character. In 1948 Islamic countries did not have the influence
they exert today in international relations. From a stri'Otly legal point of
view the case must be viewed under a different light. As a matter Of fact
official representatives of Islamic member States of the United Nations
in 1948 didparticipate in the proceedings. The crucial point in regard to
t e legal capacity to oblige the State consists of authorization and
accreditation through full power to act on behalf of the State (Convéiitfon on
the Law of Treaties, arts. 7and8). The professional qualifications of the
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 12
delegates who express the official position of a State or group of States is
not •an element of the will to consent. The selection o delegates with
suitable specializations to deal with the subject matters under debate in
international fora is left to the discretion and wisdom of each Government.
47. Certainly it would be possible that national representatives become
liable under municipal law but this would be an internal affair.
Responsibility under municipal, law does not affect international obligations
acquired by duly authorized and accredited representatives . The Convention
on the Law of Treaties (Art. 27) prescribes that States parties can not invoke
municipal law in order to justify the non compliance with a treaty. The
legality of the consent. to be bound by international instruments does not
impede in any way the accountability of national officers who did not follow
instructions, or exceeded powers. .Conversely he accountability mentioned,
before does not affect international obligations.
(d) An Islamic DeclaratIon of Human Rights
48. The Iranian Government referred to an Islamic Declaration of Human Rights
that could redress the flaws of international instruments adopted under the
aegis of the United. Nations., “The Islamic. Declaration, onc.e finalized,, will
make the most notable achievement of co—operation among Islamic States on this
iàsue and they shall undoubtedly find it more p rtinent to their concerns
regarding human. rights, and fundamental f.reedoms' C 'he . Viewpoints”., p.. 8,.
para.9). ‘ . , , ... .. . ..•, . . . , .•. .
49 An Islamic Declaration of Human Rights would certainly contribute to the
consolidation of human rights around the world. The. regional, declarations
adopted so far, s those of the EuropeanCothxnunity and the Ofganizatfonof
American States have not departed from the structure. of in'ternational' ,
protection of human rights of' the United Nations. They have' increased the
protection of human rights through special commissions of surveillance and
even ad hoc courts of justice. That is, regional declarations have g.one
beyond the system sponsored by the United Nations.
50. An Islamic Declaration, of Human Rights might. expr.ess.particu.lar .
viewpoints, including religious and philosophical foundations, but it may be
expected that, the same as previous regional declarations, it will . be
consistent with the universal system of the United Nations and will increase
the protection of human rights with a special commission and a court. of
justice.
51. Judgement may be deferred in order to examine the final product, ‘but in
the meantime, on account of the rich cultural heritage and the humanitarian
content of Islamic teaching and tenets, the formulation of a declaration
consistent with international law may be expected.
52. The Universal Declaration has acquire'd the status,of customary
international law. Consequently it binds all States, including those that
were not members of the United Nations at the time of its adoption
Furthermore new members implicitly accept previous decisions of the competent
organs of international organizations. It is commanded by reason and
sanctioned by custom that new members accept the transactions that have ‘been
performed within the terms of the constitutive treaties.
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 13
(e) Municipal Law and international Law
53. The departure. of municipal law from internatioi a1 law has been the
subject of careful study by eminent scholars and judges and has produced
extensive legal liteLature A dominant consensus has energed in the sense
that municipal law nas to be integrated witnin international law ani
consequently any departure leaves international law in full fotce
International law must not be bent by deviate muriicioal norms
54 Accordingly international law preserves its features, contents and
functions in spite of contradictory municipal law International
jurisprudence has proclaimed the dictum that as far as international law is
concerned,, municipal law operates as a fact and no more than that. The
admission of unilateral departures from existing international law would
threaten the security and stability of the entire fabric of international
relations The values, motives and ends behind those departures, as
pertaining to the domestic jurisdiction of the State, remain unchallenged
(f) Selective. Adherence to International. Instruments
55 In the case of Iran the main effect of the alleged incompatibility of
international law with Islamic law regarding certain p ovisions of the two
Covenants and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights'.'há' 'bèen the se 'lec ive
adherence to a number of provisions and the refusal to apcept'.the validity, and
applicability of others, as indicated b i '-the quotations mentioned at the
beginning of this section. .... ‘.
56 The legal, political and moral nature of the instruments concerning human
rights does not admit selective -acceptance and rejection Each instrument
constitutes an indivisible body, and once a State is bound, it is bound by the
entire instrument Termination and suspension of international obligations
are ruled out with respect to human rights Nonetheless there are a few ways
open to countries which encounter difficulties of application of or are
displeased with existing norms
57 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights permits that in
case of public emergency which threatens the national life, a State party may
take measures derogating from its obligations regarding a number of
provisions, “to the extent strictly required by the exigences of the
situation”. Though the ‘Iranian situation appears to meet the condition
indicated in that provision, the Iranian Government has not taken advantage of
the/authorization under the Covenant.
58 Claims and criticism against existing norms may constitute the first
stage of a process leading to the establishment of new ñorms In principle
all norms of international law are susceptible to change, even those of
jus coqens , as stipulated in the Convention on the Law of Treaties (arts. 53
and 64), and no rule or human institution is immune to change But in so far
as the process of change has not culminated in the establishment of nesi norms,
the existing law has to be respected and applied. International relations
would become untenable and, in extreme situations, chaotic, if unilateral
positions of States would suffice to introduce exceptions to existing law,
even where those positions or actions are well enshrined in the cultural
heritage of the States concerned.
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 14
59. Furthermore, it may happen that certain specific ways of application of
general rules to particular cases might be adapted in order to take into
account the peculiarities of each concrete case or situation. Thinking in a.
speculative way, a working arrangement of action and inaction, formal
authorization and mere toleration could be conceived. This expedient would
have to be carefully studied and worked ou.t with respect to concrete
situations and cases only. It could not be ruled out a priori , but to
transform it into a means of disregarding, putting aside, getting rid of or
introducing unilateral modifidations to binding international instruments
would be inconsistent with, the existing system of human rights. This would be
another example of application of the ancient adage saying that whereas
justice is good equity is even better
2 Replies to Alleged Violations of Human Rights
60 The Iranian Government has refused to provide detailed replies to the
allegations of violations of human rights presented to its consideration on
four grounds: the terms of”the resolution of the Commission on Human Rights
creating the mandate, the method of conveying the' allegations to the attention
of the Government', the qualifications of' the ‘witnesses interviewed by the
Special Representative., arid the use of a certain terminology, in official
resolutions and documents The question regarding the terms of the mandate
F will not be discu sed in this report
(a) The method of conveying allegations
61. With respect to the method of conveying allegàtiáns to the attention' ' f'
the Government, the Iranian Government stated that the groups that had
provided such information were disqualified as valid interlocutors and that
they had “the only common denomiri ator that they all follow the same
objective of undermining the sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran It
is quite questionable, therefore, that these groups have been the only sources
of information for the so called detailed and specific allegations
Nevertheless the Commission should be informed that to respond to these so
called “allegations” in the present format creates a legal problem. None of
these groups have regis tered themselves or are qualified to be registered as a
political party or a minority in the Islamic Republic of Iran. To respond to
thesespecificsectioñs of the Report would implicitely imply recognition of
the status the Special Representative has granted them. A situation that
would run contrary to'Iranian law” (“The Viewpoints”, pp. 10—11, para. 23).
62,,. It is necessary to clarify that the Special Representative has not
granted any recognition to any of the groups which have served as channels of
communication of alleged violations of human rights. The mention of the
groups that have acted as vehicles for the presentation of concrete cases can
not and should not be construed as intended to grant or recognize them any
particular status. ,The mention of those groups has no other purpose than to
provide the Iranian Government with a complete picture of the allegations. . ‘
The granting of recognition or status would go beyond the mandate of the ,
Special Representative and would not correspond to his intention.
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 15
63, All the a1leg tions concern individualsand many of them weremade by
iridividual in their individual capacity. The political affiliations of those
persons are not under discussion. They may or may not be members,
sympathizers or simply acquaintances of any of tne groups referred to by tee
Iranian Government They are human beings entitled to the enjoyment of
protection of human rights. International law on human right avitates on
the generic and most common dimensions of human beings, without consideration
of particular features such as race, nationality, sex, religio.n,culture or
economic or social position. Natural érsons are racognized in their inherent
dignity and worth.
64. The study of the situation of human rights prevailing in a given country
rec iire the coliection of a1lavailableinförm tion. tt wbuld be unwise to
reject a priori certain sources and to accept others Indeed all information
is debatable and subject to scrutiny It is precisely for that reason that
the circumstantiáte i views of the Government concerned have animportant
role After a controversial examination of the cases it would be possible to
have a more accurate view of the situation regarding human rights Judgement
would follow the examination of facts and vehicles of information
65 The Iranian Government suggested, as an alternative, that the Special
Representativémayrecéive information from dertain po.iitiäa l groups
informally and convey it to the Government in the same manner, in order to get
the öff [ cial consent tô publlsh the namés of such grdäps..in officia1
documents The Government objects to the publication of the names of such
groups Ileging that it prôvidés them ‘with “publicity, exposure and cloutl t
(“TheViewpoints”, pP. 11, 12, 15, paras; '28, 40(g)) if public documents of
the United Nations are used for propaganda purposes, that fact goes beyond thè
intention and the -capacity of control of the competent-organs-. The suggested
procedure might be adopted by the Commission on Human Rights, but according to
the present formulation of the mandate the Special Representative has to
present to the Commission, through his reports, all the available information,
without any restrictive procedure To further clarify this suggested
procedure, it is convenient to have in mind the distInction between
information provided by groups as such and information provided by
individuals. The suggestion mentioned above concerns only information
emanating from and concerning groups.
(b) The qualifications of witnesses
66. With respect to the qualifications of the witnesses interviewed by the
Special Representative, the latter has received communications and examined
witnesses in accordance with the well established practice of international
organs dealing with human rights. The Inter—American Commission on Human
Rights started this practice in 1962, and from then on this procedure has been
extensively applied. Witnesses are indispensable to collect firsthand
information and to sessthe prevalent situation of human rights.
67. The Iranian Government would like the Special Representative to apply the
restrictive rule of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(art. 41) (“The Viewpoints”, p. 11, para. 24). This rule applies to the Human
Rights Committee and has not been adopted as practice by other international
organs entrusted with the protection of human rights.
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 16
68. The mandate of the Commission on Human Rights empowers the Special
Representative “to make a thorough study of the human rights situation based
on such information as he may deem relevant, including comments and material
provided by the Government” (resolution 1984/54, para. 4). The mandate
therefore leaves it to the discretion of the Special Representative to
determine the relevant information. Certainly discretion can. not be equated
to arbitrariness. The Special Representative has used that authorization
within the terms of the international practice on human rights and in
accordance with duly and widely recognized international, standards.
(C) The question of the term “Minority ”
69 The Iranian Government has objected to the use of the terin”minority” as
applied to the members. .of the Baha'ifaith. The adduced motivation is, the..... . ,
absence of a standard definition at the United Nations And, irideed, the
Sub—Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of
Minorities is far from reaching an agreed definition of this term. -
the Cornmiss ion Hpln,
The Special
the same manner, within
70. The term “minority” has been consistently used by
Rights in its resolutions in reference to the Baha'is.
Representative has sometirnes.. referred to this group in
the terms of - reference of his manda.te.
71. The term “minority” has been studied by sociologists and has entered and
has been incorporated by.the. internatidnal lexicon for. a long, time
Sociologists generally define “minority” as a group of people differentiated
from others of the. same society by race, nationality, religion or language..
The app ication of that term to the Baha' is would not add or diminish ,..,,
characterizations to their entfty They are what they afe irre pective of the
words used to refertó them. The Special Representative deals with the
Baha'is as individuals, and is interested in groups as formed by individuals
and as providers of information on individuals The view of the Iranian
Government denying the condition of minority to the Baha'is has been duly
reflected in the Special Representative's previous reports
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 17
V. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
72. The presentation by the Iranian Government of a document (“The
‘Viewpoints ' t ) containing its views on several issues and its opinions on the
binding force of international instruments on human rights, has helped to
clarify controversial points and provided material which makes it possible to
have an insight into the intricate situation of that country. Clarification
of conflicting approaches and interpretations may sometimes consitute the
first stage of a process leading to some kind of common understanding and to
the eventual solution of the outstanding problems. The Iranian document has
in particular permitted the Special Representative to elucidate his own
approaches and views on conflicting points.
73. The Special Representative welcomes the statement of the Iranian
Government that some provisions of the International. Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, particularly those which may be considered as jus cogens ,
are compatible with Islamic Law. This statement clears the normative basis
for the examination of the concrete alegations of violations of human rights
submitted to the attention of the Iranian Government. Disparate official
statements on this subject have been registered, but it seems that, with
regard to the situation of human rights, the position officially communicated
to the Special Representative should prevail. The Special Representative
expresses the hope that the Iranian Government will increase the normative.,
area of agreed application of norms concerning human rights in order to cover
the entire international instruments by which it is bound as a member. of the. .,
United Nations and a party to the two Covenants. This final:, outcome would.
entail the abandonment of the selective adherence to onie provisions of .the .
international instruments.
74 The original perception from which the Iranian Government derives its
initial positions and theses with respect to the international protection.of
human rights may be considered as deeply enshri ned in its cultural life and.
its current natIonal movement. The preliminary diffici i1ties with respec to
the full application of the instruments on human rights could thus be
explicable. The statement on the compatibility' of dertain international
provisions with Islamic law may be understood as an effort of accomodation to
the international obligations and as the beginning of a sustained trend that
may eventually reach the point'of acceptance of the positions adopted by the.
General Aásembly of the United NatIons and the Commission onHuman Rights in
their successive resolutions. The discussion and the clarification of the
question of compatibility of international law with Islamic law, and the
hypothesis of a working arrangement at a concrete and factual level are
therefore quite important. On the part of international organs of protection
of human rights a parallel effort might be undertaken in order to take mt 9
account the peculiarities of the Iranian situation and to facilitate and help
the full compliance of Iran with the provisions of the international
instruments. Comments made and information provided by the Iranian Government
have been extensively quoted and referred to in the reports prepared by the
Special Representative previously, particularly in the Interim Report
(A/42/648). Both the pr cti'ce ‘of international organs of protection of human
rights and the terms of the mandate (resolution 1984/54, para. 4) determine
that comments from the Iranian Government should be received, considered and
included in the analysis of the prevalent situation. ‘
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 18
75. The views of the Iranian Government concern a variety of subjects, from
the qualifications of groups that have acted. as medium for conveying
information to the compatibility of international law with Islamic law. The
Special Representative has been unable to agree on some of those views. There
is no doubt that the original perception based on the system of international
law on human rights differs from the original religious, perception of the
Iranian Government. Nonetheless in the course of the oral and written
dialogue some points have been identified upon which a kind of working
understanding may exist. The Special Representative has tried to take the
Iranian views into account as much as possible, to the extent this was
consistent with the structure and operation of international instruments on
human rights. Thus, a possible way was indicated to give some consideration
to the Iranian desire to apply particular rules to the use of information
provided by organized groups (supra, p.. 65). The present use of such
information is consistent with the practice of international organizations but
there is no legal obstacle for the Commission to adopting particular rules in
handling such information It has also been acknowledged that the
participation of Islamic scholars in the preparation of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights was relatively minor, considering the importance
and extension of Islamic culture, without attributing any legal effect to that
fact An hypothesis has also been outlined according to which a working
arrangement with respect to concrete cases might be worked Out in order to
overcome obstacles of local character while ensuring the compliance with
internatiônál norms (supra, p 59). , , ,; , , ,•• . ,,
76 In his introduction to the Interim Report (A/42/648) the Special
Representative indicated, with respect to the enjoyment of human rights, the
coexistence of two complementary but distinct elements with their respective
-lev-els-cf- operation: - the normative -and iega-l level -and the level-of - - ‘-
implementation The normative lever is important and is cons tituted by
international instruments and municipal law. But despite its importance it
may have scarce practical occurrence if the level of implementation is
faulty Governments therefore have to monitor carefully the level of
implementation through the actions of both petty and high officers, in order
to fully comply with international obligations
77. With respect to the normative level, ithas not yet been possible to
obtain complete texts of the pertinent Iranian laws, such as the Penal Code.
It has therefore not been possible to examine the compatibilitj of the laws
with international instruments Nonetheless, it has been possible to examine,
to some extent, the level of implementation on the basis of oral and written
information, and the Special Representative has expressed in the Interim
Report his concern regarding the treatment given to prisoners during -
interrogation and before and after thefinal verdict, as well as at the
extremely summary and informal proceedings, unawarness of defendants of
specific accusations against them, lack of legal counsel and other ,
irregularities. . :1
79 The Iranian Government provided information quoting provisions of the
Constitution and the Penal Code concerning the punishment of judicial . 1
officials and non judicial staff engaged in inalt eatment and molestation of
E/CN.4/ 1988/24
page 19
orisorlers (A/42/ 548 p 16, para 46 It is the considered view of th
Spec a1 Representative that complaints regarding maltreatment and torture
should not be discarded without a thorough examination of each case, since
sucn practices are strictly forbidden by municipal la.q and international law
79 The communication of allegations of violations of human rights has a
positive aspect, as it gives information to the Government concerned on facts
that may have escaped its kno .iiedgé ánd'may orient th investigation and
contribute to the possible redress of any weakness in the national. system of
protection of human rights The communication of such allegations tnus
contributes to the fair functioning of national institutions The furnishing
of circumstantiated replies to such allegations also has a positive aspect for
any Government As a matter of fact the Government concerned may benefit from
the inclusion of the replies in the reports,as both the General Assembly and
the Commission on Human Rights would be aware of its views and would have
additional information to formulate a balanced judgement on the current
situation The replies are part of a consistent practice on this subject
matter. Furthermore they would not im l any recoqnition or granting of
status to any of the groups involved in political strife or, in any other way,
active in a given society In the case of Iran the replies would be part of a
dialogue between the Iranian Government and the Commission on Human Rights
through the Special Representative, and nothii g more In the absence of
concrete official replies to allegations of violations of human rights only
one side voices its views, while the other side — the Government — remains
silent.
80 It may be convenient to emphasize again that the international protection
of human rights has a co—operative character which derives from the text of
the Charter of the-United Nations Itactiuatesth co—operation romjjsed - -
among members of the United Nations The objective of the exercise is to
ensure compliance with international obligations on the basis of co—operation
of each State and each Government. It is nota judicial procedure. It
appeals to good will, to moral and political standards and to legal norms
whose enforcement is, for the time being, imperfect. Its goal is not to
condemn a Government but to redress a given situation
81 The Centre for Human Rights has dev loped a programme of technical
assistance which is based on the co—operative character of the action and
surveillance by the con petent organs of the United Nations, whose ultimate
recourse is world public opinion Governments wishing to be fully and
thoroughly acquainted withthe bntinuing n'd fast developments in the field
of human rights and to know the intricacies of the application of
international instruments may take advantage of this service (Commission on
Human Rights, resolution 1987/37 and basic information provided by the Centre)
82 In the light of the foregoing analysis the Special Representatives has
reached the following conclusions (of which the chapter on “Observations” of
the Interim Report may be considered as the introductory part):
(1) The Special Representative appreciates the co—operation of the
Iranian Government and expresses his hope that this co—operation will reach
the level of full co—operation in the near future, in compliance with the
E/CN. 4/1988/24
page 20
reiterative resolutions of the General Assembly of the United Nations and the
Commission on Human Rights The Special Representative also expresses the
hope that the Iranian Government will reconsider its position on some issues
referred to in this report, in order to fully comply v 'ith toe provisions of
binding international instruments on human rights. The Special Represer itative
believes that the development of coincidgnce of views and • the ac ua1.,
implementation of the co—operative character of the international protection
of human rights may lead to the gradual solution of the pending problems
(2) The alleged incompatibility between some provisions of international
law on human rights and Islamic law is a domestic problem that should be
solved by the Government concerned, because it does not affect or change
per se international obligations. From the point of view of international law
the obligations acquired by the Islamic Republic of Iran as a member State of
the United Nations and as a party to the two International Covenants are fully
binding and do not admit exceptions on account of constitutional problems,
rules and regulations of municipal law, or cultural or historic background—
even if justified from a national point of view
(3) Notwithstanding that assertion of principle and taking into account
the co—operative character of the international protection of human rights it
would be possible to make efforts in order to meet some of the misgivings and
concerns of the Iranian Government at a very concrete level and without
belittling the full force and the right application of agreed and binding
provisions on human rights.
(4) Although the selective acceptance by the Iranian Government of
important provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
—Rights-provides a normative basas for -the five categories of compaaints
commur icated tothe Government; it is expected, as a matter of principle, that
the Iranian Government may reach the point of complete recognition of all
provisions of binding iternational instruments without discrimination of any
kind -
(5) Allegations on violations of human rights have been communicated to
the Iranian Government in accordance with international practice. These
allegations refer to individuals. Whenever..certain groups have played the
role of intermediaries to convey information the individual character of such
information has been kept As human rights protect human beings in their most
common and generic dimensions, their political or religious affiliations,
their change of citizenship and other particular conditions or characteristics
are of no relevance
(6) The circumstantiated official replies to communications of alleged
violations of human rights would certainly contribute to a better
understanding and evaluation of the situation regarding human rights and would
inform the international community of the concrete views of the ranian
Government as well a the result of the investigations on specific cases.
Furthermore, these replies would be an important element of the full
co-operation required by the Commission on Human Rights.
- -.. - I
.1
E/CN.4/ 1988/24
page 2l: .:'
(7) The Special Representative expresses concern on account of
communications referring to new cases of summary executions and of informatjor
according to which some prisoners were in danger of execution. Neverthelens,
the Special Representative notes witn satisfaction the information according
to which five prominent members of the Baha'i faith who were arrested in
Teheran in October 1987, including two former members of the National Baha'i
Council of Iran who were alleged to be in danger of execution, were recently
released from prison without any ôndi tions. Inf o ñi tioh on growing economic
pressure on Baha'is, such as cancellation of business licen es, confiscation-
of property, dismissal from governmept jobs and loss of pensions, as well as
denial of higher education, still continues to b& received in a consistent
manner
(8) Information on maltreatment and torture in Prtsoris continues töb è
received and was the subject of pathetic and moving declarations by witnesses
who had direct experience of the conditions prevailing and the bahaviour of
officers in prisons Some witnesses presented the physical effects of
maltreatment that could be seen and interpreted by a layman Medical doct5rs
gave expert opinion linking those effects to torture Moreover, information
on irregularities of various kinds in the course of trials was abundant,
consistent and Convincing Consequently the Government may wish to initiate
an urgent investigation of those complaints in order to take measures of
redress.
(9) The Special Representative continues to believe that acts still,
occur in the Islamic Republic .6f Iran which are inconsistent with
international instruments on human rights, and that the situation in that
country justifies continuing international concern, study and constant
monitoring by the competent organs of the United Nations -
