|
Tehran, Jan 4, IRNA -- Tehran's Shahid Beheshti University sponsored
a gathering titled 'Aftermaths of UN Human RIghts Violation
Resolution Against Iran' on Monday. Speakers at the gathering included 2003 Nobel Peace Prize laureate
and Head of Center for Defenders of Human Rights Shirin Ebadi and Head
of Faculty of UNESCO Human Rights at Shahid Beheshti University Amir
Arjomand.
 photo: ISNA
During the gathering, cosponsored by Office to Foster Unity's
Human Rights Department, Ms. Ebadi initially briefed the audience on
the United Nations' human rights record.
She said, "During the first years after the victory of the Islamic
Revolution, Iran was repeatedly condemned for violation of the human
rights, and that was why the United Nations appointed a permanent
Human rights observer for Iran.
 photo: ISNA
Ebadi added, "Reports presented by UN human rights observers were
always condemned by the government, and eventually these observers
left Iran."
The head of Center for Defenders of Human Rights said, "During
the era that followed, that is after May 23, 1997, international
pressure on the one hand, and President Khatami's cabinet's favorable
approach on the other hand, improved the condition of human rights in
Iran, which was regarded as a pleasant achievement for the
president."
Ebadi expressed regret that the favorable trend was only
temporary, arguing, "After Zahra Kazemi's death the international
pressure against Iran on the need to observe the human rights mounted
once again and Iran was accused of many violations at international
communities, and a number of resolutions were issued gainst the
Islamic Republic."
 photo: ISNA
Referring to the reactions often made by Iran regarding
resolutions on violation of human rights here, Ebadi said, "Iran has
argued firstly that the human rights observers' reports on Iran were
biassed and impartiality had not been observed by them, because
violations of human rights had also occurred elsewhere in the world,
but only the slamic Iran had been condemned."
She added, "Iran's other typical objection has been based on
legality of the the punishments referred to by the human rights
observers, arguing that no violation of laws had occurred."
The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate said, "The first reasoning is quite
irrational, because from the legal point of the view no regime can
violate the human rights resorting to the excuse that some other
regimes, too, are doing so. Such a reasoning is legally null and
void."
She added, "The other reason, that is quite often expressed by the
Islamic Republic, leads to another question, that is, 'To what extent
can the human rights be harmonized with national governance?"
Ebadi stressed, "The human rights are above the constitutions of
different countries and no country can resort to its civil laws to
justify its violations of the human rights, because that bears no
weigh."
Emphasizing that the human rights are the essence of the
societies' public demand, she emphasized, "Human rights are based on a
culture, and reflect the public demand of the people."
Ebadi said that the Islamic Republic's argument about "relativity
of matters in cultural field" in dealing with the human rights issue
has been aimed at diverting the international community's attention
from the matter, which is quite impossible."
Shahid Beheshti University professor Dr. Amir Arjomand, too,
focussed on aftermaths of the UN General Assembly's recent human
rights resolution against Iran.
He said, "Unlike the previous cases when the resolutions were
passed by the UN Human Rights Commission, this time it was directly
proposed and passed by the General Assembly."
The head of Faculty of UNESCO Human Rights at Shahid Beheshti
University reiterated, "Discerning the effects and aftermaths of this
resolution depends on understanding the changing international
relations, whose axis is observing the human rights."
Dr. Arjomand said, "A new world order is taking shape, whose core
is abiding by the human rights."
Referring to the major characteristic of the emerging new world
order, he said, "Under the new conditions of the international
community, the violation of human rights equals violation of the
obligatory international laws, and no country is permitted to do so."
The human rights professor reiterated, "The international public
order is above the will of those who have to abide by it, and under
such conditions the governments are not the sole representatives of
nations to be able to define the human rights to their liking, relying
on their own special laws." Referring to the situation after the
passage of the resolution in question, he said, "This resolution was
the first step aimed at obliging the governments to yield to the
emerging new world order, calling upon the government and others under
the international laws to abide by that order's demands."
Iran's foreign ministry dubbed United Nations General Assembly
criticism over its human rights record as "politically motivated" and
based on unreliable sources, on december 22.
"The resolution is not documented and is far from realities in
Iran, being drafted from unreliable, distorted and untruthful
sources, thus invalid, politically motivated and unreal," ministry
spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said.
The General Assembly on Monday, December 20th criticised the
human rights situation in Iran in a relatively close vote that lashed
out at restrictions on free speech under Tehran's Islamic regime.
The assembly, which groups all 191 UN member states, approved
the resolution 71-54 with 55 abstentions. Resolutions adopted by the
assembly are not legally binding but do reflect international opinion.
The measure was sponsored by Canada, whose relations with Iran
have taken a turn for the worse since Iranian-Canadian photographer
Zahra Kazemi died while in custody in Iran last year.
"The different views and the low voter turnout show the reality
that a large majority of countries are against political misuse of
human rights as a tool," said Asefi.
"The nonconstructive approach of the initiators of the resolution
is a completely political move, aimed at raising hue and cry against
Iran."
The resolution which was co-sponsored by 33 other nations
including Tehran's arch-foes Israel and the United States said member
states had "serious concern" over a long list of rights abuses.
It took aim at the Islamic Republic for "the worsening situation
with regard to freedom of opinion and expression" and the "targeted
... Payvand News - 1/4/05 ... --
|