Fighting for a Voice: Human Rights and Iran's Contested 2009 Presidential Election

Human rights violations in Iran caused grave concern far before the government began suppressing the 2009 protests against the rigged presidential voting victory of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In Iran, democracy and human rights activists have been imprisoned, tortured, and killed for decades. Torture has included mutilation, rape, whipping and stoning. Execution of political prisoners has been rampant. Capital punishment of juveniles has been reported. The government also stops the publication of opposition newspapers, websites and books. Censorship is extreme. Peaceful demonstrations are rapidly quelled- like the 2007 assembly for the commemoration of International Women's Day, during which hundreds were beaten.

The Guardian Council- composed of six Islamic jurists who wield significant power over politics, the candidacy of aspiring political leaders, social and economic issues, and cultural life- has impeded legislation that promotes human rights, and has endorsed policies and leaders that reinforce the imbalanced power arrangement at the cost of the freedom of the Iranian people.

Ironically, the Iranian government has said that Iran is "the freest country in the world."

The Protests and the Crackdown

During the 2009 Presidential elections, the relatively reform-oriented Mir-Hossein Mousavi ran against the incumbent Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad was declared the winner, but suspicions of electoral fraud surfaced soon after. For example, in two provinces voter turnout would have had to be over 100% for all the ballots to be legitimate. In other words, there were more votes cast than there were people to cast them. Given the lower historical turnouts and limited internal migration, it is highly unlikely that all the ballots were fairly cast. Following mass protests against the fraud, the Guardian Council organized a partial recount of votes, but still announced Ahmadinejad's victory. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, said that the reformist leaders would be blamed for any violence resulting from clashes between protesters and government forces.

Over 100,000 Iranians took to the streets to express their opposition to the ruling regime. To quiet protests, forces have raided houses at night in an attempt to frighten residents. Many prominent democracy and human rights activists, demonstrators and lawyers have been arrested and killed by the government. Protesters have also disappeared, as the government has rounded up many of them and not allowed them to contact family or lawyers.

The Iranian authorities have declared about 20 casualties, 500 injured persons, and over a thousand detainees as of July 2009. The actual numbers are disputed due to the suppression of information and blocking of the internet in Iran. Unofficial sources have placed the death toll at over 250. As forces have attacked unarmed protesters, the government's reaction is widely perceived as excessively harsh. Twenty six year-old Neda Agha-Soltan, a philosophy student, was fatally shot by police when she stepped on to a road, even though she was not participating in the protests. She is one of the many who have been caught in police firing, and has emerged as a symbol of the protests.

Many fear that Iranian authorities have or will use the protests as an excuse to purge reformists from society.

U.N. Response

The U.N. has addressed violations of human rights in Iran through several resolutions in the past. The accumulation of reports of human rights abuses in Iran led the former Human Rights Commission to open an investigation of Iran through a confidential process called 1503, named after the resolution that created it. 1503 was a resolution adopted in 1970 by the U.N. Economic and Social Council. It established a procedure to examine governments that committed a "consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms."

In 2007, the U.N. Human Rights Council decided to end its scrutiny of human rights abuses in Iran, a move that Human Rights Watch criticized for sending the wrong signals to abusive governments around the world. Twenty-five out of forty-seven members favored the resolution. The supporting countries included Gabon, Mali, Senegal, South Africa and other countries that have consistently shielded abusive governments. Members put national economic interests before moral obligations in the Human Rights Council. Executive Director of the International Helsinki Federation For Human Rights, Aaron Rhodes, said, "The Human Rights Council is dominated by bloc voting, and what you find in this decision is the result of different regional blocs, the members of which are not considering the cases on their face value but are going along with political motives, which are thought to be consistent with the priorities and the needs of countries in those regions."

Following the election protests in 2009, human rights experts from the U.N. expressed alarm about the ill-treatment of the opposition and their supporters. They issued a joint statement reiterating "grave concern about reports of killings, ongoing arrests, use of excessive police force and the ill-treatment of detainees."

The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, said, "The legal basis of the arrests that have been taking place, especially those of human rights defenders and political activists, is not clear...What are the grounds for the arrests? Have proper warrants been issued in accordance with Iranian law? Why have some of those who have been arrested been denied access to lawyers and members of their families? And why is the whereabouts of others unknown?" Pillay urged the Iranian government to observe due process in its dealings with protesters, emphasizing that the freedoms of expression and assembly are fundamental human rights.

Iran is a party to the U.N. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression, the right to peaceful assembly and protection from arbitrary detention. Its provisions include clauses against torture, providing for the rule of law, rights upon arrest, individual freedom of belief, and right to political participation.

Change to Come?

Iran is at a critical point, and has courageously challenged the oppressive ruling regime of politicians and religious figures. If it is to use the momentum behind these protests to usher in new respect for human rights, its old ways will need to be changed. These include the tradition of stoning and flogging as means of punishment- the Islamic Penal Code prescribes them as appropriate punishments for adultery. The country's court system is in need of drastic reform, as it is not independent and is subject to influence of the ruling regime.

Iran also has good laws in place, and these need to be followed responsibly. Its Constitution requires that the dignity of arrested persons be maintained, and prohibits the use of torture for extracting confessions and acquiring information. Other articles state that the "investigation of individuals' beliefs is forbidden, and no one may be molested or taken to task simply for holding a certain belief;" and "public gatherings and marches may be freely held, provided arms are not carried and that they are not detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam." Among the articles that seek to guarantee freedoms like speech, assembly and free press, exceptions are allowed when the enjoyment of such freedoms conflict with the fundamental principles of Islam. The Iranian government must not use the existence of such exceptions to exploit the people and justify their suppression. A free, peaceful, and truly representative order is perfectly compatible with the society's religious beliefs.

The protest movement has risen from the Iranian people, bearing the stamp of their discontent and their desire for change. Whether or not the protests topple the government, the expression of popular dissatisfaction has forever altered the political landscape. The Supreme Leader's authority as the religious head and final word on all issues has been openly challenged- Ayatollah Khamenei has been defied and called a liar in public. Divisions have emerged within the ruling circle, and the internet has been used as a tool of mobilization of civil society. Grass-roots movements have organized and fueled the rise against the government. Women have played an active role in calling for equal rights and opposing the brutal regime.

In order to delegitimize and contain the protests, Ahmadinejad and his party are attempting to frame the protests as a Western-backed movement. President Obama has admirably resisted the trap of placing the U.S. at the center of the struggle. Obama condemned the suppression of the people in strong terms, without interfering to a level that would allow the demonstrations to be branded an American design. While the U.S. and many other countries sympathize with and support the demonstrators, they acknowledge that the demonstrations are expressions of Iranians' sentiments, not foreign ones.
Human rights lawyers have circulated a petition online, urging the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to speak out on the post-election situation in Iran. We hope that the international community, with the aid of such multilateral instruments, can provide the Iranians with the encouragement they need to demand and obtain their most basic birthrights.

Resources

Iran Human Rights Documentation Center
Request for International Criminal Court Prosecutor to speak out on Iran
Amnesty International Report
About.com's civil liberties page on Iran