Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Oct. 30th, 2014

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

How's my time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

It's over by a minute and a half.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Oh, that was generous of you, Chair.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Ms. Grewal, please.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Shaheed, for speaking to the committee on the issues of human rights violations in the Republic of Iran, where specific communities in Iran have been at the forefront of many human rights violations, in particular toward women.

I want to return again to what Mr. Marston was asking. You said that women trying to leave an abusive marriage must prove they have a significant risk of bodily harm. In this case, can you elaborate on the case of Reyhaneh Jabbari, the young woman who was executed this past Sunday for killing the man who allegedly raped her?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

Both cases referred to speak generally to the second-class status women have in society. I don't think they are linked directly, but the fact remains that there is frankly a gender hierarchy in society, and certainly in marriage as well. Some of the laws try to enforce this. But I don't think the hierarchy was what was at issue here in the Jabbari case. The Jabbari case was actually a failure to further proper legal procedure, a failure to ensure that the defendant had all her rights respected, the failure to look at all the evidence properly and therefore give her a fair trial. Without that, even if there was gender parity, then the outcome would still be unfair.

By and large, the laws entrenched hold women in a second-class status. For example, a woman cannot go out to work if the husband objects to it. The greatest complaint, I'm told, is a similar law that allows a wife to complain and have the husband stay home, but there the judge must determine that it's detrimental to the children's welfare and so on.

So in a society in which women don't enjoy a substantive equality, then formal equality of this sort doesn't really go very far.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Shaheed, over the past decade, we have seen dramatic increase of known female executions taking place there, from 25 between 2001 and 2009 to 58 between 2010 and 2014. Can you elaborate on this increase?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

Would you repeat the question, please? That the figures about women or....

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

We are talking about women. Why is there an increase in the executions?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

To be honest, I haven't looked at executions from a gender perspective. I can't explain why the figure is going up in a particular class. Overall, there has been a very sharp rise in executions in the past five years. In 2004, the total number was below 100 and now it has gone all the way up to almost 800 this year. That's across the board. Most of these are for drug offences. About 70% to 80% are for drug offences. There are other categories.

I have not seen the death penalty being used as an instrument to undermine women's rights. I have not made that correlation. However, I have seen the death penalty clearly being used to combat drug trafficking, and it isn't working. I wasn't seeing ethnic minorities perhaps receiving the death penalty in greater numbers than do other classes of offenders.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

What can Canada do to reduce the persecution of religious minorities such as the Baha’i community and Christian groups in Iran? Are we able to approach this increasingly violent situation from afar, or must our aid come from within Iran?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

That is a question that requires multiple approaches, some of which have to be targeted at the communities you have just mentioned. Others would benefit more broadly the human rights situation. My stance is that the UN and the member states of the UN need to maintain a spotlight on rights violations in the country, documenting them and speaking about the challenges that they pose. The agenda is on the table.

Iranians themselves are not able to have this agenda domestically because of the restrictions on speech and the penalties given to those who advocate human rights. For specific communities, what we can do initially is get the information out, maintain contact, and give them a voice, so that people take notice of this. There have been many cases when issues have been raised about particular individuals. That state has stepped back and reviewed the case. We should bear in mind that this is part of the interaction we have with Iran. That's the way I have designed my work in the UN, to highlight issues, to enable a discussion of the issues, so that Iran will have the space and the motivation to take steps that address these rights.

I'd like to point out the Baha’i as a particularly vulnerable community. I think that must be recognized, and our actions must demonstrate that.

On the question of other minorities, including Christian minorities, the fact that new converts are targeted specifically is something that should be borne in mind and spoken about, and people should become aware of that. If more countries in the world know about this persecution, more countries will speak to Iran either privately or publicly on the subject, and there will be more incentive and motivation on their part to address the issues.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Chair, do I have more time left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

I'm afraid, you don't.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Mrs. Grewal.

Professor Cotler, please.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to express our appreciation to you, Dr. Shaheed, for appearing before us today. Your reports and testimony have always been comprehensive, exemplary, and worthy of the recognition that they have been given. This leads me directly to my question.

In Geneva tomorrow, the United Nations Human Rights Council will be conducting its universal periodic review of Iran's human rights record. After the first UPR, in 2010, Iran accepted 123 of the council's 188 recommendations. It committed itself to complying with the international human rights obligations to which it is bound, including matters such as the free exercise of religion, the rights of detainees, protection against torture, and the like.

Now, four years later, to what extent has Iran lived up to its own undertakings from 2010, and in what way can the UN Human Rights Council hold it to account for the breach of its own undertakings?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

As I note in my report, there were some areas in which Iran had made attempts to live up to its pledges. This included, for example, revising the criminal procedure code and the penal code. In the penal code there were some advances, like the removal of capital punishment for apostasy, heresy, and witchcraft, but there were other regressive elements in it, such as widening the scope of capital punishment.

The criminal procedure code is more positive. It has many measures in it that I think will strengthen the way the judiciary tries to provide the main judiciary functions, but one has to see in its practice whether or not it actually does so. It provides for multiple judge benches for a wider range of trials than at the present time.

I have attached my work to these commitments that Iran undertook at the UPR to see how they have actually abided by them. I have been very disappointed in the way this has turned out.

In terms of what the UN can do, I think the UN should speak out candidly on the areas in which Iran's practice does not meet its obligations under international law. It must perform the function of being a champion of people's rights and, therefore, uphold its commitment to protecting human rights as a universal standard. I think most states should speak out on their concerns about human rights in Iran.

The UPR tomorrow will again be an opportunity to take stock of what happened and to highlight our ongoing concerns and then work with Iran in identifying an agenda to address these issues.

What is important here will be to remain engaged in this dialogue with Iran in terms of keeping a focus on the violations and a focus on the measures to be taken. It will take a long time, of course, to achieve improvements in human rights, as is the case generally, but we must persist in staying with the task.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, doctor.

Three weeks ago, several of us from all parties held a press conference to warn about the threatened executions of three prisoners. One was Ayatollah Boroujerdi, who has been languishing in the notorious Evin Prison for eight years on trumped-up charges and who has been called Iran's Mandela, really a dramatic and shocking example of the plight of political prisoners.

The second was the threatened execution of Omid Kokabee, a renowned physicist, also on trumped-up charges.

The third person we brought up in our press conference was Reyhanah Jabbari who tragically, since our press conference, was in fact executed.

Do you have any information that you can update us on, either on Ayatollah Boroujerdi or Omid Kokabee, or anything you might want to say about the plight of political prisoners in Iran, generally speaking?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

I have raised my concerns about Ayatollah Boroujerdi and Omid Kokabee in my communications with them, as with my reports as well.

My concerns were, in the case of Ayatollah Boroujerdi, about his health and the need to get proper medical attention.

In the other case I've listed my concerns about the fairness of trials and the charges laid against him and the extent to which they actually meet Iran's own commitments and its own rule of law provisions and its own human rights commitments.

I have nothing new to report on these two cases. You mentioned damages in my report.

In the case of Reyhanah Jabbari, I shared the shock of everybody when we heard the news that she had been executed. There were a number of attempts made on the part of many people to highlight the concerns that were there, and I did write to the government on several occasions expressing concern about her case.

There were other communications made to the government to stay the execution and to enable us to have a chance to look at the issues at hand. So really, unfortunately, I have nothing new to add to these, other than to express my shock that the execution took place.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

About political prisoners, generally speaking, do you see any improvement in the situation? I think you yourself identified there being some 800 political prisoners in Iran? There may be more we don't know about, but are the trends improving or, as I can appreciate, are the trends not improving?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

In some senses those trends have not been improving. I mentioned earlier about the execution of a person who made a donation to a news organization, so that was clearly a political prisoner being executed. There are other instances in which my information has indicated that cultural activists may also be facing the death penalty or may have been executed. Of course, Iran and I disagree on the facts in some cases, but the concern is that unless free and fair trials are guaranteed, the possibility that genuine political activists may face the death penalty exists. I have not seen any easing of the situation with regard to the treatment of political detainees in the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Unfortunately, professor, that uses up all your time.

Mr. Schellenberger, go ahead, please.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your presentation today, Mr. Shaheed.

You suggested the rest of the world should speak to Iran about their human rights. I don't think they appreciate being told by the west. Who in the rest of the world do you think should or could persuade Iran?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

The “should” includes everybody. I think human rights are universal. It's everybody's obligation to raise the issue. Who “would” I think is a different question. I will be looking at those countries that support the resolution in New York, that cosponsored the resolution, to ask people who could speak out.

There are also other countries that may not support the resolution but may feel that, at least in certain cases, their conscience requires that they speak out on Iran, such as Iran's partners in the OIC, the Islamic conference of countries, and Iran's partners in the NAM, the Non-Aligned Movement. Some of the leading actors in this movement, I think, could and should be encouraged to speak to Iran either publicly or privately on these issues. On some issues, I think, many feel compelled to speak out more so than on other issues. The Baha’i situation may present a situation for some on which they feel the need to speak out. Maybe some might want to champion increasing media freedoms. There's a range of countries out there that have different priorities, but they can all be utilized as channels to communicate with Iran.