Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on May 7th, 2015

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

Is there a danger, if the nuclear issue with Iran is solved, that international pressure on human rights will ease? What measures can be taken to ensure that a nuclear deal doesn't betray human rights?

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

I don't think a nuclear deal would suddenly ease the pressure on human rights, although it could have a distraction from it. I think because of continued human rights violations in the country, people and countries will remain concerned about rights violations. With persecutions of the order you referred to, then it is right and would be the case that we would be concerned about that.

It will be important to give more space to the Iranian people to activate their voices, to hear more from the victims of rights violations, to give more encouragement that they can become active in talking about themselves and therefore ensure that their own commitment to more human rights remains strong, regardless of other considerations, which are also legitimate and are also ongoing at the same time.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

You still have another minute and a half, if you'd like to use it.

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

Mr. Chair, I'll pass my time to Mr. Sweet.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

All right.

You're okay as well?

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

All right.

In that case we'll now go to Mr. Cotler.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

To whom I will donate that minute and a half.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to commend both our witnesses for their exemplary and excellent testimony.

Since I have an extra minute and a half, I'll put two questions, one for each of you.

The first question is for Maziar Bahari.

You shared with us some of your initiatives in terms of journalism is not a crime and education is not a crime, and the last, as you mentioned, dogs are not a crime. You mentioned that if you had more time, you might elaborate on some of this. I'd like to give you more time on any of those issues.

Dr. Shaheed, as we've said, we've been having Iran Accountability Week while the nuclear negotiations have overshadowed, if not sanitized, the human rights violations. We wanted to sound the alarm on these human rights violations. How can we try to help to make sure this alarm is being heard?

We'll start with you, Maziar.

[Maziar Bahari]

Thank you very much for your question.

I think, as Dr. Shaheed said, the Iranian regime is trying to limit the space available to the Iranian people, especially young Iranians, as much as possible, to deny them physical space by persecution, incarceration, torture, and a crackdown on different newspapers and publications, but they're also quite active in cyberspace.

We have to realize the Iranian regime is ultimately an analogue regime operating in the digital world. It's a regime that is very similar to the Soviet Union's regime, which is very good at interfering with shortwave radios, shutting down newspapers, and jailing people, but when it comes to social media, to Internet digital technology, the people of Iran are always one step ahead of them.

In our initiatives, which are mostly online initiatives, we are trying to provide that cyberspace to Iranian activists and civil society. As Dr. Shaheed correctly noted, Iranian civil society is physically restricted, but there is a very vibrant and very lively dialogue going on in cyberspace and that has an inevitable effect on the physical civil society discourse as well.

One of the initiatives that we started about two years ago was education is not a crime, which is a campaign for the rights of the Baha'i religious minority to study and teach in universities. As you know, Baha'is cannot teach or study in a university. I made a documentary film called To Light a Candle. Then we made that documentary available online in Persian for anyone who wanted to download it. From what we know, and of course we cannot have any official statistics, different groups of people download that film and watch it together.

Also, we had another international campaign last year on the last Friday of February in almost 400 cities around the world from New Zealand to Hawaii. They watched the film on the same night. The campaign is still going on. In the second phase of the campaign we want to create murals and graffiti all around the world, again with the help of citizens, not only Baha'is or Iranians, but other people, to raise awareness about this issue.

With journalism is not a crime, the website is available for Iranian journalists to be in touch with each other. As I mentioned in my testimony, many people around the world do not know the names and faces of these Iranian journalists. They're just statistics: 45, 56, 65. They don't mean anything, so we are trying to document every person who's been in prison in Iran. We started in 2009 and right now we have a wall of shame. The website is going to be revamped, and we're going to have different events around the world with different festivals.

We also provide psychological and legal counselling to journalists. When people are arrested, they do not know their legal rights. When their belongings are confiscated, they do not know whether it is legal or not. In the interrogation room the interrogator can mention different articles of the constitution and they do not know that. We are providing legal counselling, both for the journalists and for the families of journalists to refer to, but lawyers are also available to give counselling.

There are many other “is not a crime” topics. As you know, they arrested some young people who were dancing to the song Happy. Maybe young people know the Happy song by Pharrell Williams, so we have made a website for happiness is not a crime.

The last one is “being a dog is not a crime”, which in a few days has gained 5,600 followers on Facebook, because the inhumane treatment by the Iranian government goes beyond people. Stray dogs are killed on the streets of different cities across Iran. We think, and I think the majority of young Iranians think, that life has to be respected. That's why they have reacted positively to our campaign.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Dr. Shaheed.

[Dr. Ahmed Shaheed]

Thank you very much. It's a very vital question.

I hold that a nuclear deal is not the end of anything. I think it's the beginning of a new phase. I liken it to a first half goal rather than the golden goal that finishes the match. There's a need to maintain and to play the game to make sure you defend your interests.

It's been said for a long time now that security, peace, and development are interrelated. Without human rights we don't have peace, or development, or security.

If we are seeking security through a nuclear deal, it becomes important to realize that unless the countries concerned also respect your human rights you will continue to have that country as a source of concern.

We aren't concerned with human rights in Iran because they possess a nuclear weapon; we are concerned because these violations represent a very egregious situation for the values we hold dear. When countries violate human rights, they become a problem of their own, to their neighbours, and to others as well.

These concerns will continue regardless of whatever deal may become feasible on the nuclear front. Once they have a deal of any sort, any agreement of any sort, what is required to maintain that transparency? Accountability, good faith, and performance all apply in a good equal measure to those undertakings and on the human rights field as well. If countries aren't willing to address these concerns across the board in the same manner, then how secure are you on any front?

I maintain that you cannot divorce security from respect for human rights. In the long run, if we are concerned about stability, and if we are concerned about security, we have to take on board the fact that democracy and respect for human rights are an integral part of the order of framework. Therefore, we have to bear that in mind.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you very much.

We'll go now to Mr. Hillyer.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

You talked about some of the reasons that the current president was elected. How much choice did they have in electing whomever?

[Maziar Bahari]

How much choice did people have?

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Yes.

[Maziar Bahari]

There were six or seven candidates. People could choose any of them.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Were these six or seven...could anyone run?

[Maziar Bahari]

No. That's what I'm saying. He was the best of the bad choices. They had to go through the filter of the Council of Guardians. Of course, many people were rejected, including former presidents. Only these people were available to the people. People were wise enough to vote for the candidate who was least liked by the supreme leader of Iran.

I think what we have to understand about the 2013 election is the fact that Rouhani was elected as the legacy of the 2009 election, and that people came to the streets in millions and protested against the rigging of the election in 2009. The regime did not want a repeat of the same thing and allowed people to vote for the person they elected.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

When it comes to other countries putting pressure on countries with human rights problems, the reason it works presumably is that even dictators and abusers of human rights care about the world view. They get shamed. That's one of the reasons the Obama administration pulled back on the sanctions.

At the last meeting we were told by witnesses they believed the international community was on the verge of success with the sanctions, and they were about to do their job, when they pulled back. One of the reasons given is if we isolate them, then the shame doesn't work. It only works if there's a relationship.

I want to get your comments on that balance between having a relationship and where the shame works. If you go really far, and the shaming is high and you don't talk anymore, now you don't have the relationship for it to have an effect.

[Maziar Bahari]

What we have to understand about the Iranian government is that it is not North Korea. It is not Saddam Hussein's Iraq. It is not Nazi Germany. It is a country that is authoritarian, but it's not totalitarian. It's an oxymoron. It's an Islamic republic, as they call it.

It is an authoritarian regime that has a supreme leader who has the ultimate power in terms of military and foreign affairs, but at the same time, the regime was brought to power by a very popular revolution, and it needs people to support it.

On one hand, they have to be in power through any means possible, but on the other hand, they have to seek legitimacy. In that order, if you think about the Iranian narrative from that point of view, the sanctions work in order to put pressure on the Iranian regime, but they do not work if you want to change the regime with the sanctions. You can change certain things within the regime through the sanctions, but you cannot change the regime through the sanctions.

Ultimately, when you also look at the Iranian historical narrative, the Iranians are very resentful of foreign interference because Iran has been at the crossroads of different cultures. It's been invaded since Alexander the Great invaded Persia and burned down Persepolis. Then the Arabs invaded Iran, then the Mongols, then the allied forces.

Iranians are really resentful of any kind of foreign pressure, but at the same time, young Iranians would like to be in touch with the rest of the world. It's a very delicate balance: how much pressure should you put on the Iranian government and where?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Saganash, please.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Chair, first of all, I want to thank and commend the two witnesses today for their extremely important testimony. It's very important for this subcommittee.

I feel very privileged, as well, because as a jurist specializing in international law and international human rights law, these are issues that I've dealt with my entire life, so thank you for that testimony.

I would like to ask Mr. Shaheed some questions.

I know the very important universal periodic review mechanisms at the United Nations are important for the kinds of issues that we deal with. Having participated in those different mechanisms over the years, for 23 years, as a matter of fact, I know very well the halls of the Palais des Nations in Geneva. I know their relative influence sometimes on the member states that are being reported on. I know the limited possibilities of the conclusions and recommendations being actually implemented by the member states.

How important is it still to pursue those mechanisms?

I know Canada has been introducing resolutions to the UN every year condemning the human rights violations in Iran. How important are these initiatives for a country like Iran, and situations in Iran?