‎

The battle against Iran’s One Million Signature Campaign (Against Gender ‎Discrimination) continues unrelentlessly. This campaign is the most peaceful manner a ‎citizenry can protest anything: i.e. request government agencies to review a number of ‎laws through the existing legal framework. But despite this, judiciary officials are ‎incredibly unrelentless in its efforts to summon, prosecute and punish the activists of this ‎movement all of whom are young women with impeccable credentials in volunteerism. ‎

Another outstanding feature in the battle against this campaign are the attempts to ‎suppress the real reasons for battling this movement, which calls for nothing other than a ‎change in the discriminatory laws of the country. In short, the judiciary makes every ‎effort to hide the real and specific reason for creating dossiers against the movement’s ‎activists. The charge that these activists face is “activities against national security.” Even ‎judges do not seem to bother to clarify that how can women and young girls who are ‎requesting the Majlis to review a number of laws within the current legal structure of the ‎Islamic Republic of Iran be labeled to be acting against national security. This charge is ‎normally used against those either take up arms against the state or are engaged in clear ‎acts of espionage. ‎

To demonstrate how the state responds to members of the One Million Signature ‎Campaign the case of Maryam Hosseinkhah is a good example. She proudly defended the ‎righteousness of her demands in the trials and who continues her commitment to fight for ‎women’s rights even after incarceration by making available to the public the events that ‎are going on in prison and the treatment that prisoners receive behind the bars. The court ‎ordered the extremely heavy bail of 100 million Toman (about $120,000) for this activist. ‎She couldn’t pay it, and so was sent to jail. It is interesting to note that even when the ‎owner of a prominent newspaper volunteered to personally guarantee this activist's ‎presence at trial, the court rejected his offer. And when her husband announced that ‎neither he nor his wife could acquire that much money (which was published on some ‎Internet news sites), some government authorities charged him with spreading ‎propaganda against the judiciary.‎

This manner of confrontation is not an isolated example. It is routinely carried out against ‎women’s rights activists. By what legal standards is a man’s mention that he cannot pay ‎the bail of his wife considered propaganda against the judiciary? Or what about a woman ‎who wishes to change the laws that allow her husband to take multiple wives and is ‎accused of acting against national security? Really, one should say bravo to whoever ‎advances such logic and arguments!‎

The reality is that this kind of logic not only does not help national security, it in fact ‎undermines it. Those who present such arguments only demonstrate the weaknesses of ‎the state and are shooting themselves in the foot. I wish they were not afraid to honestly ‎mention what they are really scared off, which is not national security, but the security of ‎the male-chauvinistic order which they are entrusted to protect. ‎

Wouldn’t it be easier if the officials who are confronting the activities and members of ‎the One Million Signature Campaign came forward and announced that what they are ‎really afraid of is gender equality in Iran and thus label is to be illegal?‎