The passage of a resolution denouncing human rights violations in Iran by the United Nations General Assembly’s Third Committee once again attracted international attention to our country. We have discussed this resolution with Dr. Abdolkarim Lahidji, vice president of the International Federation of Human Right Leagues, the text of which is below.
Rooz (R): What do you see as the significance of the recent resolution?
Abdolkarim Lahidji (AL): The Third Committee’s recent resolution will be put to vote at the United Nations General Assembly next month. It must be noted that the vote that was cast by the United Nations General Assembly’s Third Committee, which will be presented to the General Assembly as a resolution in denouncing human rights, is an indirect vote. In other words, though it is about human rights conditions, it is not issued by the United Nation’s human rights arm, which is the Human Rights Committee.
R: Why?
AL: In reality, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (which replaced the former Human Rights Commission) is organized such that, because of the composition of its members based on geographic and political considerations, the issue of human rights is essentially not the primary factor in decisions of its members. For this reason, for the past five years human rights defenders have chosen the indirect route of the Third Committee to pass resolutions condemning Iran’s human rights violations, and they succeeded for the fifth year. It must be noted that the committee cannot itself prepare the resolution and that member nations must initiate the action. This year too, like previous years, Canada and European countries initiated the process to introduce this resolution in the Third Committee.
R: What options does the Islamic Republic haveto block further resolutions from passing?
AL: Naturally, it must improve human rights conditions inside the country. For example, if the Islamic Republic really wants to stop the execution of juveniles, it should abide by the Convention on the Rights of the Child and explicitly revoke the death penalty at least for juvenile offenders. Or, if they cannot change the law then they should pass an amendment through the Majlis that offenders who were younger than eighteen years old at the time of the crime are not eligible for the death penalty. Iranian officials can then say that such verdicts are not implemented because of that amendment. It even is better for the Islamic Republic to abide by this convention and for its rulers not to repeatedly violate it.
R: In your opinion, will the General Assembly pass a resolution condemning human rights violations in Iran in the coming month?
AL: If officials do not revise their approach, we are certain that the resolution that was passed by the Third Committee will be passed with larger margins by the General Assembly. The text of the resolution obliges the United Nations Secretary General to prepare a report on human rights condition in Iran to be presented at the 2009 General Assembly gathering, and because cases in which the United Nations Secretary General is charged with preparing an exclusive report on human rights condition in a country are very rare and extraordinary, it is clear that this resolution is very highly regarded by the international community and also will be significant in the international legal community.
