Consideration of reports, comments and information submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention (continued)
Twelfth periodic report of the Islamic Republic of Iran
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, COMMENTS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION (agenda item 4) (continued)
Twelfth periodic report of the Islamic Republic of Iran (CERD/C/226/Add.8)
1. At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr. Tabatabai and Mr. Alaee (Islamic Republic of Iran) took places at the Committee table.
2. Mr. TABATABAI (Islamic Republic of Iran), referring to the fourth preambular paragraph of the Convention, said that while some countries were the initiators of policies based on colonialism and racial superiority, Iran, despite its dominant position in the region, had never acted as a colonial Power or attempted to keep other races under its domination.
3. The adoption of the Convention in 1965 had helped to realize the aspirations of ordinary people towards dignity and equality, and had helped to promote universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The achievement of universal norms and standards in a world of diverse cultures and traditions was a commendable accomplishment.
4. The Islamic Republic of Iran welcomed the rapid ratification of the Convention, and had pledged to take both individual and joint action, in cooperation with the United Nations system, to contribute to the speedy elimination of racial discrimination in general and of the crime of apartheid in particular.
5. His country had fully adhered to the provisions of the Convention, and was committed to pursuing policies, both nationally and internationally, designed to help eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms. It had never committed any act of discrimination against persons in territories under its jurisdiction, or indeed elsewhere. It made no distinction based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin between any of its citizens.
6. Because many different ethnic groups had always existed in the country, and in the course of history had become mixed and interlinked, there was no reason for any kind of racial superiority or discrimination. All citizens were equal before the law, and were equally entitled to participate in the political life of the country. The Islamic Republic of Iran had been prompted to accede to the Convention solely by its desire to proclaim its solidarity with the international community in combating racial discrimination and segregation wherever they existed. His country fully supported the objectives of the Convention both in the letter and in the spirit, and had in 1977 made racially discriminatory propaganda punishable by law. As yet, however, there had been no occasion for that law to be enforced.
7. Mr. GARVALOV, Country Rapporteur, welcomed the statement by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran that his country had pledged to take action, both unilaterally and in cooperation with the United Nations system, to eliminate racial discrimination.
8. Eight and a half years had elapsed since the Committee had considered the country's eighth periodic report (CERD/C/118/Add.12) in March 1985, and he appreciated the fact that the Iranian Government was now resuming its cooperation with the Committee. However, the combined document containing the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth periodic reports (CERD/C/226/Add.8) was surprisingly brief, containing only 11 paragraphs. Seven of those paragraphs were quotations from the Koran, the Constitution, and Iranian legal instruments; of the remaining four paragraphs, two stated that the Republic did not condone racial discrimination either constitutionally or legally, and two contained information on the Government's accession to other conventions.
9. His first observation was that the report did not follow the Committee's guidelines. Indeed, bearing in mind the quality of the eighth report, and the earlier promise made by the Iranian delegation to supply more information in reply to the Committee's questions, it represented a step backwards. Since the Government had decided to postpone its ninth, tenth and eleventh periodic reports, why had it not taken the opportunity to produce a comprehensive twelfth report, containing all the information requested?
10. There was in fact no specific reference anywhere in the report to the Convention, although mention was made of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. He had an uneasy feeling that the report had been intended for consideration by another body.
11. The statement in paragraph 1 that the Republic's laws and regulations had been ratified on the basis of faith in Islam was not in itself sufficient proof of fulfilment of its obligations under the Convention, unless it was read in conjunction with paragraph 10, which stated that the country did not accept any discrimination between its various tribes and ethnic groups. The latter statement was a definite improvement over the claim by the Iranian representative during the consideration of the eighth periodic report that racial discrimination in Iran did not exist. Nevertheless, it was more of a declaration of intent than a conclusion drawn from objective analysis. The Committee had always declined to accept statements by representatives of Islamic States parties that there was no racial discrimination in their countries: experience had shown that no State party was immune to that evil, and that the need to combat it remained imperative.
12. The Republic was to be congratulated on having adopted the Law of Punishment for Racial Discrimination Propaganda (1977). However, paragraphs 5 and 6 of the report merely quoted articles of that law, and gave no information on how it was administered in practice. Had any cases ever been brought to court under the law? What was the status of the Convention vis-à-vis the Republic's domestic legislation and Constitution, and could the Convention be invoked directly in the courts? Information on any litigation or complaints brought either by Iranian citizens or non-citizens would be welcome.
13. At the time the eighth periodic report was being considered, it had come to the Committee's knowledge that a tribunal had been set up in the country to investigate any complaints or protests on the part of the public against government officials, units or regulations, on the basis of principle 173 of the Iranian Constitution. Paragraph 11 of the eighth periodic report had further stated that, where article 2, paragraph 1 (c), of the Convention was concerned, reference should be made to the fact that any national laws that contradicted principle 19 of the Constitution concerning individual rights and equality before the law were to be considered non-applicable and non-binding. He would welcome further information on those points. The latter statement would seem to indicate that at that time the Republic had not been entirely alien to the concept of the primacy of international law, but since the twelfth periodic report contained no such indication, he assumed that that was not the case.
14. The report did provide some information where article 3 of the Convention was concerned, and it was commendable that the country had seen the need to legislate against racially discriminatory propaganda as early as 1977. The picture would not, however, be complete until the Committee had information on cases brought before the courts on the basis of the law.
15. No information was given as to how the Republic was implementing articles 5, 6 and 7 of the Convention. Where article 5 was concerned, had all Iranian citizens been able to participate without distinction in the recent elections, including members of various ethnic and religious groups? Were members of such groups entitled to freedom of movement within the borders of the State? Did they have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association?
16. In 1983, when the Republic's seventh periodic report had been considered, the Iranian representative had promised that detailed demographic information about the ethnic composition of the country would be provided in the eighth report. Although the latter had made some reference to the existence of ethnic groups, it had not in fact provided any demographic information, and the twelfth report contained no mention whatever of such groups. That fell short of the Committee's expectations.
17. He asked whether the groups that had been referred to in paragraph 36 of the eighth periodic report, namely Turks, Turkomen, Kurds, Lurs, Baluchis, Farsis and Arabs, were the only ethnic and linguistic groups in the country. There was legitimate interest in the status of the Lurs and the Baluchis, as well as in the ethnic differences between the Turks and the Turkomen, and information would be welcome. Were Sistan and Baluchistan, where the Baluchis were mainly concentrated, still the poorest and least developed regions in the Republic? What was the policy of the Iranian Government towards them, and what resources were allocated for their development? Referring to paragraph 34 of the eighth periodic report, he wondered how the Republic could reconcile acknowledgement of the existence of Kurdish, Baluchi and Arabic ethnic groups with the fact that schools in the areas where those groups were settled were provided only with books in the official language. It would be of interest to know to what extent children of such ethnic groups received instruction at school in their mother tongue. He would welcome information about the percentage of elected members from ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities on Iranian legislative bodies.
18. While he welcomed the statement in paragraph 4 of the twelfth periodic report that, under article 19 of the Constitution, members of all ethnic groups or tribes enjoyed equal rights, such a statement was not entirely equivalent to a prohibition of racial discrimination in the sense of article 2 of the Convention.
19. Reference had been made in paragraph 12 of the eighth periodic report to "regulations and policies" of the Ministry of the Interior providing for minority rights. What were those regulations and policies? In view of the declaration in article 19 of the Constitution that all people enjoyed equal rights, why did that same Constitution recognize only the Zoroastrians, the Jews and the Christians as religious minorities? In particular, why was the Baha'i community discriminated against, and their religion denied official recognition? Why were the Baha'i prohibited from electing leaders and conducting religious activities, and why were Baha'i marriages not recognized? Such practices would seem to be in contradiction with the statement in paragraph 2 of the twelfth periodic report that everyone without distinction was entitled to enjoy all the rights and freedoms contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
20. There were also reliable reports of the execution for political reasons of a number of Iranians of different ethnic backgrounds. Four Iranian Kurdish dissidents had been killed in Berlin, Germany, in September 1992. A prominent member of the Baha'i community, Bahman Samandari, had been summarily executed in March 1992. There were also persistent and equally reliable reports that persons of various ethnic backgrounds were being detained and tortured while in detention, that obviously being a common practice. Baha'is continued to face arbitrary arrest and detention by the authorities, the practice apparently being to keep a small number of Baha'is in detention at all times.
21. Article 5 (d) (viii) of the Convention proclaimed the right to freedom of opinion and expression. According to the Iranian Constitution,
"... publications and the press may express ideas freely, except when they are contrary to Islamic principles, or are detrimental to public rights ...". In practice, however, matters were different, with governmental control and censorship. The authorities appeared to place a broad interpretation on their right to censorship on religious grounds. The case of the British author, Salman Rushdie, was a case in point. Newspapers were forbidden to criticize the concept of the Islamic Republic or to promote minority rights. Those were among the many questions requiring elucidation.
22. He assumed that the provision of the Law of Adherence quoted in paragraph 8 of the report addressed certain aspects of the system of apartheid as it existed in the Republic of South Africa, since he was persuaded it did not exist in the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, since the provision introduced the idea of prohibiting the acts mentioned, it was apparently intended to deal with racial discrimination in the Islamic Republic itself. The quotation from the Law of Adherence was also of interest in its prohibition of any action designed to divide the population on the basis of racial boundaries. That provision was not only an integral part of Iranian domestic law but had wider, international implications. The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina came to mind and the extremely complex problem of how to solve uncontrollable enmities grounded on ethnic and religious differences and reconcile conflict between the rights of sovereign States, including their right to territorial integrity, and the rights of minorities.
23. In conclusion, he said he was persuaded that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Committee would pursue their cooperation, and that examination of the report would benefit both the reporting State and the Committee as well as furthering the aims of the Convention.
24. Mr. WOLFRUM welcomed the resumption by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran of its dialogue with the Committee and hoped that it presaged fruitful cooperation in the future. However, he shared Mr. Garvalov's disappointment at the brevity of a report intended to span a period of some eight years. The result was that most questions had been left unanswered, making it very difficult to assess the status of implementation of the Convention in Iran.
25. Under article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention, States parties undertook to report on the legislative, judicial, administrative or other measures they had adopted to give effect to the provisions of the Convention, but the report merely mentioned a single legislative measure, the Law of Punishment for Racial Discrimination Propaganda (1977). That was the more regrettable in that the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities had, in its resolution 1992/15 of 27 August 1992, expressed its deep concern over the continuing violations of human rights committed by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, namely summary and arbitrary execution, torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The use of excessive force to suppress anti-government demonstrations had been particularly deplored. The Sub-Commission had further expressed its concern at the renewed persecution of religious minorities and the summary killing of Baha'is. In view of those stringent conclusions, the Iranian Government might have been expected to take the opportunity provided by the Committee's present session to put the record straight, but it had failed to do so.
26. Neither the eighth nor the twelfth report contained any information on the demographic composition of Iran. According to information in his possession, however, many ethnic groups were to be found in the Islamic Republic of Iran, the larger minorities being Azeri Turks, Kurds, Arabs in Khuzistan province, Baluchis, Turkomen and nomadic tribal groups such as the Quashqai and the Bakhtiari. Approximately 50 per cent of the whole Iranian population belonged to minority groups. It was therefore of the utmost importance that the Committee should be given a clear picture of their status and of the way in which they fitted into the economic, cultural, social and, more particularly, the political life of the country.
27. The education of minority groups had been touched on by Mr. Garvalov. He, in his turn, would like to know whether there were any primary schools where teaching was provided through the medium of the Turkomen and Kurdish languages. To what extent were those languages taught at university level? What proportion of persons from minority groups achieved a higher education?
28. With regard to the representation of minority groups in political life, he asked to what extent minorities were represented in parliament or were employed in the public service (at both the central and the regional level) and in the diplomatic service. He applauded the provision under article 64 of the Iranian Constitution of three parliamentary seats for Christians and one each for Zoroastrians and Jews, and asked whether similar arrangements had been made for the other minority groups he had mentioned earlier.
29. In the light of the injunction to provide effective protection and remedies contained in article 6 of the Convention, he would like particulars of the Iranian judicial system, such as the procedures for training judges, their status, independence and tenure of office, and the existence of any judges coming from minority groups.
30. The situation of the Baha'is, on which he shared Mr. Garvalov's views, was also under consideration by the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. He asked why the Baha'is, as he understood it, were denied access to higher education. The property of Baha'is had apparently been extensively expropriated by the Iranian Government, which had recently put it up for sale, thus depriving the Baha'is of any opportunity of recovering it. He also asked why, as it appeared, those Baha'is still in business were prohibited from dealing in foodstuffs and were confined to selling dry goods.
31. He drew the Committee's attention to the findings of Mr. Galindo Pohl, Special Representative of the Sub-Commission on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Apparently there were certain groups that exercised various police functions but did not form part of the State's security forces. He asked what the Government had done to ensure that such groups acted in accordance with the laws and Constitution and with the international obligations assumed by the Islamic Republic of Iran. He understood that some attempt had recently been made to bring the groups under Government control by attaching them in some way to the regular police. He asked what protection individual citizens had against violation of their rights by such groups and what remedies were available to them in the event of such acts.
32. That lengthy list of questions, which could be extended further, had been rendered necessary by the brevity of the report. He therefore recommended that the next periodic report, due in two years' time, should be more detailed.
33. Mr. DIACONU, welcoming the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran, said he hoped their presence marked the initiation of a dialogue on implementation of the Convention in their country; the replies they provided would help to fill the gaps in the report. Some of the blame might well attach to the Committee and he therefore suggested that it should consider asking States parties in future to make every second periodic report a more comprehensive one, so that full details of the situation in any given State party would be available every four to five years.
34. He endorsed the questions asked by Mr. Garvalov and Mr. Wolfrum and asked that the replies relating to the demographic composition of the Islamic Republic of Iran should be as clear as possible.
35. The Kurdish people made up a large population, present as minority groups not only in the Islamic Republic of Iran but also in Iraq and Turkey, as well as parts of the former USSR and Afghanistan. He asked whether the Iranian representatives could provide a comparative picture of the human rights situation and legal position of the Kurds in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq and Turkey.
36. In view of the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran was a large country with a large population, he asked whether significant allocations from the country's annual budget were made to areas in which minority groups, including nomads, lived. Were there any economic or social (medical and health) projects under way to improve the level of development and living conditions of such groups?
37. He asked for more information of the religious minorities present in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The problems of ethnic and religious minorities were closely related and gaining in urgency; if measures were not taken at the outset to resolve such problems, conflicts were bound to develop.
38. Mr. de GOUTTES said that, like other speakers, he had been disappointed that the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this oral introduction to the report had not provided more information to fill the gaps in the written text. His disappointment had been the greater given the importance of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the fact that the twelfth report, since it embodied four previous reports covering a period of over seven years, ought to have been particularly comprehensive. Instead it was brief, incomplete, abstract and too general in nature. It had confined itself to a listing of legal texts, which gave no real impression of the actual situation prevailing in the country as it affected individuals and minority groups. Like Mr. Garvalov, he considered the report to be a step backwards. The report had ignored the Committee's guidelines and did not provide the general overview of the economic, social and religious situation in the country which the Committee was anxious to have from States parties.
39. As had already been noted, the report provided no information on the country's ethnic composition, which was very varied. Two-thirds of the population was of Aryan origin, consisting of Persians or Farsi; other major groups were the Azeris, Kurds, Lurs, Bakhtiari and Turks, and there were many others. It would have been useful to know what the situation of all those groups was. As Mr. Wolfrum had pointed out, it would also be useful to know what proportion of posts in the public services and in the principal professions were held by members of ethnic minorities. Information on the position of Kurdish opposition groups would also have been helpful.
40. The report had made no mention of the serious problem represented by the activities of the Revolutionary Guards, which included arbitrary arrest and summary execution, sometimes outside the country, torture and cruel and degrading treatment. Those activities had been condemned by the Commission on Human Rights and by many non-governmental organizations, including Amnesty International. They had been the justification for the designation in 1984 of a Special Representative on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran and for the subsequent prolongation of his mandate. Since the Iranian Government had not provided information in reply to its questions, the Committee had to seek that information elsewhere in United Nations documents and reports by non-governmental organizations.
41. Turning to specific provisions of the Convention, he asked whether certain acts committed by the security forces or Revolutionary Guards, such as arbitrary arrests and beatings, could be considered compatible with the right to security of person enshrined in article 5 (b). Were the very restrictive religious and political criteria applied by the Iranian Council of Guardians to parliamentary candidates compatible with the rights enshrined in article 5 (c)? Did the strict application of Islamic law in the Islamic Republic of Iran ensure proper respect for the freedoms set out in article 5 (d) (vii)-(viii), despite the spirit of tolerance and understanding among races manifest in the Verses quoted in the report? Many sources of information, including the report of the Special Representative on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, bore witness to the persecution of various religious groups including the Baha'is and many Christian sects, which had been condemned by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 1992/67. Lastly, was the discrimination against Christians, Baha'is, Zoroastrians and Jews in employment, education and access to public office reported by the Committee of the International Labour Conference examining the application of ILO Convention No. 111 in the Islamic Republic of Iran compatible with the provisions of article 5 (e)?
42. In view of the clear evidence of failure to respect provisions of the Convention in the Islamic Republic of Iran, he hoped that the Iranian representatives would respond forthwith to those serious concerns and trusted that the country's next periodic report would conform to the Committee's expectations.
43. Mr. BANTON questioned the Iranian representative's reference to colonialism as the mainspring of all tendencies leading to doctrines advocating racial superiority. Such simple terms could not account for developments in many parts of the world today, such as the former Yugoslavia, Somalia or Liberia, or for attitudes of racial superiority in Japan, for instance. He remained puzzled by the verse of the Holy Koran quoted in paragraph 1 of the report, and in previous reports, which suggested that classes of people were distinguished physically so that they might know one another better, since experience showed that physical differences tended to make it more difficult for people to know each other because of the prejudices associated with such differences. He hoped that some light could be shed on the relevance of the verse to the very serious problem of racial discrimination.
44. He suggested that the Islamic Republic of Iran should consider its obligation under article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention to pursue a policy of eliminating racial discrimination, particularly in the domestic sphere. The first step in formulating such a policy, in addition to a State party's obligations under articles 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Convention, was to consider where racial discrimination occurred in the society in question. Many States were unaware of the incidence of such discrimination because of the lack of research. Such research was imporant in formulating policies; in that regard, reporting States might learn from the experience of an empirical ten-country study currently being undertaken by the International Labour Organisation, the research methodology consisting in ascertaining the treatment in employment of persons in the same occupations but of different races or ethnic origin. The findings of such a study would provide persuasive evidence of equality or inequality of treatment.
45. Although the Committee was not concerned specifically with religious or political discrimination, it required some information on those aspects in order to ascertain whether a racial or ethnic dimension was not involved, since distinctions between religious and ethnic groups, for instance, were sometimes blurred. The Baha'is were a case in point. It was incumbent on the Committee to consider such distinctions and it needed the relevant information in order to assess whether rights were available to everyone without discrimination.
46. Referring to paragraph 8 of the report, he said he knew that some States declined as a matter of policy to collect data about the ethnic origin of its population, interpreting such "ethnic monitoring" as discriminatory. Such an interpretation was, in his view, unfortunate, and he hoped that the Iranian Government would regard the question of ethnic monitoring as a way of assessing whether its professed policy of ensuring racial respect was being implemented in practice. The ethnic composition of the judiciary or the diplomatic service, for example, would provide the kind of evidence required to establish whether that policy was effective. With reference to paragraph 10 of the report, proof was required of the effectiveness of the laws in protecting those they were intended to protect; there were indications to the contrary in reports from non-governmental organizations and other sources. He hoped that such information would be provided in the next report.
47. Mr. SHAHI, welcoming the resumption of the Iranian Government's dialogue with the Committee, suggested that the Government should request the assistance of the advisory services of the Centre for Human Rights in drafting its periodic reports in accordance with the Committee's guidelines, and should provide more comprehensive texts of the laws relevant to the various articles of the Convention, including article 5. The difficulties of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which had undergone a protracted war and was subject to external pressures, might partly account for its failure to comply with reporting procedures.
48. Regarding the demographic composition of the country, he asked whether population censuses required citizens to register by ethnic background. In Pakistan, regular censuses were taken, but, as a matter of deliberate policy, the people were not asked to which school of Islam they belonged, given the danger of exploitation of sectarian differences. The Committee was familiar with the negative response by a number of States to the question of ethnic monitoring, arguing that they did not wish to divide society but, on the contrary, to ensure national integrity. Although he believed it was desirable for the Committee to be provided with full ethnic statistics in order to carry out its task, it must also bear in mind the need for a uniform, non-selective approach to the issue.
49. Commenting on Mr. Banton's question about the Koranic verse quoted in paragraph 1 of the report, he said that it was crucial not to take any one verse in isolation, but in conjunction with others, and to look at the Holy Koran in the broad light of history. Ideologically speaking, it could be seen that Islam was a great revolutionary force eliminating differences, even though discrimination might occur in practice in Islamic societies.
50. Mr. RECHETOV welcomed the Iranian Government's resumed cooperation with the Committee. Endorsing the introductory comments by the country rapporteur, he agreed with him and other speakers that the periodic report fell short of the Committee's expectations and associated himself with their questions about the specific human rights situation. There were conflicting interpretations of the ideology of Islam as either a potential source of conflict and destabilization or as a model of social justice and human rights fully compatible with international law. The key to understanding the position of a State that had embraced the Islamic faith lay in that country's policies and, particularly, practices.
51. He was particularly concerned with the specific situation of ethnic minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Those minorities were similar to the national minorities in the newly independent territories of the former Soviet Union, which were currently undergoing a difficult period in their development. Their destiny would be affected by their relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Although it was reported that the latter was exerting a highly positive and peaceful influence in certain ethnic conflicts in the territories of the former Soviet Union, it was important to know how those ethnic populations were faring in the Islamic Republic of Iran itself, for their own sake and in terms of the Islamic Republic of Iran's attitudes towards neighbouring States and the rest of the world.
52. Mr. FERRERO COSTA concurred with previous speakers in stressing the inadequacy of the report before the Committee, in terms of both procedure and substance. Since it was in the Committee's interest to have a more substantive dialogue with the Islamic Republic of Iran and to receive detailed information on the implementation of the Convention, he would suggest that, in accordance with article 9 of the Convention and rules 64 and 65 of the Committee's rules of procedure, the Islamic Republic of Iran should be asked to provide additional information in writing, replacing the incomplete twelfth report, for consideration by the Committee at its next session in March 1994, without prejudice, of course, to replies by the Iranian representative to questions raised at the current session.
53. Referring to the political role of Islam, he said that, for historical reasons, Islam was often depicted in the worst possible light and had become associated with fanaticism, terrorism and violence. It did not, however, have a monopoly of terrorism. Indeed, there had been instances in recent history where terrorism had led to the independence of certain countries. Each situation had to be viewed in context. For example, in Afghanistan, the Muhajidin had been regarded by the Soviet Union during the Brezhnev era as "counter-revolutionary bandits", while the West, as well as Pakistan, had supported them in their struggle.
54. In relation to the role of Islam in contemporary world politics, he had once expressed the view that a correspondence existed between the law of external relations of Islam and modern international law, as expressed in the United Nations Charter. Some scholars, on the other hand, equated that law with constant war for the purpose of imposing Islam. However, one could no more blame Islam for wars conducted by Islamic rulers than one could blame Christianity for the imperial conquest of Latin America. It was necessary always to keep the historical perspective in mind and to rise above stereotypes and prejudices.
55. He, too, would have liked the Islamic Republic of Iran to provide an assessment of the treatment of Kurds by its courts, as compared with their treatment in other countries with Kurdish populations, but he recognized that it was not appropriate for the Islamic Republic of Iran to comment on conditions in other countries. He would, however, welcome information on ethnic minorities in that country.
56. Mrs. SADIQ ALI said she had little to add to the comprehensive analysis made by the country rapporteur. She had, however, two specific questions. Firstly, she would like to know if, in view of the many ethnic and religious groups in the Islamic Republic of Iran, there were any integrationist multiracial organizations. Secondly, was there any training of police and military personnel in human rights?
57. Mr. van BOVEN said that the Committee had discovered in the course of its work that problems of racial discrimination existed in all countries. While some countries claimed that they had no racial or ethnic problems and that the Convention was being fully implemented and respected, it invariably emerged on further inquiry that no country was entirely free of racial or ethnic problems. In that knowledge, the Committee tried to review compliance, not as a tribunal but as a monitoring body, which furthermore liked to advise, and make recommendations to, Governments. The Committee needed meaningful dialogue, and that was why it had brought its guidelines for the preparation of reports to the attention of States parties so that they could draft their reports in a systematic way. The Committee would then have full information on which to reach objective conclusions.
58. In that respect, he agreed with other members of the Committee that the twelfth report of the Islamic Republic of Iran did not conform to the guidelines. However, he welcomed the presence of the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran, who would be able to provide further information serving as a basis for a dialogue. He associated himself with the view of the country rapporteur and others that the information in the report was inadequate, so that the Committee had had to rely on other sources of information.
59. The Convention had both international and domestic aspects. With regard to the former, the Islamic Republic of Iran had ratified the Convention, thus expressing its firm commitment and solidarity with the international community. With regard to the latter, it was necessary for a State party to implement the Convention, and the Committee would then monitor compliance. The questions relating to article 5 were very important, since that article gave a very specific list of political, social and economic rights to be enjoyed equally by all people.
60. He looked forward to hearing the replies of the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the specific questions put by members, and, in the light of those replies, the Committee could decide, as Mr. Ferrero Costa had suggested, whether to seek more information.
61. Mr. YUTZIS said that most of the points he had wished to make had already been expressed by other members of the Committee, particularly the country rapporteur.
62. He welcomed the presence of the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran, since, though States parties were not obliged to send representatives, it was very desirable that they should do so in order to permit a meaningful dialogue. The report presented was very abstract and contained no specific details of actual developments in the Islamic Republic of Iran in relation to the Convention. In those circumstances, the Committee had no alternative but to request additional information, since at present it had no basis for a discussion.
63. As other members of the Committee had pointed out, it had been necessary to use other sources of information, to assess compliance with article 5 of the Convention. For example, where the Baha'i community was concerned, he understood that a systematic attempt was made to destroy historic places, including the violation of tombs in cemeteries. There were difficulties over property ownership, access to university education, divorce, inheritance and other matters. That example illustrated the Committee's need for full information and there might well be other similar cases, such as that of the Sunni Muslims. He agreed that, if necessary, it should ask for further information in accordance with article 9 of the Convention.
64. Mr. SONG Shuhua said that the presence of a representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran was a promising sign after an interval of some eight years.
65. As compared with the country's eighth report, which had contained much information on compliance with the Convention, the twelfth report, which made no reference to compliance, was deficient and he hoped that future reports would follow the guidelines.
66. No information had been provided relating to articles 5, 7 and 8, so that the Committee did not have a full picture of the present situation in the country. He wondered whether the lack of detail was due to the difficulties faced by the Islamic Republic of Iran in its relations with neighbouring countries in recent years. Ethnic and religious issues could not be separated from political issues, and therefore had not been included. He hoped that more information on recent developments would be provided in the next report.
67. The CHAIRMAN said he had nothing to add to the exhaustive analysis by the country rapporteur and the comments of members of the Committee. He hoped that the answers by the representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the questions raised would meet the Committee's concerns.