I welcome our guests. Perhaps they will introduce themselves in the event that I might mispronounce their names.
Human Rights Issues: Discussion with Iranian Community in Ireland.
Mr. Keyvan Gholizadeh
My name is Keyvan Gholizadeh and I have been living in Ireland for the past eight years.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
I am Roja Fazaeli and I have been living in Ireland for the past 17 years.
Do our guests mind if I inquire as to what brought them to Ireland?
Mr. Keyvan Gholizadeh
I came here as a student.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
My mother studied in Ireland and that is the reason I came here.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
My name is Abbas Sadri and I have lived here for 30 years. Perhaps I am more Irish than Iranian at this stage.
Mr. Sadri certainly has something of an Irish accent.
Mr. Mohamad Ali Esmaeil Zadeh
I teach martial arts and have been living here for ten years.
Ms Emily Boulter
I am Emily Boulter. I graduated of the University of Toronto with a degree is Persian studies and I am currently a fellow of the Transatlantic Institute in Brussels.
Our guests are all most welcome.
Members will be aware that the sub-committee has taken a keen interest in human rights issues as they obtain in Iran. We, and our colleagues on the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, have raised our serious concerns on many occasions with both the ambassador to Ireland from Iran and his predecessor, the chargé d'affaires to this country. The international community has expressed its serious concerns at the situation in Iran following the recent re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and allegations regarding the manner in which the election was conducted. While every democracy must respect the democratic decisions of the people of Iran, the questions which arose in the aftermath of this election are worrying.
The violent disturbances which followed the much-disputed results of the election led to injuries and deaths of many civilians who were protesting at the outcome. The right to protest is often one which we take for granted but to witness the brutality inflicted on innocent civilians who recently exercised this right in Iran was truly appalling. We all witnessed on our television screens and through the Internet the brutal killing of civilians who exercised the same democratic right to protest as every citizen in this State and in other countries throughout the remainder of the civilised world enjoys.
The sub-committee has been outspoken in its criticism of President Ahmadinejad and his Government's record on human rights since his election in June 2005. Efforts on the part of his predecessor to bring about tentative reform were completely rejected and, as a result, relations between Iran and the West have again deteriorated. While we have been critical of the recent Israeli offensive in Gaza, allegations of Iran's supplies of weapons to Hamas and the reported remarks by President Ahmadinejad that Israel should be wiped off the map of the world and his repeated denial of the Holocaust are deeply concerning.
Ireland has been a long-standing critic and vocal opponent of the resurgent use of the death penalty in Iran. The increasing use of the death penalty for so called moral crimes, such as adultery and homosexuality, and the cruel methods used in execution of those convicted is disturbing. Such methods include public stonings and public hangings from nooses on cranes. Despite the denial of Iranian authorities, it has been reported that there has been an increase in the execution of minors.
Persecution of religious minorities, particularly members of the Baha'i faith continues. This sub-committee and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs have met many friends and members of the Baha'i faith who are complete pacifists and the stories of their persecution in Iran is heartbreaking. We have raised the case of the members of the Baha'i faith who were arrested last year and who were outrageously charged with bombings in the Shiraz region of the country. We are seriously concerned with regard to their fate. The worrying aspect of this case is that these seven people face charges which, if they are convicted, could result in the death penalty being applied. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, has repeatedly raised Ireland's concerns directly with the Iranian Government and also through the EU and UN in respect of this case and on the wider human rights situation in Iran generally.
I thank our guests for making available to the sub-committee their recent letter to the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen. I look forward to hearing their assessment of the current situation in their home country and their suggestions with regard to how we might be of assistance.
Before we commence, I advise our guests that whereas Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in committee, witnesses do not have the same privilege. Accordingly, caution should be exercised, particularly in respect of references of a personal nature. If members wish our guests to cover any particular matters during the course of their presentation, will they indicate their preferences now? This might reduce the number of questions to be asked later.
I welcome our guests, who are here to discuss the current situation in Iran. Yesterday, the joint committee engaged in a comprehensive discussion on the urgency attaching in respect of the abduction of Sharon Commins and Hilda Kawuki and impressed on the Sudanese ambassador to Ireland and the United Kingdom the significance of this event, not just for the families involved but also in the context of Ireland's aid programme and the country's foreign policy in general.
I wish to make another general remark which is interesting and which arises in respect of the work of the Sub-Committee on Human Rights. We have had many meetings at which we have discussed human rights. However, there is a glaring gap in our work programme which must be addressed. I refer to the actual issue of human rights and the definition relating thereto. I regard 1997 as the end of the high period of international acceptance of human rights. However, it is a fiction to suggest that the term "human rights" has been used in the same sense in different parts of the world during the past 12 years. I accept that this matter is relevant to the work of the sub-committee and not to the issue we are about to discuss with our guests. We are much further away from acceptance of the principles of universal human rights than was ever the case previously. We have returned to the position that obtained prior to the 1990s.
There is a real and great danger in respect of what has happened because in the discourse in some of the countries from which those we ask to appear before us come, human rights are perceived as a Western imposition. The assumption is that these rights are sourced in the Enlightenment which emerged from the Western tradition, whereas most of the people in these countries believe in revelation, namely, that there is a revealed source of human rights. That issue was dodged at meetings which took place in Geneva as far back as 1997.
There has been a massive scholarly neglect of this subject. People may state that this is academic but that is not the case. This matter is fundamental and it arises in respect of other issues, such as female genital mutilation, which the joint committee discussed previously, where people have argued that there is a collective right to be set against a personal right. I entirely object to the latter. We must return at some stage to making a decision on what we mean by human rights. Otherwise, we will merely receive delegations in a vacuum. I suggest that this matter be placed on the sub-committee's work programme.
I appreciate the Deputy's comments.
If we do not do that, human rights will descend to a point where it will be an instrument of abuse to be used by one side against the other. We end up without substance.
We have on several occasions raised the issue of the Baha'i faith. We have raised it in general, as an issue of freedom of expression as well as raising bogus incarceration, specific cases and so forth and we will continue to do so. I have been interested in the Baha'is since the end of the 1960s. It is an incredible oppression.
The other issues that arise are the loss of life, illegal detentions, censorship and suppression of free speech, which concerns everybody. It is important that we take a clear and unequivocal stand on these. We have raised other human rights issues with the Iranian ambassador who appeared before the committee. We specifically discussed the Baha'i community, the inhuman and degrading punishment and the treatment, for example, of the gay community. We mentioned suppression and I have no difficulty raising those issues again.
I also met the Iranian deputy Foreign Minister when he visited Ireland and all these issues were taken up with him but that is in the past.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
When was that?
He was met by Deputy Shatter and myself quite some time ago. The background to that meeting was, on the one hand, a threat of a pre-emptive strike by Israel against Iran and, on the other, a discussion on the nuclear issues. The European Union has a blind approach to the question of nuclear capacity in Iran. The international community has not considered it properly in the context of the non-proliferation treaty and many international initiatives could have been used involving both Russia and the US, which would have enabled Iran to have its nuclear capacity without turning it into an aggressive possession.
There is a comprehensive silence at this committee about the fact that Israel possesses nuclear missiles. The official position of Dr. Zion Evrony when he appeared before the committee was that the Israeli policy is one of non-denial. In other words, one would not force the Israelis to say publicly they have them. I will move on from that but it is an important context. Time is limited in the discussion of human rights and it is important to be as real as one can.
I am interested in the delegation's presentation. With regard to the recent elections, the first thing that strikes anybody who is not familiar with the Iranian system is the balance of power between civil and religious authorities. The international community sends hundreds of observers to elections every year throughout the world but the majority are sent a few days before the election is held to oversee polling day and the election count when, on the basis of work I did 30 years ago, most of the fraud takes place during the registration process and, therefore, observers should be sent earlier to see how elections are manipulated.
The recent revelations about the printing of millions of ballot papers in excess of the total number of people on the electoral register were outrageous as were the limitations on participation in elections and the interference of the state authorities in the civil options through the prohibition of actions and expressions in the public space such as assembly, the right to speak, the right to communicate, the right to write and so forth. I am not aware of the degree to which a recount is possible within the system. I have the greatest admiration for those who have lost their lives or been wounded or incarcerated or who have damaged their lives professionally because of the heavy surveillance of the activities that are taking place. There are all clear human rights abuses, which I will take up with the ambassador. My party has written about these issues and I am happy to take them up with higher authorities.
I am more pessimistic than I have ever been about the viability of the human rights discourse and where it is going. We are in a dark time because of the absence of precision in the matters to which I referred earlier. I do not accept sovereignty arguments can stand as obstacles to the vindication of human rights. When ministers or government representatives from other countries appear before the committee and are confronted by us, they say it is a matter for their countries to discuss. If we accept the principle that absolute sovereignty stands as a barrier to human rights, we can get nowhere. We are only waving bits of paper after each other but that is where we are.
I welcome the representatives and their presentation will be interesting. What are the abuses for which their seven leaders are in jail in Iran? A great deal of effort is being made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs who has had regular meetings with the Iranian ambassador but his comments are falling on deaf ears. We are more than happy to do anything we can to be of assistance as a committee.
Deputy Higgins referred to the definition of human rights and the wider issue, which will be the rolling challenge for parliamentarians and human rights groups throughout the world, but I invite him to discuss with the clerk to the sub-committee how we can put this on our agenda.
It should be on the work programme.
Perhaps we can then roll with it through our own channels, that is, the Department of Foreign Affairs, the EU, the UN and so on.
I support the Deputy regarding the monitoring of elections. It should take place not only on the day of the election or the day after. Recently, I had the opportunity to observe the US elections. The US is perceived as the most democratic country in the world, yet no state has a register. One could, therefore, be registered in a number of states. In the state I visited, one could register and vote on the same day. An accommodating approach to voting was adopted, from which one could learn a great deal.
The Chairman is correct to pursue me about the first issue. I suggest, Chairman, that you find time in the work programme to invite an Islamic scholar to say how he or she views human rights and if he or she sees a possibility of universal human rights. I suggest someone like Tariq Ramadan from Oxford. Someone else could give the western point of view.
My only reason for mentioning this matter in the presence of this delegation is that the easiest way of attacking the opposition is to say human rights are a Western imposition. That is happening in country after country across the planet. We should invite someone in to say how Muslims view human rights.
When was the Iranian ambassador last before the committee?
It was seven or eight months ago.
Mr. Gholizadeh, Mr. Sadri and Ms Fazaeli, you are aware that everything is recorded and will be published. There may be some things you particularly wish to put on the record. Other committee members are attending meetings of other committees or the Dáil or Seanad. They will come and go during the meeting. They may monitor the activities of this committee in their offices and they will receive the printed report. People with an interest in this matter will read about it.
With delegations of this nature, we usually invite one delegate to make a short lead presentation. In the course of the presentation, issues may be passed to other members of the delegation for comment. When that presentation is concluded, after seven or eight minutes, there will be a further question and answer session and questions may be directed to whichever delegation member is appropriate to answer it.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
We are here in number because each of us represents a different group in Iranian society. Deputy Higgins asked about human rights. Iran, as Persia, was the first country to initiate human rights 2,500 years ago. We are now, 2,500 later, discussing our own basic human rights. That is because all politicians always take advantage of short-term interests to put human rights issues to the back room when it suits them best. Europe did that and is still doing it. America and Russia are doing it. Even Iranians are doing it. Every country does it. It does not vary from one nation to another. It is a human situation, which we need to address as an ethic of human society.
The Baha'i faith is not the only issue. Baha'is are one group of many which are abused in Iran. The regime is totally authoritarian and does not even value its own believers. The clergy are becoming the leaders of the soft coup d’etat which happened in the past few weeks. We are not here as politicians but as ordinary Iranian people. Therefore, we will confine our remarks to what is happening to our people on the streets. University students are struggling and have always been at the forefront of our struggles. Today is the tenth anniversary of the day when students in Tehran university were thrown from the fourth floor and killed. At the same time, those who killed them were chanting, “Allah Masalah Alla Mohamad va Al Mohammad”, which is one of the biggest slogans in the Islamic world. They claim to do everything in the name of peace. They have brought humans to the level of killing young people in the name of God. This is the type of people you are dealing with.
Now, within the same regime, there is a second soft coup d’etat, whose clergy are separate from the Revolutionary Guards. They want a second round of elections. The election was to have represented a democratic shape but it was simply to show someone like President Obama that we also have a democratic system. They did not expect everything to get out of hand. People were too clever for them. We have a population of 70 million, of whom 82% are highly educated. One cannot mess with this kind of group anymore. In 1957, when I was a teenager, that was possible because we were manipulated by American influences and we were emotional rather than calculating.
The committee has read the documents we provided. The Iranian ambassador has not reflected the true picture in the media. The Iranian ambassador must be more loud. We are too quiet.
Thank you, Mr. Sadri. I welcome Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, who is an old friend and poll-topper in Dublin in the recent European Parliament elections.
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
Thank you, Chairman.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
I would like to talk about certain specific cases of people who have been arrested. Before I do, I will respond to Deputy Higgins. I lecture in Islamic studies and human rights in Trinity College, Dublin. I am aware of the debate about Islam, human rights and Western and Islamic values. This issue is used by the Iranian Government and by some conservatives. Iran is party to the two human rights covenants and a member of the UN. Mere lip-service is paid to the rhetoric of human rights.
I bring some urgent cases to the committee. Mahsa Amrabadi is a young journalist who is pregnant and, reportedly, not doing well in prison. Jila Baniyaghoob, a human rights defender and journalist is in prison since the start of the demonstrations and protests. Her husband, Bahman Ahmade, a journalist and human rights defender, is also in prison. Very little has been heard of him. Shiva Nazarahari is a human rights defender. There is no news from her. Reza Tajik is a human rights defender and journalist. Abdolfaateh Soltani is a human rights defender and colleague of Shirin Ebadi, the Nobel peace laureate. Muhammad Dadkhah is a lawyer who works on human rights cases. Sara Sabaghyan, Bahare Doloo and Amir Rayeesiyan are also lawyers. These are ten of the 800 people whom we know to have been arrested in recent weeks. Many more have been arrested but their names have not been released.
I am sure the committee has heard of Said Hajarian who was shot last March. Many journalists, including a Greek and French journalist, have been arrested. Many regular people were arrested in the riots and have, reportedly, been severely beaten and are in detention. Students were attacked in their dormitories, especially in the University of Tehran, and in Shiraz and Esfahan. In Tehran students took cover in their dormitories but Basiji vigilantes were waiting for them and they were severely beaten. It is said that a few students died that night. We do not know the number of the dead but we think it is higher than the figure reported. People have died but others have died as a result of the beatings in detention, which comes under torture. We are looking for accountability. Ireland is a member of the international community and as such should uphold the Iranian people's human rights as a matter of international concern. I know the UN Secretary General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon was here. Given that there is a relationship, we should ask the UN Secretary General to appoint a delegation to travel to Iran. I know a number of Nobel Peace Laureates have asked the UN Secretary General to give this matter the status of an urgent crisis, to investigate the alleged fraud in the election and the fate of the prisoners and the numerous people who have disappeared. We call for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, including journalists, student and civil society activists and an end to the state sponsored violence and accountability for crimes committed, and also for freedom of assembly, of expression, of the press as guaranteed by the Iranian constitution and not only under the international covenant they have ratified.
We want more pressure to be put on Iranian officials, the Iranian ambassador to Ireland. There is no other time like this to impose political sanctions on Iran and many people have called for this. We ask the Irish Government to consider this also.
Does that conclude Ms Fazaeli's presentation?
Ms Roja Fazaeli
I have a letter from international academics in support of the students who have been arrested.
Will Ms Fazaeli give that to the secretariat and it will be circulated? We will now open the debate to members.
It is important to dispose of the business and that all the specific cases should be referred for further investigation to the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and they in turn can pursue them.
And report on them.
This is very important and I propose that this be done.
The content of the letter from the academics should be communicated to the Higher Education Authority and the heads of third level institutions, many of whom have relationships with Iran. People may forget that at one time Iran had the highest proportion of women graduates. I agree with the delegates that what is taking place is brutal. We should use all the means we can to offer solidarity to those who find themselves in these circumstances.
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
I apologise that I was a little late. I had the opportunity to meet the Iranian ambassador recently. Clearly, this is an issue, and these general issues are exercising everybody's mind. The idea of giving members of the European Parliament access to these committees is so that MEPs can liaise, giving the Irish viewpoint on issues of this type. With the advent of the new European Parliament, it might be a good idea if the minutes of this meeting were circulated to the Irish MEPs with a covering letter suggesting that they may wish to pursue these issues in the parliament from an Irish perspective. That would be helpful. Yesterday in the European Parliament there was a meeting of the foreign affairs committee on Iran and the issue is on the agenda. There is a plenary session of parliament next week in Strasbourg. The Irish MEPs could take the work of this committee and build on it.
In light of what my colleagues at the committee have indicated, in particular Deputy Michael D. Higgins; that we follow up on the people, will the delegates formally submit the names to me? I can take them now, if the delegates have a list, or they can e-mail them to the committee.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
We will supply the list of names to the clerk of the sub-committee, Mr. Paul Kelly.
We will be happy to raise the issue in the political affairs committee of the Council of Europe and we might perhaps invite the group to make a submission to that forum. I suggest that we invite the ambassador again and give the group an opportunity to come again before the committee so that the ambassador is asked to respond directly to the delegates.
Ms. Abbas Sadri
I do not think that would be helpful. What will happen and I can give a 100% guarantee is that our names will be noted and our famiies in Iran will be threatened. That will not yield a positive result. Does the Deputy think it would have an effect if three or four Iranians questioned the ambassador? No, not really. If the questions came from members of the Irish Parliament, that would have more impact because the Iranian government cares about its public image. One can see how the government responded to the 3 million Iranians who took to the streets. Four Iranians facing the ambassador would not have much of an impact. In fact, what he would do, is ensure that the Iranian government would find out who else is connected to the people in our group.
Deputy Fahey, what we could do is that the committee could meet the ambassador and question him.
There is a number of practical suggestions, first, we take up the specific cases with the Departments of Justice, Equality, Law Reform and Foreign Affairs; second, we raise it with the political committee of the Council of Europe, which is very important, as Ministers are represented on it and third, that we forward the proceedings of this committee to the European Parliament, which brings it to another forum. We could also include a sentence to the effect that the purpose of our communication is to encourage these bodies to comment to Geneva. What will count is the international embarrassment of Iran rather than anything else, in what is really a sub-committee of the General Assembly and the information will be sent to Mr. Ban Ki-moon and to the Human Rights Commissioner.
It is important that the ambassador comes before the committee. The Chairman and members have received a letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs and it is obvious that a great deal of effort is being made but is not generating any response. In the light of what we have heard, one would wonder what action can be taken to ensure it will have an impact.
I propose that we invite the ambassador to appear before the committee. Members should speak to the delegates who are present and get the relevant information that can be put to the ambassador, should he agree to come before the committee.
I thank the delegates for their presentation. I realise they are concerned about talking directly to the ambassador. It is our job as members of this committee to put political pressure on the ambassador and anything we can do in that regard will be done. I ask the delegates to keep the Chairman informed of any other issues as they arise, so that action can be taken in between committee meetings rather than having to wait for the next committee meeting. One thing is certain, if the issues are not highlighted in the public domain, the Iranian government will continue with its actions. However, public embarrassment may have an effect on the government and impact on the release of the pregnant journalist. I ask the delegation to assist the committee in making a case by providing information on those specific cases.
Will the delegates make their final response?
Mr. Abbas Sadri
Our main objective is to achieve the best result we can from this. The best result is to ensure the issue is kept in the media as much as possible. Maintaining pressure on the ambassador is good, but we will get nothing out of him because he is just a puppet and will say only what he is told to say. He will give no clear response in terms of taking action. Even if he does, it will be pure lies and fabrication. The best approach is to continue that pressure on the ambassador and to ensure those contacts and the responses given, which will be minimal or nothing, are reported in the media. The Iranian authorities are very fearful of the media, particularly Western media. The best result for us will be if every issue is reported in the media. If we go quiet for weeks, the regime will have won. Whatever communications take place with the Iranians must be reflected in the media. That is all we can ask.
Perhaps the Chairman could ask the ambassador whether he would be willing to allow members of the sub-committee to visit those who are detained and imprisoned. It would be interesting to see what answer he receives.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
I had some problems in Iran in 2004 even as a dual Irish-Iranian citizen. Even in such instances, the authorities make the case that it is very difficult to have any involvement. However, it is a very good suggestion.
Will Mr. Mitchell clarify whether there were suggestions some weeks ago that the European Parliament might send a delegation to Iran?
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
There were attempts to send a delegation, but I am not sure whether they have been successful. The outgoing foreign affairs committee of the Parliament met yesterday and a major Iranian figure whose name I cannot recall was in attendance at that meeting.
When will the new committee be appointed?
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
New committees will be appointed next week but they may not be up and running until the end of the month. There is a time lag. However, the Parliament will meet in plenary session next week. There is a difficulty in that we must deal with the election of the President and the appointment of members and chairmen of committees. However, I will be surprised if an opportunity is not found to address the Iranian situation. It may well be done not in plenary but via a reconvened meeting of the foreign affairs committee or by some other means. It is very much on the agenda.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
What about political sanctions? I understand there has been talk of expelling ambassadors for a period.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
Was the recall of the European ambassador on the agenda of the foreign affairs committee?
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
Those types of proposals have been made. As far as the European Parliament is concerned, the issue will primarily be addressed within the foreign affairs committee before being debated in plenary. However, we are talking about major steps. Once one takes those types of action, there are no further steps to take. We must be careful not to rush too quickly into anything. The fisherman is told to keep a tight line to reel in the fish. If one pulls too hard, the line will break, and if the line is too loose, the fish escapes. We must maintain the correct degree of pressure. There is much concern about this issue at European level.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
Have there been any proposals to refuse to recognise the new Ahmadinejad Government as a legitimate Administration?
Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP
That suggestion has been raised by individual MEPs but the Parliament has not pronounced on it. A resolution may well be agreed by the leaders of the group for consideration. However, it is a major step to take at once. In the meantime, there is much ongoing discussion. The Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, is very much involved in that, as is the General Affairs Council. I expect we will not get through the plenary session without some consideration of this issue. It was an unusual step for the outgoing foreign affairs committee to reconvene but it did so specifically to discuss the Iranian situation.
Ms Roja Fazaeli
The international community always seems willing to impose economic sanctions. However, Iranians have asked those of us living in other countries, if we have an opportunity to speak to Government representatives in the jurisdictions in which we reside, to ask them to push for some type of political accountability and possibly political sanctions. It is a call that is coming from Iran.
The time pressure of which the delegates spoke would be best addressed in a presentation by the sub-committee to the Joint Committee on European Affairs. The latter is the scrutiny committee for European Union legislation and in regard to matters pertaining to the General Affairs Council where they are specifically European rather than global. The delegates should submit their presentation to that committee.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
There is a further important point to make. Before the election, it was a matter of the Iranian people against the regime. Now, however, we have a situation where a part of the regime is separating itself from the main body. That is very important and something upon which Europe should capitalise. The fact that all the elements within the regime have not recognised this Government as legitimate offers a great opportunity and excuse for the European Union and others to withhold recognition on the basis that its own legal and political bodies have withheld that recognition. Mr. Ahmadinejad's Government cannot operate without international legitimacy. That is the best way to handicap his Administration.
Ms Emily Boulter
I have a question in that regard. People like Mohammad Khatami have indicated their support for Mr. Mousavi, and Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani has come out against Ayatollah Hamani. I understand a cleric commented last week that Iran will not be like Ukraine and Georgia. What is necessary for a sea change to happen? How many clerics need to speak out to ensure there is no legitimacy for Ahmadinejad?
Mr. Abbas Sadri
Strangely enough, this is turning into a war between the clerics and elite Revolutionary Guards. The threat under which clerics in Iran feel themselves to be is greater than that experienced by those who are opposed to the regime as such. The clerics were the influencers and manipulators of almost every regime change in the last several centuries. When Western Governments wished to exert influence in Iran, they used clerics to assist them, such as in President Mosadeck's time when Ayatollah Kashani was used for that purpose. Even in the last election, we believed that Ayatollah Hamani was brought into the equation by lobbies outside, but that is beside the point. The ironic part is that even the clerics inside Iran feel threatened by the situation and are fearful that the entire system has been hijacked by a bunch of revolutionary boys.
This offers a great opportunity for us to give more room and space for the reformists to use the clergy to move a little bit further. So long as we continue not to recognise this Government, it cannot operate for more than five or six months. The Iranian economy is virtually at a standstill. If the bazaar system, which is what we call the heart of the economy, should shut down officially, that will be the end of the system. It is already very close to that point. These are the issues we must be aware of inside Iran. It is no longer a case of the people versus the regime but that the regime itself is breaking up.
On behalf of the sub-committee, I thank the delegates for their informative presentation. It is clear that the situation in Iran remains deeply concerning. We have noted the points made by the delegates and are aware of the other issues which we may not have had time to deal with. The main points of concern are the escalation of violence, the need for fair and transparent elections, the question of economic and political sanctions, the condemnation of the existing Iranian regime, the necessity of the release of what one would deem illegally held prisoners, and the need for international and United Nations involvement in events in Iran. There is a big agenda in this regard and had we more time, we probably could have touched on much more. However, that is it in a nutshell.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
I thank members of the sub-committee for taking the time to see us here today.
It was a pleasure. I assure the witnesses they have a friendly ear here in the Irish Parliament. Members always are willing to listen and to do what they can in the cause of human rights in the witnesses' country. Moreover, not alone will the sub-committee continue its work but in light of the attendance today of Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, the minutes of today's meeting will be circulated to him as he requested. This will have an effect along the lines to which Mr. Mitchell referred. Consequently, the witnesses have members' support. We look forward to continuing to work together with them to secure the human rights of all Iranian citizens.
The witnesses made a valid point on the importance of media and the manner in which the regime considers media coverage. The press officer to this committee is in attendance today and I have spoken with the clerk to the sub-committee. We will issue a press release through our press office later today, which hopefully will be helpful. We will continue in this regard.
Mr. Abbas Sadri
Were the sub-committee to meet the ambassador a few times and if this was shown to everyone in the media, it would become clear that they cannot simply continue to come and talk rubbish to members or continue to respond in a rubbish way. I apologise for the simple language but that is the reality of the position.
If members are agreeable, I propose that the sub-committee will write to the Minister for Foreign Affairs to request that he continue to raise the intolerable situation in Iran at every possible level, whether that be through his contacts with the Iranian foreign minister, the European Union or the United Nations. We will do that.
He also should refer to specific cases.
Yes, and in respect of specific cases, as requested.
It has been requested — I also feel strongly about this issue personally — that we should request the Iranian ambassador to Ireland to appear before the sub-committee to discuss the wide range of human rights concerns that have been expressed both today and in previous meetings, as well as those that are generally known. We could have a good, wide-ranging discussion with the ambassador. Is that agreed? Agreed. We will do so and will begin that procedure from today. Consequently, the ambassador may appear before the sub-committee in September or October.
As there is no other business, I will take this opportunity to again thank the delegation, members who attended and, in particular, Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP. This is our July meeting and the Houses are going into recess. While members have other committee work to do up to the end of July, I look forward to seeing them in the autumn and hope they all have a nice break. I thank everyone for their attendance.
The sub-committee adjourned at 12.35 p.m. sine die.