Vol. 476 No. 5
10 Mr. Ellis asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the action, if any, that is being taken at EU level in view of the eight year Iranian fatwa against Salman Rushdie; and the progress, if any, made in having the fatwa lifted during Ireland's EU Presidency. [7465/97]
On 13 February, the Dutch Presidency of the European Union issued a declaration on behalf of the EU on the eighth anniversary of the fatwa, which clearly outlined the EU's position on the threat to the life of Mr. Rushdie. The statement reiterated that the fatwa is in defiance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the principle of the sovereignty of states and is null and void. The EU renewed its demands that Iran abide by international law and called upon the Iranian authorities to make further efforts to obtain a satisfactory solution in respect of Salman Rushdie. The statement also regretted the increase in the bounty offered by a private Iranian organisation for Mr. Rushdie's assassination and called on the Iranian Government to take appropriate steps against any initiative that might endanger ongoing efforts to reach a solution. In its statement the EU stressed that it will continue to take advantage of its critical dialogue with Iran to defend fundamental rights and freedom of expression.
In the context of Ireland's Presidency of the EU, I met Mr. Rushdie in Dublin on 11 December. Mr. Rushdie outlined his concerns about the continuing threat to his life posed by the fatwa and I briefed Mr. Rushdie on the efforts made by the Irish Presidency, following on those of the previous three presidencies, to arrive at a satisfactory resolution with the Iranian Government. I also stressed to Mr. Rushdie the EU's firm commitment to the pursuit of a resolution of this issue through negotiations with Iran.
During the Irish Presidency we availed of a number of opportunities to raise the issue with Iran, for example, during the critical dialogue session which took place in Dublin on 29 November. This provided an opportunity for us to put the EU's view to the Iranian side in a full and frank way. The Government also regularly raises the issue in bilateral contacts with the Iranian authorities, such as the visit of the Deputy Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mr. Rohani, to Dublin in November last. The Irish Presidency took the opportunity to raise the question of the fatwa against Mr. Rushdie in the speech which it delivered on behalf of the EU to the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly in New York in November. In the speech, we repeated our condemnation of the fatwa and affirmed that it is a blatant breach of international law. We underlined that the EU would continue its efforts to obtain firm and incontrovertible assurances from the Government of Iran that the life of Mr. Rushdie would not be endangered under any circumstances.
While some progress was made in bringing about a resolution of the threat to the life of Mr. Rushdie during the Irish Presidency and Iran now understands the EU's position better, talks with Iran have not reached the stage where we could claim that there has been a breakthrough. The EU will continue to use the critical dialogue with Iran in order to defend fundamental rights and freedom of expression, including the issue of the fatwa against Salman Rushdie.
Has there been any response by the Iranians to the Dutch Presidency's statement of 13 February? There has been a series of well intentioned statements and interventions but has there been any progress?
There has been some progress in getting a better understanding from the Iranian Government of the unacceptability of the fatwa by the standards of international law. The fatwa still exists and an increased sum of money was offered towards the end of last year about which we voiced our opposition. I do not believe a great deal of progress has been made. Progress will not be made until the Iranian Government accepts its responsibility to ensure the fatwa against Mr. Rushdie is lifted.
Will the Tánaiste arrange a meeting of the joint Iranian Irish commission and use the opportunity of such a meeting to discuss this issue?
I have met the Iranian Foreign Minister on five occasions and I have raised this matter each time. Should the opportunity arise to meet him again the matter will be at the top of my agenda.
Will the Tánaiste arrange an early meeting of the commission?
We offered a date for a meeting which was not accepted by the Iranian authorities. They offered a day which was not suitable for us. If it can be arranged it will be arranged.
The Tánaiste has no intention of having such a meeting. He should say so.
I am grateful for the Tánaiste's information on his meetings with the Iranian authorities. What justification do they offer for the continuation of the fatwa? Is it used as a bargaining ploy in their strange conduct of international relations?
I would be reluctant to offer a response to the Deputy's second question as it is not for me to offer an explanation of the thinking behind the elaboration of Iranian foreign policy. The Iranian authorities take the official stance that they have no responsibility in relation to the fatwa which is a religious declaration and is, therefore, outside the power of a mere government.
We hardly believe that.
What the Deputy believes is a matter for him.
