Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sub-Committee on Human Rights) díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 31 Mar 2009

Baha’i Community in Iran: Discussion.

I welcome members of the national spiritual assembly of the Bahá'í of the Republic of Ireland to discuss human rights violations against the Bahá'í community in Iran. In particular, I welcome Mr. Brendan McNamara, Ms Alison Worthley and Mr. Patrick Dawson.

Human rights in Iran has long been an issue of concern, not only to members of the sub-committee but to the wider membership of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs where the matter has been raised on numerous occasions along with various other concerns regarding the respect for human rights in Iran more generally. There is evidence that persecution of members of the Baha'i faith in Iran has increased over the past two years. As the delegation is probably aware, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, has raised Ireland's concerns repeatedly directly with the Iranian Government and through the EU and UN. Washington has signalled a change of approach in its dealing with Iran. Should this succeed in easing the tension, it may provide a better opportunity for international players, including the EU, to strengthen dialogue with Iran on this and other issues of concern.

The question remains whether Iran will be more willing to heed international concerns than it has been up to now. I would be interested to hear the views of the members of the spiritual assembly of the Baha'i here today on that question and I would also like to hear how best we, as parliamentarians, can support calls for the end of the persecution.

I advise the delegation before it commences that whereas Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in committee, witnesses do not enjoy such privilege. Accordingly, caution should be exercised, particularly in references of a personal nature. I invite Mr. McNamara to address the sub-committee, following which there will be questions from members.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

I will begin by stating how pleased and grateful we are to be here. I thank the Chairman for his kind words of welcome. I have a statement, the reading of which may lead to the questions. It gives an overview and background.

Is there a copy for circulation?

Mr. Brendan McNamara

Yes.

Is that the one that begins, in the Baha'i faith, the world applies to both the faith and its members?

Mr. Brendan McNamara

It begins "Overview on the Situation for Baha'is in Iran."

I gather from the committee clerk that it has been circulated.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

Is it alright to proceed?

Yes. If Mr. McNamara wishes, seeing as it is circulated, rather than read it from A to Z he may wish to refer to aspects of it as then it might be easier to pose questions. We can take it as read. It is up to Mr. McNamara, whatever way he wants to handle it.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

Since it is the first time we have appeared before the sub-committee, we thought it appropriate to mention a few background details about the Baha'i faith. An overview might give some context as to why Baha'i are persecuted in Iran as well. I will read that and then pick out some of the major points from the review, which goes into much detail about what is happening.

We are in Mr. McNamara's hands.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

Thank you. We are deeply grateful for the opportunity to address the sub-committee on human rights and for the genuine concern on the part of the committee and its members for the fate of the Baha'i community in Iran. The expressions of support and assistance that have been forthcoming from our Government and Members of the Oireachtas, from this esteemed committee and its members, is a great source of encouragement and pride for us as Irish Baha'is, deeply concerned as we are for our co-religionists in Iran.

It may be of assistance if I mention a few brief details on the background of the Baha'i faith and its origins. The Baha'i faith is the youngest of the world's religions and the second most widespread. It is based on the teachings of its founder, Baha'u'llah, who emerged in the mid-19th century in what was then Persia, now Iran.

Baha'is accept that all the different religions have proceeded from the same source, teach the same fundamental truth and have the same goal — the spiritual education of humanity. In this age, Baha'u'llah says that the time has come for the human race to be united as one people. "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens", he wrote. He teaches a spiritual solution to the world's problems, based on justice, equality and the elimination of prejudice. In the words of one of the Baha'i faith's central figure's, "The Baha'i faith recognises the unity of God and of His Prophets, upholds the principle of an unfettered search after truth, condemns all forms of superstition and prejudice, teaches that the fundamental purpose of religion is to promote concord and harmony, that it must go hand-in-hand with science, and that it constitutes the sole and ultimate basis of a peaceful, an ordered and progressive society."

Worldwide, the Baha'i faith has more than 5 million adherents, who are engaged in the process of learning how to translate that guidance into realities of individual and community life. Though they come from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds, they are united by their belief in Baha'u'llah and by their desire for a united, prosperous and peaceful future for all of humanity. In Ireland, the Baha'i community is active in 25 localities and Baha'is have been in Ireland since the early decades of the last century. The Baha'i faith has no clergy. It is administered by democratically elected councils called spiritual assemblies. There are 17 local spiritual assemblies in Ireland and there is also a national spiritual assembly, responsible for all the affairs of the Baha'i community in this country.

I refer to the background to persecution in Iran. The Baha'is have been persecuted throughout their history in Iran. The central reason for this persecution is based on the religious doctrine of Islam that Muhammad is the final Prophet of God, the Seal of the Prophets, and that no divine teacher can arise after him. Many Muslims agree to disagree with people of other religious faiths, to live and let live when it comes to matters of belief but not, unfortunately, the authorities in Iran, whose actions against Baha'is are solely as a result of religious intolerance.

With 300,000 members, the Baha'i community is the largest religious minority in Iran. According to the Iranian constitution, Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians are the only recognized religious minorities. The regime refers to the Baha'i faith as a heresy or a conspiracy and classifies its members as "unprotected infidels", who thus have no legal recourse. Some conservative Islamic leaders in Iran and elsewhere view the Baha'i faith as a threat to Islam and brand Baha'is as heretics or apostates. The progressive stands of the faith on women's rights, education and independent investigation of truth are of grave concern to many Muslim clerics. On the other hand, the Iranian constitution allows for the protection of the human rights of believers of unrecognised religions. Iran is also a signatory to the main international human rights covenant that guarantees freedom of religion or belief and frequently pays lip service to upholding the best standards of tolerance and justice.

I will outline recent events relating to how the Baha'i faith has come under pressure. Harassment of Baha'is is pervasive and includes many incidents of the following which have all been documented: arrests and detention, with imprisonment lasting for days, months, or years — in cases where the Baha'i is released, substantial bail is often required; direct intimidation and questioning by authorities, sometimes with the use of high intensity lights and physical mistreatment; searches of homes and business, usually with Baha'i books and other items confiscated; school expulsions and harassment of schoolchildren; prohibition on Baha'is attending universities; court proceedings where Baha'is are accused of promoting propaganda against the government "for the benefit of the Bahaist sect"; monitoring of the bank accounts, movement, and activities of Baha'is, including official questioning of Baha'is requiring them to give information about their lives, actions, neighbours, and so on; denial or confiscation of business licences; denial of work opportunities in general; denial of rightful inheritances to Baha'is; physical assaults, and efforts to drive Baha'is out of towns and villages; desecration and destruction of Baha'i cemeteries and harassment over burial rights; dissemination, including in official news media, of misinformation about Baha'is and incitement of hatred against Baha'is; evictions from places of business, including Baha'i doctors from their offices and clinics; intimidation of Muslims who associate with Baha'is; attempts by authorities to get Baha'is to spy on other Baha'is; threatening phone calls and letters to Baha'is; denial of pension benefits; denial of access to publishing or copying facilities for Baha'i literature; and confiscation of property.

The planned and systematic nature of the persecution against this religious minority came to light in 1993 with the discovery and publication by a former UN special representative of a government memorandum establishing a policy on "the Baha'i question". Drafted by the Supreme Revolutionary Cultural Council and signed by the Supreme Leader, the document states unequivocally that steps should be taken to subjugate the Baha'i community, culturally and economically in order that "their progress and development shall be blocked". The document provides conclusive evidence that the campaign against the Baha'is is centrally directed by the government.

The next section of the report deals with the plight of Baha'i leaders, which is the most recent development. Most people are aware of the imprisonment of Baha'i leaders. While dozens of Baha'is are held unjustifiably in Iranian prisons, particular concern has arisen in respect of a group of Baha'is, five men and two women, who were detained in March and May 2008 and have been held in Evin Prison in Tehran without any charge since then. During this period, their only outside contact has been family visits of ten minutes approximately once a month. It is reported that the conditions of their confinement are bleak. The seven people constitute an informal leadership group that is attempting to maintain links among Baha'i communities throughout Iran. Their arrest gives rise to particular concern because of the fate of members of the previous Baha'i leadership, who were arrested in 1980, in the early days of the Islamic Republic, and never seen again. Members of the successor leadership were arrested in 1981 and later executed.

A spokesman for the Iranian Government has announced that the seven Baha'is in this case will be charged with a number of offences, including running an illegal organisation, disseminating anti-regime propaganda, insulting religious values and engaging in espionage on behalf of Israel. The sub-committee may be interested to know that the charge with respect to Israel is frequently levelled against Baha'is because the spiritual and administrative centres of the faith are located in Israel. This fact, which predates the birth of the modern state of Israel, came about as a result of the banishment by the joint Persian and Ottoman authorities of the time of the founder of the Baha'i faith to what was then a remote province of the Ottoman empire. The basis for these serious charges, which could lead to the application of the death penalty, must be seriously questioned. Concerns are heightened by the fact that the lawyers for the accused, including the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, have been unable to see them at all, have been denied access to the case files and have been subject to public criticism and harassment. In such circumstances, there seems to be little prospect of a semblance of a fair trial.

Many voices have been raised internationally in defence of the Baha'i leaders. As the Chairman said earlier, our Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, has directly raised his concerns about the treatment of Baha'is with members of the Iranian Government. He raised the matter with the Iranian Foreign Minister, Mr. Mottaki, at a meeting of the UN General Assembly in September 2008 and with the Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr. Safari, in Dublin in June 2008. Last December, the Minister, Deputy Martin, wrote a letter to Mr. Mottaki on the subject of human rights concerns in general. He raised the plight of the Baha'is, particularly the case of these seven representatives, in the letter. He argued that in such circumstances, it is difficult "to avoid the conclusion that the Government and authorities of Iran are actively trying to suppress a religious faith". The EU has expressed its concern and the UN has agreed resolutions, etc. It should be noted that there is encouraging evidence that Iranian writers, intellectuals and ordinary people, within and outside Iran, are beginning to question the validity of the systematic persecution of Baha'is. A prominent Iranian Islamic theologian has recently made a strong statement to this effect, which has created quite a stir in Islamic circles in Iran and elsewhere. This development is particularly noteworthy as those who speak on behalf of Baha'is in Iran are subject to pressure and put themselves in danger.

We are witnessing the intensification of a co-ordinated strategy of intimidation against the Baha'is. Our experience has been that when the spotlight of international attention focuses on attempts to culturally and economically strangle the Baha'i community and terrorise its members, this pressure is alleviated or, at least, is not allowed to develop to a more catastrophic outcome. We seek no special treatment or recognition for our co-religionists in Iran. We want the Iranian Government to honour its commitments under the various international covenants and standards to which it is a signatory, so that this beleaguered community can finally be emancipated. We are acutely aware that the Baha'i community is not the only one to suffer in Iran at present. Our call for the upholding of fundamental human rights extends to all citizens of that great country.

In conclusion, we want to make it clear that Iran's Baha'is love their country and have no wish other than to contribute to its progress and development. We hold no animosity towards the great message of Islam; rather we uphold and respect its divine origin. The followers of the Baha'i faith constitute a peace-loving community that is drawn from all backgrounds of Iranian life. They endeavour to live by the standard that was set down by the founder of the Baha'i faith, Baha'u'llah, when he wrote, "Consort with the followers of all religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship". The sub-committee has the real and sincere gratitude of the Baha'i community in Ireland for giving it an opportunity to make its case today.

I thank Mr. McNamara for his presentation, which was very well put.

Mr. McNamara's presentation is useful. It is necessary to continue to ask questions and use our influence on behalf of the Baha'i community. I raised this issue on the previous occasion foreign affairs questions were taken in the House and I have tabled another question on the issue, specifically the position of the seven individuals to whom Mr. McNamara referred, for the Minister to answer when foreign affairs questions are taken in the Dáil one week from tomorrow. We did not receive a direct answer when we raised this issue with the Iranian ambassador. Senator Norris was present when we asked him specific questions, not only about the Baha'i community but also about other minorities in his country, including the gay community.

Curiously, I first met members of the Baha'i community when I was studying in the United States a long time ago. I was very impressed by its members' interest in matters cultural, notably music, as was the case with the Baha'i community in Indiana. Will Mr. McNamara explain the principle of the designation of an apostate? Members of the Ahmadiyya sect, for example, are in a somewhat similar position in Pakistan where they are regarded as having departed from belief in the notion that there is a single prophet. The Iranian position is not a general position in comparative religion because many people who accept the primary revelation also recognise other prophets. The difference in the case of the Baha'i community is, I presume, that it is based on a specific set of revelations. In the history of intolerance, this runs into difficulty in two ways. One is the interpretation of the most recent enlightenment in the Cartesian sense, while the second relates to the question as to whether one can have several forms of revelation. The point is that the faith was recognised for a long time, including during Mossadegh's time, in what was then called Persia.

Members received an answer to some of our inquiries which suggested that one could be tolerated in Iran provided one kept one's faith private and practised it at home. However, the specific objection of the state to what is regarded as a subversive cult was the collective side, in other words, communication among members of the faith. I recall this answer from one of the letters. This issue runs across minorities in Iran, including the gay community, which has particular forms of capital punishment.

All these issues have been raised and members will raise them again. In addition to the Dáil and Seanad, they can be raised with important bodies such as the European Union and UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. Another important body is the International Commission of Jurists which could be valuable given that the former President, Mary Robinson, has been appointed its head.

I make all these points conscious that this issue should not be caught up in the type of bellicose language which is directed against Iran. There are those with an international agenda who would favour a pre-emptive strike against Iran on the basis of its transition to nuclear energy. Many opportunities have been foregone to make progress in reducing the issue of the nuclear threat from Iran. I say that because it is necessary to be very clear. I stand with those who are in favour of an international regional settlement, which I believe to be possible if people are sensible about, for example, the international control of fissile material that could be available to everybody and eventually bring about a reduction in the nuclear challenge, internationally. However, none of that as regards the distortion of Israel's position by its opponents, justifies its systematic breaches of human rights. The lessons to be learned are not for Iran alone. Where there is theocratic subversion of civil society and the state, it is impossible to sustain even the most basic elements of human rights, with any pretension to universality. I can certainly speak for my party. Senator Norris and I have also worked on these issues, specifically, and I should be very glad to continue.

We shall now hear from Senator Norris, and perhaps Deputy Higgins will respond.

I also welcome our friends. I suggested in correspondence that it would be good for them to come back and see the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, to keep us updated and ensure that this remains a priority, both at main committee and sub-committee levels.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins and I are old friends and we agree on many things. I certainly agree with him on the temperate language aspect. This is one of the singular features of the Baha'is, rather like the Tibetan Buddhists. They are squashed, squeezed and tortured unmercifully and yet they always seem to come out with this very balanced peaceful language. It seems almost as if this peacefulness aggravates their aggressors even more.

They are very welcome, in any event. I have had the privilege of raising these matters, not just with Deputy Higgins here, in the company of the ambassador, who was not consistently helpful. I also had the opportunity to raise them in Tehran, with the authorities some years ago and visited the headquarters, as I understand it in Haifa, which is a very beautiful building with wonderful gardens. It epitomises the peacefulness, the civilisation and nonaggressive attitudes of the Baha'i people.

As regards the whole question of apostasy, this to my mind is the kernel of the issue. One gets this from time to time in Islamic countries. Everybody has a perfect right to be an apostate. It simply means changing one's faith, by conscience. Surely to goodness, if one is conscientiously convinced, why should one not? There is a moral imperative to do so, and yet Christians in Pakistan are sometimes subjected to attacks because they are apostates. Under certain applications of Sharia law they can be killed. I am not speaking here as a Christian, although I am one. I am speaking as an individual who believes it is a moral right to change or abandon a religion if one is unable to believe. It is not helpful or does not sustain anybody's religious belief to be forced to pretend hypocritically that he or she is a believer. It is weakening Islam to try to force people to pretend to a belief they do not conscientiously have — and it is a point that could usefully be made to the authorities. It is a sensitive issue. I am 65, a member of Church of Ireland and I have all types of glorious paper skeletons in the cupboard. However, I am glad to say they can be hauled out when politically expedient. I remember that awful consternation was caused when anybody turned. It was the Irish equivalent of apostasy — "he turned in order to marry her" or "she turned". Usually, it went one way and all of the children were kept hostage under the Ne Temere decree. The whole thing was nasty. Why should not people turn, or become atheist or agnostic, if that is honestly what they are?

I fully deprecate any system where any human being claims to know. They do not know — the Grand Ayatollah; my fellow, the Archbishop of Canterbury; your fellow, the Pope. No one knows so they do not know. The time has come when they should be a little more humble. They believe, which is a different thing, and those of us who are part of the believing community try to believe. However, to say we know in the objective sense and that this confers upon us a moral right to inflict the product of this knowledge on others is wrong and leads to unpleasant consequences. That is my position.

On the other matter, I am not sure how progressive the Baha'i are. I know they are getting there and they have added in women's rights. When I was in Haifa, they did not seem to be fully sound on the gay issue but perhaps we can get an update on that. One always hopes for progress, including with the Iranians. I was able to point out on that issue that I had the previous night speed-read my way through the Gideon Koran, which was beside the Bible, and I located the various stories where there was mention of this issue. I said the Holy Prophet, Mohammed, blessed be His name — for I was very polite — had only expressed surprise, for example, at the biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah and did not appoint any specific punishment. I asked whether they considered they were greater spiritual authorities than the Holy and Blessed Prophet, so I was trying to get them involved in their own little bit of blasphemy.

They regularly produce, and certainly produced for us, members of the Jewish community. Can Deputy Higgins remember if they had a Jewish member of parliament?

Then, they bring one to Isfahan to demonstrate the Christian community. I asked whether they had to wear this garb and they replied that they are very tolerant and let them wear their own clothes in their own homes, as long as nobody sees them. They actually seemed to think that this was tolerance. There is a long way to bring these people and one does not start at the top.

I shiver when I see the point about government memorandums discussing the Baha'i question because it raises the spectre of the Jewish question and the solution that was found for it by that nasty Mr. Hitler and his colleagues. I am aware, and was aware in the past, of Jewish people being arrested and accused of spying when they plainly were not — they were elderly and members of a rural community. I protested vigorously against this. It seems the same thing has been happening with regard to the Baha'i community. They produce this stuff about apostasy, which they can justify according to their own warped logic, but they then add to it the political charge of spying for Israel, which is extremely dangerous because it could lead to the death penalty. This is where we must look.

I am glad the witnesses included some details about the arrests in 2008. They give the number and the prison but they do not give the names, occupations or addresses, which would be helpful. The bullet points provided could apply to any country. I am interested in the question of Tibet. I could take these bullet points, recite the whole lot and substitute the word "Baha'i" with "Tibetan Buddhists" and it would be the same. It is a template for these kinds of tyrannical regimes. For each one of those, the witnesses should supply an example, if that is possible, which it may not be in all cases. It may sometimes be dangerous to give names although it would not be dangerous for those who are already under possible death sentence. That would be immensely helpful.

I found, particularly when working in conjunction with Amnesty, that even when I go to countries with whose regimes I am sympathetic, such as Cuba and so on, I ask in every country for a list of the names, detention places and so forth, and what has happened to the various people. I find that helps. If they know that one is aware of specific people, it tends to act as a little protection for them. I would ask that they might do that. I would suggest that the sub-committee might today, with the assistance of our friends, consider writing to the Iranian ambassador and asking him to transmit back to Tehran our concern. In particular, we should list the violations of international legal procedure, for example, the interference with legal representatives on their behalf, preventing the lawyers speaking to these people, preventing the proper collection of evidence, and any vitiations of trial procedure with which they can provide us. We start at that level, but the names, the details, the places and the times are crucially important in my opinion. I do not imagine that we can create very much of a haven for the Baha'i people in Iran but we may be in a position to protect some of the people who are most under threat.

We should request details of the charges against the named persons. We should ask when proceedings will be held and we should ask for clearance for representation——

That would be in the letter.

——-of independent human rights organisations at any such trial. That would be helpful.

These would be questions to the Iranians.

To the Iranian ambassador.

Yes. We should ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs to issue such a request.

Mr. McNamara might wish to comment on that suggestion because he might have more knowledge. We can proceed along the lines suggested by Deputy Higgins and Senator Norris. There are many opportunities for us. On reading the documentation and following the presentation by Mr. McNamara, Ms Worthley and Mr. Dawson, I suppose I would say that just because it always was does not mean it always will be, but maybe that is the way some of the Iranian authorities think.

We look at the documentation before us today and we see people who were executed in 1980. Thirty years down the road is 30 years too long. It is 30 years of failure, 30 years of democratic governments around the world, and other organisations such as the UN and EU, lodging objections, and 30 years of calls falling on deaf years. That is why I say, just because it always was does not mean it always will be.

We must start thinking outside the box. With respect, I am not too sure of the value of letters to the Iranian ambassador, or letters from our Minister for Foreign Affairs. I presume such actions might have already have been taken in the past 30 years. I accept there is other information and other suggestions here, that would be worthy of exploration.

The fact they are being watched is an inhibiting factor on bad behaviour. It is not perfect but I would recommend that the sub-committee send that letter.

I am open to doing so. I will pass over to Mr. McNamara for comment. I am merely making the point that 30 years have passed and I am sure there are 30 years of letters as well.

They have altered their practice with regard to gay people to a certain extent. It is by no means satisfactory, but they are not hanging them in public from the back of a lorry on a crane anymore because there was such a storm about it. That is the force of public opinion. They will still behave badly but may not do so in quite such a spectacular fashion.

Baha'i leaders went missing in 1980 and 1981, and in 2008 they go missing again. We now know where they are, if one wants to call that progress.

They do not appear to have been killed yet. There is an obligation. To paraphrase Beckett, we can't go on, we must go on.

In fairness, the most distinguished person from Iran was the one who had been elected Prime Minister, Dr. Mossadegh, and he spent his life in prison, if you like, under United States influence.

That was because of oil, not because he was a Baha'i.

Before I call Mr. McNamara, I would just make that point. I would be interested in his suggestions on how we could think outside the box and do things differently. He might comment on the following. I understand that on Thursday, 26 March, in Geneva, the United Nations forum passed a resolution condemning defamation of religion as a human rights violation. That was despite wide concerns that it could be used to justify curbs on free speech in Muslim countries. Will Mr. McNamara respond to this and the comments of my colleagues?

Mr. Brendan McNamara

I thank Deputy Higgins and Senator Norris for their tremendously helpful suggestions and we can provide that level of detail for them. The history of the Baha'i faith in Iran, where it emerged in the 1850s, is one of waves of persecution and periods of seeming calm but the faith has never been recognised, nor has it enjoyed the total freedom one would expect in a country of Iran's standing and cultural history. When the revolution sponsored by a particular expression of fundamentalist Islam took place, it bode ill for the Baha'i community and the pressure began to build immediately once more. There had been a period of relative quiet prior to it. For example, in the 1950s there was another outbreak of persecution. It seemed to be that when a scapegoat was required, the Baha'i community could readily fill that position and it became much worse.

I thank committee members, all other Oireachtas Members, human rights activists and Mr. Talbot from the Department of Foreign Affairs human rights desk who is present for their unstinting interest and support. They have been tremendously helpful and supportive of the Baha'i community in Iran since the early 1980s. The UN General Assembly and the old commission for human rights passed resolution after resolution. Nowadays if there are no resolutions, there is at least a mention of the position of Baha'is in Iran at the new council for human rights. That has been a steady focus of attention throughout the years. However, in recent years, the authorities began to systematically approach their task. It was no longer sporadic or involved large efforts such as banning Baha'i students from university. It became more sinister and systematic in that lists were compiled of names and addresses, indicating where people worked, who their bosses were and so on. As Senator Norris said, fears arose about what had happened in other countries where something similar was done systematically. The special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief brought this to the attention of the international community and it became an issue at the United Nations. That has been done and it has not led to the catastrophe it could have.

The effect of 30 years of resolutions and bringing the issue to public attention has served to protect the Baha'i community in Iran. The community is a good example of how international and national instruments work. That might seem to be a contradiction in the context of how Baha'is are being persecuted but it could be much worse. Our fear in the last while is the Iranian authorities seem to be more intent and more fundamentalist groups are emerging in Iran which want to push forward their agendas to extricate the Baha'i community from the land of its birth. The focus of international and national attention, through committees such as this, stays the hand of the Iranian authorities. For example, at the UN General Assembly in December, when a resolution was mooted about the overall position on human rights in Iran, including the Baha'i community, the Iranian authorities made every effort they could to stop the resolution going through. It makes a difference to them. While we may not think it is effective, it does stay their hand.

It is difficult for Baha'is to be critical of Iran because of our connection with that country. As I mentioned, the Baha'i faith grew up in Iran. The Iranian Baha'is love their country and want nothing but to see it progress and develop. They have been involved since the beginning of the Baha'i faith in some of the most progressive developments with respect to education and women's rights. It is not easy for us to be critical of the country. We believe that Iran is part of the international community and is signatory to its instruments. They are the only defence available to the Baha'i community. It is a signatory to the Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and we must call it to account in that respect. Perhaps Mr. Dawson would like to comment further on the matter.

Mr. Patrick Dawson

I thank Senator Norris and Deputy Higgins for the breadth and depth of their comments and their knowledge of this situation and the circumstances surrounding it. Given that among other things they are educationalists and academics the proposal to ban every Baha'i child from third level education of any description will be of particular interest to them. One of the principles of the Baha'i faith is the right of every individual to search independently for the truth in a religious, academic or career sense. To squash these young people, to permit them to go through great difficulties during their primary and secondary education by way of harassment and humiliation in terms of their faith, to have them sit the school leaving certificate examination and attain good results and to then refuse them entry to third level education on the basis that they will not sign up to a recognised religion is wrong. People may well say one should be pragmatic and register oneself as a Muslim, receive the education and later state one is a Baha'i. However, to do so makes one an apostate. As I understand, if one is an apostate the penalty can be death. It is not right to suggest telling a white lie is all right in the circumstances. Lying is not acceptable within the Baha'i morality.

Generation after generation of these young people are forced to find other ways to express their intelligence, including working in the arts and other fields. In every step they take in any field measures are being taken to hold them back. Many academics throughout the world, including a list of high level academic people in the UK and United States have signed letters of protest against this practice. These are people who are not members of the Baha'i faith but who appreciate the right of each individual to progress as far as he or she can within their own capacities in the academic field. This is an area of particular concern as is the arrest of what is termed the interim leadership.

The original leadership of the Baha'i faith, which as mentioned is democratic and does not have a clergy or hierarchy of any description, has been banned. An informal arrangement was made with the knowledge of Government that in every town a group would represent the Baha'i faith and in that regard would be permitted, within limited circumstances, to arrange funerals, marriages and so on. Often the authorities would contact the groups to find out what meetings were being held. The groups are required to report any gathering of a particular number of people in a home. They are now being accused of having run some type of illegal organisation and are under threat of death, leaving the community without an administrative structure of any description. Even so, the Baha'is will accept the rule of law in that country and will not object or demonstrate against it. They will have no opportunity by way of media or other organ to rebut many of the appalling untruths being told about their community by, one might say, a form of black propaganda. This community and their little children through the generations have to withstand this and while one might see them in one sense as victims, in another sense they have a tremendous spiritual strength which for generation after generation has seen these people retain their faith. They have nothing but goodwill towards the people of Iran and many of the people of Iran are much more friendly to them than they are allowed to admit. These are just two elements of an overall situation. I wish to express my gratitude to the Deputies and Senator and to the other members of the committee.

Ms Alison Worthley

I refer to the situation of the seven people arrested last May and the recent announcement of their trial. I am sure the sub-committee is aware that the Iranian Government made that body illegal and this is another threat against them and makes their situation even more perilous. This is another example of how the situation is being made systematically worse.

On the question of why the Baha'is are being persecuted, it is a case of asking what it is that Iran is afraid of. One of the laws of the Baha'i faith is that we must obey our government and this also pertains in Iran. What is Iran afraid the Baha'is will do?

It is like the people in China, the Falun Gong, peace, tolerance, whatever it is. This is very threatening to tyrannical regimes.

We have had a very good discussion with good interaction. A recommendation has been made. I wish to explain to the delegation that other meetings are taking place today and this explains the small attendance of members. However, the presentation is in the Official Report of the House and it is also being broadcast to the offices of members.

With regard to the worthy recommendation made by my colleagues, with the agreement of the sub-committee——

I propose that Senator Norris seconds the proposal.

I propose we send a letter to the Iranian ambassador and Deputy Higgins suggested we send a letter to the Iranian foreign affairs ministry in order to make an inquiry into the Iranian——

I suggest we write to the ambassador and to the Minister, that is, two letters.

I think a note has been made of what Deputy Higgins said.

The clerk to the committee will work out the detail.

Perhaps they could be pooled and an identical letter sent to both.

It could be sent to the new head of the international commission of jurists and to Mary Robinson.

Could the ambassador be requested to transmit it to Tehran?

I thank members of the delegation for their most informative presentation and for the interaction in the question and answer session. It is clear that the 350,000 Baha'is living in Iran continue to need the vocal support of their friends worldwide. It was interesting to hear Mr. McNamara say that this support and the letters mean a lot to them and hopefully they will continue to do so. I wish to assure the delegation that they have our support and we look forward to continuing to work together to secure the human rights and freedoms for the Baha'i people wherever they reside.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

I thank the Chairman most sincerely. I know he had a little incident with the car and I hope he is OK.

The news seems to have spread.

Mr. Brendan McNamara

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. It means a lot to us to be able to make this presentation. I can assure members of the committee that the actions they have decided to take mean much to the Baha'is on the ground in Iran.

The sub-committee went into private session at 4.05 p.m. and adjourned at 4.25 p.m. sine die.
Barr
Roinn