Iran Tribunal delivered its interim judgement: Islamic Republic of Iran committed crimes against humanity!!

Share/Save/Bookmark

Iran Tribunal delivered its interim judgement: Islamic Republic of Iran committed crimes against humanity!!
by Iqbal Latif
01-Nov-2012
 

After a harrowing three-day hearing at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the Iran Tribunal delivered its interim judgement on October 27th. According to the tribunal, which has no legal standing, the Islamic Republic of Iran committed crimes against humanity and gross violations of human rights against its citizens during “the bloody decade” of 1980s.

Democratic Islamic Republic is a biggest lie; Democracy is intrinsically not Islamic or Christian; Democracy is democracy! Dignity of man ''I have rights as a man - when you take my rights away you take my humanity away!!'' Dissent and freedom of expression are source of democracy, a nation that denies both denies democracy. Iran can be rightly termed as the cradle of civilization and of being a "Lawgiver"; it has a rich tradition of culture and diversity of thinking.

No prophet can claim the institution of dignity emanating from the source of his scriptures! Hence no Republic founded on 'any of the holy scriptures' can claim warrants to enforce human dignity ala Islam or Christianity. Human dignity is free of holy scriptures it is within us. When free expression is denied humanity is denied. Human dignity is not a 'God bestowed right' it is an innate right to respect and receive ethical treatment. It is an offshoot of Enlightenment-era concepts of inherent, inalienable rights.

The first 'Iranian rulers' were lawgivers and now contrast it to today and one see the 21st century Iran under clergy as the biggest violator of human rights. Cyrus the Great granted that right, and literally figures like Rumi and Saadi have structured within the Iranian genre by saying: "The sons of Adam are limbs of one another Having been created of one essence." "When the calamity of time afflicts one limb, The other limbs cannot remain at rest."A great commanding and authoritative speech by a global champion of Human Right causes. It is perhaps the tragedy that "deranged ideologically motivated" leadership has wasted the histological traditions of Iran in less than three decades, the richness of thousands of years trampled in few years.

Look at this damning indictment of Khomienism:Islamic Republic of Iran has committed crimes against humanity and gross violations of human rights against its citizens during “the bloody decade” of 1980s. Its post-revolution decline from bastion and cradle of civilization to the lowest rung of civilized nation's ladder is scandalous and disgusting. To live in peace without coercion is an indispensable human right; terror campaigns violate the sacred trust of "live and let others live" that has been evolved over millenniums.

Law started in Iran in the beginnings of human history, however, this rich inheritance has been wretchedly shattered by the in-attendance clerical tyranny in Tehran. Although it is generally considered that the most ancient code of laws is understood by Western scholars to be the code of Hammurabi, an ancient king of Babylonia, who ruled about 2100 B.C. Babylonia, the first dignitaries to have rendered extraordinary service in framing and codifying laws was Prince Uruvakhshaya, the brother of the eternal idol Krsaspa (Garshasp) and the son of King Thrita, the vicar of medicine. They were the direct ancestry of Yima, the dazzling antediluvian monarch. This unquestionably demonstrates insistence of early Iranian rulers to codify law and provide justice to their subjects.

The other code known to civilisation popularly is the "Justinian code" Roman law that was promulgated by Justinian, the contemporary of Khosrow, the Great of Persia who was more popularly known as Anoshervan. The influences of Anoshervan on edicts of Justinian code are extraordinarily evident. Iran is far too sophisticated for that. But to see the violations in terms of human rights abuses originating from this great country is heartbreaking; particularly, a nation ingrained with the utterances of Cyrus the Great, who 2500 years ago said, "he would not reign over the people if they did not wish it" and declared that he would not force any person to change his religion or faith.

Rediscovery of "political Islam" in Shiite and Sunni worlds has led to the redefinition of our human social contract evolved over thousands of years through a process of survival of the best idea. The legacy of thousands of years' human richness has been sacrificed on the altar of holy interpretations of how we should administer our life; unfortunately these interpretations are led by the likes of Khomeini. Ideologically provoked "terrorism" has plunged a dagger into the heart of our social contract, that of basic respect of human life. It provides, through its ill-founded medieval judgement and jurisprudence, the "right to kill innocent" without hearing.

With new ideological jurisprudence in practice, we are living in a two-tiered world of justice, one where justice demands evidence before someone is convicted, the other, where convictions are handed by 21st century's new inquisitors, those who are quick to dispense justice and are able to craft and interpret the worst of atrocities in the name of "moral equivalence and ideological justifications."

Share/Save/Bookmark

more from Iqbal Latif
 
Kaveh V

Crimes Against Humanity and more... indeed

by Kaveh V on

 

Establishing the precedent, Crimes Against Humanity, is a solid first step. Although, the tribunal chose to solely focus on the mass murders to reach this verdict, Islamic crimes against humanity are not limited to mass murders. Every forcible change accompanied by gross human rights violations, from "cultural revolution" to forced veiling of the women, falls within this category. The crimes against humanity, as defined by Rome statute of the ICC are very specific and include crimes other than mass murder.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity

The next step would be to review the conduct of the Islamic "Judiciary", their statements and verdicts, over the past 33 years and establish the intent to commit genocide. Ultimately, pave the way for the indictment of Islam, particularly, Shia-eh Islam institutions in Iran and all the associated organizations and individuals for these crimes.

 


Truthseeker9

Crimes against Humanity

by Truthseeker9 on

The UN must try Iran`s 1988 murderers

The mass murderers of 1988 now hold power in Tehran. The world must make them face justice

"The regime decided they should be eradicated so they would not trouble the postwar government, and Khomeini issued a secret fatwa authorising their execution.... It bears some comparison to the death marches of allied prisoners at the end of the second world war – the Japanese generals responsible were sentenced to death at the Tokyo trials. ... there is no statute of limitations on prosecuting crimes against humanity, and the mass murder of prisoners already serving sentences for political protests must count as one of the gravest of unpunished crimes. The fact that they were killed ostensibly because they did not believe in God – the God of the ayatollah's revolution – makes their slaughter a form of genocide: the destruction of a group because of its attitude to religion." 


Darius Kadivar

Brutal & Tyrannical Certainly But Crimes against Humanity ?

by Darius Kadivar on

First let me start by saying that I don't think anyone who has read my blogs and comments over the years can claim that I of all people endorse the Islamic Republic be it politically or ideologically ... My hatred for this regime and the mullahs running it is of no secret but I believe when it comes to our quest for universal justice we do need on the otherhand to look at things with a minimum of objectivity !

Secondly I would like to add that I am neither a Judge or lawyer to be able to speak with any authority on the legal validity or not of a given verdict ... but as a simple citizen I do have serious doubts as to the validity of the argument presented or the way it is presented based on an emotional outcry but less on a reasoned one.  My Point is essentially directed to the so called Iran Tribunal's verdict and not much to the author of this blog who also has valid arguments in his own right. So Please do correct me if I misunderstood you or read you wrong Iqbal jan or if my observation is merely echoing what you wrote here ...

Either way I think I am entitled to an opinion on such an important moral tightrope as anyone else, victim or not of the crimes mentioned because after all it Interpelates our final judgment and moral endorsement as "Citizens of the World" ... particularly if we are speaking about such serious allegations as "Crimes Against Humanity"

 

Spencer Tracy’s Verdict in a Scene from movie 'Judgment in Nuremburg' :

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3BwK51YFgQ

 

 

So please forgive me if I say that I can only speak for my Gut feelings as to this so called Iran Tribunal put together out of the blue by organizations which are far from transparent at first glance. At least I don't see what makes them any more anyless than another world juridication. Is it one which is internationally recognized ? If so by Whom ? Is it entirely impartial or politically motivated ? including by let's say Separatist groups ( Kurds, Azeris for instance ?) ... These are just questions not accusations on my behalf but I think we are all entitled to transparent answers particularly if it concerns such sensitive subjects.

 

For I'm sorry to say but Terms like "Genocide", and "ethnical purification" subscribe to very specific and precise definitions and I am not certain that this tribunal ( whose juridiction is hardly universally recognized) are truly being objective in their assessment.

 

There are many brutal regimes in the world and many have committed gruesome crimes that can be qualified as horrendous but they do not fall into the type of categorization known as "Crimes against Humanity" which was truly first considered after WW 2 at the Nuremberg Trials ...

I say this all the more comfortably that I support the indictment of the IRI's leadership as wished by Crown Prince Reza:

 

Reza Pahlavi Submits Demand for Ali Khamenei’s Indictment to UN Security Council 

 

But I am not certain that however commendable an effort and morally justified to wish the IRI leadership and system of government to be held accountable for many of their horrendous crimes ( to name a few the 1988 chain massacres but also prior to that the executions of many Officers and Ministers of the Shah's era as well as political assassination of opponents in exile ) that the term : "Crimes against Humanity" applies to the IRI ...

 

The IRI has committed crimes against it's own People and the Iranian Nation at large. THAT in itself is a given fact but to wish to stretch the moral tightrope out of proportion in order to magnify it's exact responsibilities merely because we have some political or ideological agenda or preference is very different from an unbiased quest for justice !

 

To date at least and regardless of the crimes committed by the IRI as well as the type of society and lifestyle which this Theocracy has imposed on Iranians for the past 3 decades which rightly allow us to draw parallels with let's say the Spanish Inquisition, I don't believe that the extent and the nature of the blood shed by the IRI is comparable to what Saddam did to the Kurds:

 

Justice4genocide: Kurds seek UK backing over Iraq 'genocide'

 

Or the Turks did to the Armenians :

 

HISTORY FORUM: Turkey and the Armenian Genocide - 'The Betrayed' (BBC Documentary)

 

From that point of view I would say quite clearly that the Regime of Bachar Al Assad or that of Gaddafi can be held accountable for Crimes against Humanity ... But can the IRI be held guilty by association to these rogue regimes ? Why Not but then you will have to include Syria's allies such as Russia, China, India, South Africa and their entire leadership too ... And that makes things far more complicated and confusing which would then have to obey to some inexistent jurisprudence ...

 

Take Russia of South Africa for instance ...

 

Both of the leaders of these two countries have been elected more or less democratically ... However alerted by serious concerns on the true nature of the Russian Democratic institutions and despite massive demonstrations in Russia No international juridiction has questioned the legitimacy of the presidential results in Russia. Same for South Africa ... should an international tribunal hold Putin accountable for Crimes against Humanity then the same should apply to all those who elected him into office ... since they too would be guilty by association.

 

For ultimately even if Iran's regime lends a helping hand to Assad ( As Russia and China and India all do ...) by insisting on no intervention or for sending military equipment one can at best hold them guilty by association because they like their allies Russia and China refuse to see an international intervention in Syria which has resulted to the daily massacre of thousands and thousands of civilians today ...

 

And that's where things become murkey ...

 

With this type of reasoning are we not contributing to what I have denounced the IRI for : A Banalization of History ? 

 

Banalization of history By DK


Iranian Diaspora Intelligentsia Unite Against Islamic Republic's Holocaust Revisionism By DK

 

 

HOLOCAUST A MYTH: Neo Nazi Socialite Michelle Renouf on Iranian SAHAR TV

 

IF Not then we should be careful with the words we use in depicting things particularly "Crimes Against Humanity" because ultimately WORDS MATTER !  


Justice Robert H. Jackson's Closing Argument at Nuremberg (July 26, 1946) :



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=No06Lwk_TAg


 

 

My Humble Opinion,

 

DK 

 

Related:

 

Indicting Ahmadinejad: Bad idea? by William Burke-White (cnn)  

 

William Burke-White is a professor of law and deputy dean at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. From 2009 to 201, he was on Secretary Hillary Clinton's Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State.

 


Iqbal Latif

Iran, 1988 Judgment time

by Iqbal Latif on

The Iran Tribunal is now calling for the Iranian regime and the Human Rights Council of the United Nations to investigate these crimes and bring the perpetrators to justice. That is unlikely to happen. But for the survivors and the bereaved, the tribunal is a victory in itself: it has allowed their voices to be officially recorded and heard in court for the first time in 25 years.

Bits of the proceedings were seen inside Iran, despite the government’s attempts to block foreign broadcasts.  “We have been inundated with calls from people in Iran saying they wanted to record the deaths of loved ones, which they had never told anyone about,” says Pardis Shafafi, a legal assistant with the tribunal.

“For the first time, people in Iran—especially the younger generations—are finding out what happened in the ‘80s and can see how the past still informs the present,” says Shokoufeh Sakhi, who testified at the hearing. She was arrested while still in secondary school, spent six years in prison where she was tortured and survived the 1988 massacre. She is now a PhD student in Canada.  “What happened in the '80s doesn’t belong to the people of the '80s. It laid down the foundations of where these young people were born: they were born in a climate of fear and oppression, and they are used to it and accept it, but the roots for the present situation have to be found in the massacres of the '80s." The judges are expected to deliver a full judgment in November.