Posted by Asghar Abdi on September 09, 1999 at 16:05:53:
The following is a literal translation of an article published in the Persian
daily Nesaht in Tehran on Tuesday 24h August 1999. The article led to a huge
outcry by certain politico-religious groups in Iran, culmination in a statement
by the Supreme Leader on Wednesday 1st September 1999, denouncing those 'who
oppose the religious law of vengeance' and declaring them being liable to death
sentence. Following this declaration, the paper was closed on Saturday 4th
September 1999.
-------------------------------------------------
Is Governmental Violence Acceptable?*
Hossein Bagher Zadeh
The reference to relativity of violence in this week's Friday prayer by
Ayat-o-llah Mesbah Yazdi has once more turned this most pivotal social question
into a topical issue. Understandably, supporters of violence and totalitarian
groups are in need of such justifications, and hence Mr. Yazdi's remarks are
not unexpected. But what is surprising is the fact that those calling for a
civil and open society are not persistent in the indiscriminate negation of
violence.
The political and cultural developments of Iran and institutionalisation of a
civil society are dependent on the complete negation of violence. Any partial
and relative negation of violence puts the callers of a civil and open society
on par with supporters of violence and theoreticians of the totalitarian
groups. We can not say, for instance, that violence on cultural grounds or by
the government is permissible, but not by those acting on their own or in small
groups. Totalitarians too allow violence in certain cases or by certain groups
or institutions. Justifying violence, under any pretext, is against the modern
human values and endangers the health of the human society.
The human society in the modern world, and especially since after WWII, has
negated all forms of violence, and regards it as an anathema to human values.
The crimes and tragedies of WWII which included organised violence in the form
of holocausts, vividly demonstrated the beastly nature of violence and its
devastating effects. The people world over saw that violence de-humanises not
only the victim but also its perpetrators, and devastates human society's
achievements. Moreover, when violence is legitimised, it can easily cross the
pre-built borders and turn its former perpetrators into its next victims.
This put the question of setting up a new institution for a world free of
violence and injustice on the agenda of the human society. One outcome was the
composition and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948
(in which Iran was a participant). Article 5 of the Declaration says that
nobody should be subjected to torture or degrading, cruel or inhuman
treatment. It makes no exception, but bans violence as a punishment too. The
inclusion of the complete and unexceptional negation of violence in one of the
first articles of the Declaration is a telltale of the big lesson the human
society had learned from the tragedy of WWII.
In the today's Iran too, only with the complete and unexceptional negation of
violence (and adoption of all articles of the UDHR) can we pin our hopes for
the development of the culture of a civil society. It is noteworthy to mention
that, legally speaking, Iran is committed by its signature under the UDHR and
should cease all violent actions (lawful or unlawful). But more important than
that is a waking call to forces supporting a civil society that only with a
persistent and uncompromising campaign against the culture of violence, in all
its forms, contents, from any direction and under any pretext, can we hope for
uprooting this devastating tool of suppression, and turn the dream of the civil
society into a reality.
It was said [above] that UDHR has negated violence some 52 [51] years ago.
>From almost the same time, a world campaign started for the elimination of one
of the most notorious forms of lawful violence, the death penalty. Now, and in
the threshold of the new millennium, this campaign has been intensified. So
far, a clear majority of the United Nations member countries have practically
stopped the use of this form of punishment. They have accepted that the death
penalty is cruel, inhuman and degrading. Moreover, many empirical and
sociological studies have shown that, contrary to the popular beliefs, the
death penalty not only has no effect on reducing crimes, but itself is a tool
of spreading injustice and crimes. Today, not only the human rights
organisations are calling for immediate abolishment of the death penalty, but
the UN too has put this recommendation on its agenda. The most notable
international political and religious personalities, from Nelson Mandela to the
Pope and Secretary General of UNESCO, too have joined the campaign for a world
free of execution. It is incumbent on the callers for a free and civil society
in Iran to join this world campaign, and to respond to this international
humanist call so that Iran can be led to a humane society and free of violence.
Violence, in all its forms, should be eliminated. Execution is the most
notable form of (lawful) violence. Campaigning against "cell violence" without
a campaign against its cultural roots is fruitless. The belief in killing
(lawful or unlawful) as a solution to social problems, lies at the heart of
this culture. Th Iranian society should accept that killing is a solution to
nothing. Similarly, neither ideology nor power (State) can justify violence.
Official violence (including execution) has a direct and undeniable effect on
the regeneration of the culture of violence. In order to combat violence, one
has to campaign against its totality and against all its forms and samples on
every level and at every stage. Half-hearted opposition to violence and
explicit or implicit sanctioning of it on special grounds or by certain
institutions, is the characteristic of the forces of totalitarianism and
oppression. Those who are calling for a civil and open society should refrain
from this partialism.
----------------------------------------------------------
* "A [pre] condition for a stable and resilient (and civil) society is that
State is 'the only legitimate institution for exercising violence'" -
Hamid-Reza Jalaayy-pour, Neshat, 7 August 1999. [Jalaayy-pour is the Managing
Editor of Neshat.]
["Cell violence" is a reference to a spate of political killings late last year
which has been blamed on "rogue" elements within the Information Ministry.]
Neshat: We Did Not Know Author of Anti-Islamic Article
TEHRAN TIMES CITY DESK
TEHRAN -- We really did not have any knowledge of the identity of the
author of anti-Islamic article which appeared in the daily, a member of the
editorial board of the Persian daily Neshat told the TEHRAN TIMES.
We will definitely beg the nation's apology for the error, he said. In
article
written by Hossein Baqerzadeh which appeared on page 2 of Neshat, the
author questioned the validity of death sentence in Islam and its congruity
with the human rights.
Hossein Baqerzadeh is an ex-Marxist and a member of the Mojahedeen
Khalq Organization (MKO), but sincerely we did not know the author of the
said article is the same Baqerzadeh, he said. The article caused uproar in
various circles, including religious seminaries.
The Leader of Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Khamenei said yesterday,
"Denial of Islamic rules in another category which is responsible for
instigation of social insecurity.... Anyone, denying religion, including its
penal
codes, is apostate and the sentence against an apostate in Islam is clear,
IRNA reported yesterday.
The MKO was set up in early 1960s as a Muslim organization with Marxist
orientation, but in mid-1970s there was an internal coup in the
organization.
Some of the members of the central council of MKO had turned Marxist and
tried to purge the Muslim members.
They brutally killed a number of members including two committed Muslim
members, Majid Sharif Vaqefi and Morteza Labafinejad, who resisted the
ideological change in the organization. The split led to the formation of a
Marxist group.
Baqerzadeh joined the Marxist group. He fled to London and headed the
MKO branch there.
-------- Original Message -------- The Editor, Dear Sir, You quote (Thursday 2nd September 1999) an unidentified member of the You then go on to refer to some of my political activities in the Referring to the "internal coup in the [MKO] organization" when "some of In order to fill in some of the gaps in the sequence of events reported My stay in Tehran lasted for nearly three months. I lived in extreme Soon afterwards, the Mojahed Newsletter (khabar-nameh-e mojahed) talked I have provided the above information in order to correct some Yours sincerely, Hossein Bagher Zadeh -------- Original Message -------- The Editor, Dear Sir, You quote (Thursday 2nd September 1999) an unidentified member of the You then go on to refer to some of my political activities in the seventies, Referring to the "internal coup in the [MKO] organization" when "some In order to fill in some of the gaps in the sequence of events reported My stay in Tehran lasted for nearly three months. I lived in extreme Soon afterwards, the Mojahed Newsletter (khabar-nameh-e mojahed) talked I have provided the above information in order to correct some historical Yours sincerely, Hossein Bagher Zadeh Hossein Bagher Zadeh certainly was a SCIer. He had posted a lot of articles about Human Rights http://www.ihrwg.org/hr_articles_fr.html Hossein is the Chair of IHRWG, which is an http://www.ihrwg.org IHRWG has had a campaign for abolition of death http://www.ihrwg.org/cp/ Hossein Bagher Zadeh has a PhD in Computer Science All these notes that I wrote are from my memory. Take Care,
Subject: Re: Neshat: We Did Not Know Author of Anti-Islamic Article
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 00:09:52 +0100
From: "Hossein B. Zadeh"
To: salimi@tehrantimes.com
References: <199909041015.DAA10185@Tehran.Stanford.EDU>
Tehran Times,
Tehran, iran.
editorial board of the Persian daily Neshat as saying that they did not
have "any knowledge of the identity of the author" of the article under
the title of "Is governmental violence permissible?" which was published
on August 24, 1999, in that paper. The said author was none other than
yours truly, and I had already sent Neshat a resume of the Iranian Human
Righst Working Group (www.ihrwg.org) of which I am a founding member and
its chair since its inception in May 1994.
seventies, but make some factual errors. I would be grateful if you
wold allow me to put the record straight for your readers.
the members of the central council of MKO had turned Marxist", you
report that "Baqerzadeh joined the Marxist group". The fact is that I
joined MKO in the Summer of 1973, at least a year before the coup. You
then add that "he fled to London and headed the MKO branch there". That
I fled to London in December 1975 is correct, but it was also in part to
escape from a death threat by the new leadership. This obviously rules
me out of any association with the then MKO organization and, a priori,
heading any of its branches. I lived in London and head MKO's office
there before the coup, and not after that.
above, let me expand on my presence in Iran in 1975 and the subsequent
escape. When early in 1975 the news of the coup reached the MKO's
external section in London and Baghdad, I was one of the few members who
stood against this development on both ideological and democratic
grounds. I argued forcefully against both the theoretical tenets of the
new leadership and the way they had tried to impose their views on the
whole organisation. Ashtiany, the emmisary of the new leadership to
Baghdad who managed to 'convert' other 'stalwarts' such as Hossein
Rouhani, proposed that I should put my thoughts in writing and send them
to the leadersip inside. I did so. After a few weeks I received an
'invitation' to go to Tehran and put my points directly to the
leadership 'if I am true to my revolutionary claims'. This was after
the murder of Sharif Vaqefi and attempted murder of Morteza
Labafinejad. It was clear that the invitation may be no more than a
trap, and I was warned by a number of friends to see it that way.
However, I decided to accept this invitation. In late September 1975 I
arrived in Tehran on a forged passport and immediately went into
hiding. (My name had already appeared in an anti-MKO news item in
Ettela'aat newspaper as 'their man in London'.)
danger with no security cover provided by the group (and with no
knowledge of my family and friends in Iran). It soon became clear that
the leadership had lured me inside to tame me. It did not work. I
decided to leave and told them of my plan. They opposed it and tried to
block my way (they had confiscated the forged passport and would not
retun it). I insisted. They threatened me. I cut all connections and
went into hiding from both the police and MKO. Then, and while being
under the death threat from two sides, I had to risk my life to flee
Iran illegally.
of a "third traitor" who had escaped from the the "revolutionary
justice" and that "no matter where he is, he will be punished". A few
months afterwards, they accused Mohammad Yaghini, a close friend of mine
in the organization, of assisting me in my escape. About two years
later, when Yaghini was about to leave Iran, they murdered him.
historical errors in your report. However, these events which took
place nearly a quarter century ago can say little about my 'identity'
now as referred to in your report. It would have been more appropriate
to look at what I have been doing more recently. Or else, if you are
interested in historical facts, perhaps you could refer to an episode in
my life with some relevance to your own profession: that I founded,
published and edited the weekly Iranshahr in London in 1978-79. The
paper (edited by Ahmad Shamlou for a while) was the sole voice of the
revolution when a general strike had closed all the press in Iran.
--------------267671D17C6825124E35BC78
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Neshat: We Did Not Know Author of Anti-Islamic Article Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 00:09:52 +0100 From: "Hossein B. Zadeh" To: salimi@tehrantimes.com References: <199909041015.DAA10185@Tehran.Stanford.EDU>
Tehran Times,
Tehran, iran.
editorial board of the Persian daily Neshat as saying that they did not
have "any knowledge of the identity of the author" of the article under
the title of "Is governmental violence permissible?" which was published
on August 24, 1999, in that paper. The said author was none other than
yours truly, and I had already sent Neshat a resume of the Iranian Human
Righst Working Group (www.ihrwg.org) of which I am a founding member and
its chair since its inception in May 1994.
but make some factual errors. I would be grateful if you wold allow
me to put the record straight for your readers.
of the members of the central council of MKO had turned Marxist", you report
that "Baqerzadeh joined the Marxist group". The fact is that I joined
MKO in the Summer of 1973, at least a year before the coup. You then
add that "he fled to London and headed the MKO branch there". That
I fled to London in December 1975 is correct, but it was also in part to
escape from a death threat by the new leadership. This obviously
rules me out of any association with the then MKO organization and, a priori,
heading any of its branches. I lived in London and head MKO's office
there
before the coup, and not after that.
above, let me expand on my presence in Iran in 1975 and the subsequent
escape. When early in 1975 the news of the coup reached the MKO's
external section in London and Baghdad, I was one of the few members who
stood against this development on both ideological and democratic grounds.
I argued forcefully against both the theoretical tenets of the new leadership
and the way they had tried to impose their views on the whole
organisation.
Ashtiany, the emmisary of the new leadership to Baghdad who managed to
'convert' other 'stalwarts' such as Hossein Rouhani, proposed that I should
put my thoughts in writing and send them to the leadersip inside.
I did so. After a few weeks I received an 'invitation' to go to Tehran
and put my points directly to the leadership 'if I am true to my revolutionary
claims'. This was after the murder of Sharif Vaqefi and attempted
murder of Morteza Labafinejad. It was clear that the invitation may
be no more than a trap, and I was warned by a number of friends to see
it that way. However, I decided to accept this invitation.
In late September 1975 I arrived in Tehran on a forged passport and immediately
went into hiding. (My name had already appeared in an anti-MKO news
item in Ettela'aat newspaper as 'their man in London'.)
danger with no security cover provided by the group (and with no knowledge
of my family and friends in Iran). It soon became clear that the
leadership had lured me inside to tame me. It did not work.
I decided to leave and told them of my plan. They opposed it and
tried to block my way (they had confiscated the forged passport and would
not retun it). I insisted. They threatened me. I cut
all connections and went into hiding from both the police and MKO.
Then, and while being under the death threat from two sides, I had to risk
my life to flee Iran illegally.
of a "third traitor" who had escaped from the the "revolutionary justice"
and that "no matter where he is, he will be punished". A few months
afterwards, they accused Mohammad Yaghini, a close friend of mine in the
organization, of assisting me in my escape. About two years later,
when Yaghini was about to leave Iran, they murdered him.
errors in your report. However, these events which took place nearly
a quarter century ago can say little about my 'identity' now as referred
to in your report. It would have been more appropriate to look
at what I have been doing more recently. Or else, if you are interested
in historical facts, perhaps you could refer to an episode in my life with
some relevance to your own profession: that I founded, published and edited
the weekly Iranshahr in London in 1978-79. The paper (edited by Ahmad
Shamlou for a while) was the sole voice of the revolution when a general
strike had closed all the press in Iran.
Dear One,
He was one of the founders of
SCI (http://www.sciran.net/histghan.htm).
on SCI, when he contributed to SCI. Unfortunately there
are no archives of that period of SCI. To read
some of Hossein's articles about human rights and abolition
of Death Penalty, I have found the following articles
on the net:
http://www.iranian.com/BTW/June97/Rights/index.shtml
http://www.iranian.com/BTW/Sept97/Hang/index.html
http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/April98/Reconcile/index.html
http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/March99/HR/index.html
independent human rights group that has no
relation to any political group:
penalty and you can see the signatories list
at the following URL. All the ones who have
signed challenge the death penalty. Dariush Foruhar
was one of the people who signed IHRWG's call:
and has a university degree in Theology from Tehran
University. He is an independent human rights
activist.
- Sam