Source: https://freedomhouse.org/article/iran-release-detainees-uphold-citizens-fundamental-freedoms
Washington
January 9, 2018
In response to Iranian authorities’
detention of more than 2,000 demonstrators in the protests that began December
28 against government corruption and other economic and political issues,
Freedom House issued the following statement:
“Iranian authorities should release
the detainees, who were exercising their rights to freely assemble and express
themselves,” said Dokhi Fassihian, senior program manager for Middle East and
North Africa programs at Freedom House. “The deaths of at least three
protestors while in custody raise urgent concerns about the treatment of
detainees at the hands of security forces. Denying the Iranian people their
fundamental freedoms and political rights is what started this crisis.
Repression will not solve it.”
Iran is rated
Not Free in Freedom in the World 2017,
Not Free in Freedom of the Press 2017,
and Not Free in Freedom on the Net 2017.
Freedom
House is an independent watchdog organization that supports democratic change,
monitors the status of freedom around the world, and advocates for democracy
and human rights.
Six days of protests in cities across
Iran have left dozens dead and hundreds arrested in what amounts to the most
significant eruption of antigovernment sentiment since 2009. The demonstrations
were initially focused on rising food prices, but they have quickly morphed
into calls for the removal of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and an end
to the Islamic Republic.
Despite tired claims by Khamenei that
the unrest is being orchestrated by the country’s “foreign enemies,” the
demonstrations are obviously organic, effectively leaderless, and spearheaded
by working-class Iranians living outside the capital. In fact, it is
increasingly clear that this uprising reflects a failure of governance. It is
the public’s frustrated response to a regime that has excluded its people from
civic and political life at home while keeping them isolated from the rest of
the world.
An ailing
economy despite the nuclear deal
Ordinary Iranians have not reaped the
economic benefits promised by the government after it signed the nuclear deal
with the international community in 2015. Nonnuclear U.S. restrictions are
still in place, Iran remains locked out of the international financial system,
and with the exception of a handful of companies like Total and Renault, most
large international firms are reluctant to invest in the country’s
unpredictable political and regulatory environment. While Iran’s economy has
shown strong growth according to some measures, youth unemployment has also
been on the rise, and soaring inflation is a serious concern.
It may be tempting to blame the
remaining U.S. sanctions for Iran’s economic woes, but it was Khamenei himself
who flatly rejected broader cooperation or normalization of ties with the
United States when the nuclear deal was signed. Khamenei’s enduring hostility
toward greater social and economic integration with the outside world is shared
by his hard-line allies in the religious establishment and the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), both of which have amassed enormous wealth in
Iran’s opaque, sanctions-era economy. Their stance contradicts the will of the
electorate, which endorsed a second term for President Hassan Rouhani based on
his pledges to improve relations with the West.
A veneer
of democracy conceals an authoritarian core
The regime describes itself as a
“religious democracy.” In reality, the system’s electoral processes and
institutions are designed to obscure accountability for policy decisions made
by the supreme leader and unelected institutions under his control. These
include his administrative offices, the Guardian Council, the judiciary, and
security services like the IRGC. Candidates for public office and all
legislation, including the national budget, must be approved by the Guardian
Council, and most reform-oriented candidates and initiatives are rejected.
Rouhani’s most recent austerity budget, which increased spending for the IRGC
and religious foundations, contributed to the public outcry.
In addition to
a monopoly on political and military power, the supreme leader has at his disposal an estimated
95 billion dollars in unlawful property seizures from ordinary Iranians.
These resources, managed by the Setad Organization, allow Khamenei to operate
outside Iran’s elected political system, with no transparency or oversight even
by the parliament.
Elected institutions do not have real
legislative or law enforcement authority. Even elected municipal bodies, which
have traditionally been outside the supervision of the Guardian Council, have
come under arbitrary directives issued by the council. In recent years, the
Guardian Council has unlawfully removed women and minorities from municipal
councils despite vehement objections from the parliament.
This duality at
the heart of Iran’s power structure provides a breeding ground for unchecked
corruption. As one protester told a reporter: “We
are here to tell someone, anyone, Mr. Government, whoever is responsible, the
economic situation is bad!” And that’s precisely the problem: No one knows who
is fundamentally responsible, who to talk to, and how to attain redress for the
injustices and problems they face in their daily lives. Citizens and civil
society face formidable obstacles in seeking accountability. Independent
nongovernmental organizations and media are severely restricted. Aside from
their participation in tightly controlled elections, which rarely translates
into the desired policy outcomes, citizens have few avenues for input into
politics and governance.
When
protests become the only option
Iranian citizens are not able to
effectively organize or take part in the political affairs of their country.
They are denied the fundamental right to associate, the right to support
candidates of their choice, and the right to a free and fair electoral process.
Few citizens attempt to engage with policymakers in formal settings for fear of
retaliation. Public officials provide little opportunity for consultation or
communication with their constituents. As one activist told Freedom House,
“such engagement is limited … and subject to strife between hard-liners and
reformists within most ministries.”
The only stakeholders invited by
lawmakers to offer input on policies are either religiously affiliated or have
some sort of connection to the government. They are not bona-fide civil society
organizations that represent the wide spectrum of constituencies in Iran.
Activists and experts who do try to engage authorities through advocacy risk
encounters with a deeply entrenched security state that has not hesitated to
brutally stifle dissent. The penal code provides the government with sweeping
authority to punish citizens for criticizing government officials or publishing
news it deems “false.”
This
helps explain why desperate citizens are now resorting to mass protest. They
will not be easily swayed by familiar proclamations that the sources of their
pain are in Saudi Arabia, the United States, or the United Kingdom. The supreme
leader has a choice to make. Either he can order another vicious crackdown on
the Iranian people, which could result in untold casualties and human rights
violations, or he can finally respect the public’s demands for more political
participation and peaceful democratic reform.
No comments:
Post a Comment