Courage in the face of assassination

It is easy to admire great courage; it is far from easy to achieve. Perhaps that is one reason why, at the end of her address to Earth Dialogues in Brisbane, 1,500 people rose to their feet to applaud Iranian Dr Shirin Ebadi, lawyer, human rights activist and Nobel Peace Laureate, who is recognised widely as a courageous person who has never heeded threats to her own safety. That and because, having survived so much discrimination, including time in jail and threat of assassination, she can still exemplify hope.

Born at Hamedan in 1947 into a Muslim and academic family, she studied at Tehran University. In 1969 she became Iran’s first female judge and was appointed president of the Tehran city court in 1975. The 1979 Islamic revolution changed Iran from a constitutional monarchy to an Islamic theocratic state, and because she was a woman she was forced to resign.

Seeking herself a reformed Islam and new interpretations of its laws, she has been particularly involved in the defence of the rights of refugees and women and children. She is known also for her defence of victims in politically sensitive cases concerning freedom of speech and political freedom. In her book, Iran Awakening, she writes of her “dream of a peaceful and just Iran”: for her stand she has faced imprisonment, threat of assassination and family humiliation.

One of four Nobel Peace Laureates - including Ireland’s Betty Williams, and Argentina’s Aldolfo Perze Esquivel - she was in Australia to attend the Earth Dialogues at Brisbane recently, presided over by another laureate, international Green Cross chairman and former USSR president, Mikhail Gorbachev.

The conference, also attended by leading environmentalists, business and political leaders, scientists and academics from 11 countries, was organised by Green Cross, the Queensland Government and Brisbane City Council. Its main themes were sustainable development, resource management, climate change, energy security and peace. Green Cross is planning to establish its Australian headquarters in Brisbane.

Dr Ebadi, currently a lecturer at Tehran University, continues her work as a lawyer. An extract from her book sets out the Iranian political situation:

In Iran, overriding authority rests with the supreme religious leader, under the doctrine of divine clerical right to rule, “velayat-e faqih”, invented and established by Ayatollah Khomeini. It is his successor, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who holds the real power in Iran. He heads the armed forces and appoints officials to influential state bodies, from the judiciary to the state media and, most important, the Guardian Council, a body that vets both new laws and elections. Under this system, branches of government such as the parliament and the executive function as accessories.

In an interview before her conference address, Dr Ebadi commented that democracy in Iran “was not complete”. Freedom of speech was also “incomplete” for under the law for journalists any criticism of the constitution in newspapers was against the law, which she saw as “one of the strangest things that can be reflected in the laws of journalism”. In the past two years she said more than 100 newspapers and magazines had been closed down and “a number of journalists and reporters imprisoned”.

The first consideration of democracy was for people to be free to vote for anybody they chose for the parliament or the presidency: but she explained Iranian “people are not free to vote for anybody they want to vote for”, because, prior to the election, the suitability of candidates had first to be confirmed by the Council of Guardians. The effect of this, for example, was that a whole city could vote for one person but those votes would still not be valid.

Human rights were also violated in regard to women because the value of a woman’s life was seen as half the worth of a man’s life. For instance, in the event of a road accident, the family of a woman would get half the amount given to a man’s family. In court, a woman’s testimony was valued at half that of a man’s.

Although 65 per cent of university students were women and they could pursue any field of study they wished, she said many women were subsequently unemployed because of a lack of job opportunities. About three times the number of women, compared to males, remained unemployed. Asked whether such situations resulted from a patriarchal system rather than religious training, she replied carefully that the employment of men was always prioritised, based on a patriarchal system to which I had alluded.

She said about 350 non-government environment organisations were mostly operated by women and had no problems for the Iranian Government; however, for NGOs in the area of human rights there were always difficulties.

There was discrimination too regarding religion. The official religion was Shi’ite and while different sects of Islam, together with Jews and Christians, were officially recognised, others, such as the Baha’ists and Buddhist, were not and therefore had no rights. Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians could only choose one representative and could not vote for Muslims. In this way, she said religious minorities were underrepresented and were never going to have what they wanted brought forward (in parliament). The president, for instance, had to be a Muslim and male.

When she later spoke to the conference through an interpreter, it was indicative of her spirit that, as a small rather rotund figure in a dusty pink suit, she soon had the audience’s total concentration.

She took peace as her topic because she said without peace there could be no underlying foundation of sustainability. In times of war and bloodshed, people had to be concerned about saving their lives and could not worry about the environment. Peace had to be founded on such things as human rights, education, freedom of speech and access to a judiciary, otherwise it was without meaning. Where people suffered despotism it created silent societies because all other voices were silenced by prison or bullets. This was a false calmness.

Applause greeted her announcement that other Noble Prize laureates retained a chair waiting for her friend, Burma’s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who had been held in prison or in house arrest for so long. Dr Ebadi said this was an example of false calm and in such cases it was not long before “the people’s patience will run out and the false calm will fall apart”.

On domestic matters she said that in the 18th century it could be normal that a woman could not leave the house without a husband’s permission. She asked: was that permissible in the 21st century?

She said fundamentalists had closed their eyes to change and, with the eyes of their ancestors, were facing problems with the outdated answers of yesterday. Rulers were trying to solve 21st century issues with 14th century rules. “These people have got off track and dismiss all new ideas.” It was odd, she seemed to add ruefully, that such ideas were held when, today, so many women bore the financial burden of the household: totally different from women all those years ago.

She warned that as soon as the people saw a weakness in their (despotic) power, the people would protest. She had in mind countries in South America, Iran, Kuwait, the Yemen and others.

“One can be a Muslim and respect human rights,” she said. While some undemocratic governments had justified their actions in the name of Islam, “the United States justifies its warmongering by abusing the name of democracy”.

Of Middle East problems, she said sooner or later, the conflicts had to end. Such events affected all the countries of the world and in time all nations were damaged. Innocent people who had never been involved would fall victims to terrorism and violence.

No country needed nuclear weapons, not Iran, not the US, nor any other, she told a questioner, adding that as an optimist she saw the future of Iran as a bright one.

Issues of war and peace were global and the fate of all mankind was tightly ordered and no one had the right to deprive others. “We must wish others a share in the fate we wish for ourselves,” she said.

“Let’s wish each other kindness: the only commodity that will not be depleted by its expenditure.”