Confidential Documents Expose Regime’s Efforts to Derail UN Fact-finding Mission
un-human-rights-council-min
Written by
Shahriar Kia
A new set of documents unveiled by Iranian dissidents exposes the Iranian regime’s fear of being held accountable by a fact-finding mission that was established by the UN Human Rights Council following the brutal crackdown on protests in late 2022. According to these files, the regime is in crisis management mode to dodge international scrutiny.
The files, entailing a letter of recommendations and guidelines from a former top national security official, reveal how the clerical regime has tried to conceal crimes against humanity and deceive the international community. Following the nationwide uprising sparked by the killing of Mahsa Amini, an innocent Kurdish girl, at the hands of the regime’s police in Tehran, the regime mobilized its vast security apparatus to the brutal crackdown on protesters in the streets while arresting tens of thousands and subjecting them to severe torture in its prisons.
The documents also reveal several deceit tactics of the regime, namely taking advantage of certain mechanisms of the UN, to render genuine investigations ineffective. The author of the document, Ali Shamkhani, then Secretary of the Supreme Security Council, particularly states that UN Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan was invited to Tehran to undermine the work and exposure made by Javaid Rehman, Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in Iran.
The writing also makes clear how much the clerical regime counts on the appeasement policy of Western governments as well as the membership of its allies in the Human Rights Council to design its deceit tactics accordingly and avoid accountability.
The aforementioned correspondence and their translation is as follows:
Number: 328473
Date: 8 November 2022
Urgency: Immediate
Very Confidential
Representative of the Supreme Leader and Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council
Islamic Republic of Iran
Supreme National Security Council
To the esteemed presence of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei (may his high status be preserved),
and the Honorable Mr. President and Chairman of the Supreme National Security Council, Dr. Raisi
Subject: Proposed measures to prevent the formation of a Fact-finding Mission at the special session of the [UN] Human Rights Council
With greetings and respect,
It is hereby informed that, in light of the holding of the special session of the Human Rights Council (21-25 November) regarding recent events in Iran, which is likely to result in the establishment of a ” Fact-finding Mission,” the consequences of forming such a committee, along with some proposals to prevent its formation, are presented as follows:
A – The Fact-finding Mission and its consequences
The Fact-finding Mission is a mechanism that has so far been established only for conflict-afflicted countries such as Libya, Sudan, and Syria. Therefore, its establishment for a human rights issue in the Islamic Republic of Iran is unprecedented and provocative and will have more repercussions than the appointment of a country-specific special rapporteur (in addition to political consequences, it will have legal consequences). The general mission of this committee is to hold governments responsible (for gross human rights violations and their causes and factors), and its approach has been, first, to submit the names of human rights violators confidentially to the Human Rights Council presidency, and second, to recommend to the [UN] Security Council the establishment of an international criminal court to investigate the crimes of those individuals (even for non-member countries of the court). Although the second approach seems unlikely in the absence of armed conflict in Iran, identifying human rights violators would provide a suitable basis for legitimizing sanctions against Iranian officials.
B – Proposed Package to Prevent the Establishment of the International Fact-finding Mission
Inviting the Special Rapporteur on the “Right to Peaceful Assembly” to visit Iran
Given that, first, the President of the Human Rights Council has announced in his meeting with the Iranian delegation in Geneva that if the Special Rapporteur on the “Right to Peaceful Assembly” or the “Prevention of Violence against Women” is invited to visit Iran, the possibility of establishing the Fact-finding Mission may be eliminated (and he has promised to make efforts in this regard),
Secondly, the consequences of inviting and accepting the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” are less than those of the “Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women” (the issue of women’s rights has a religious basis and does not allow flexibility in many cases). Therefore, for the following reasons, it seems reasonable to invite the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” to travel to Iran to prevent the establishment of a Fact-finding Mission, upon verification to see if the countries sponsoring the resolution would accept such a replacement or not:
Inviting the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” was 1) an initiative of our country, 2) will be considered a positive interaction with the Human Rights Council, 3)it is possible to manage the timing of the trip after the riots and postpone it to later dates, manage the visit itinerary, and even accept some of the rapporteur’s final recommendations (such as amending some regular laws). However, the appointment of a Fact-finding Mission is 1) imposing and during times of unrest, 2) rejecting the Fact-finding Mission’s travel request to Iran will be seen as non-cooperation with the Human Rights Council, and 3) the Fact-finding Mission will receive all its information from opponents and their opinions will be implemented.
The mission of the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” is initially limited to one issue, which may lead him to other areas such as violence against women, but the Fact-finding Mission’s resolution will most likely assign the mission of examining all human rights issues related to recent events to the committee, and some experts believe that the possibility of extending the scope of the committee’s work to include the executions of the 1980s… is also likely.
The state’s policy does not seek any interaction with Javid Rahman, the [UN] Special Rapporteur, and aims to completely sever ties with him. The invitation of subject rapporteurs, such as the Special Rapporteur on the Prevention of Sanctions [referring to Prof. Alena Douhan, the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of the unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights], was also under consideration, and even if recent events had not occurred, the possibility of inviting other rapporteurs was on the agenda, with the invitation of the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” being a lower priority due to its lesser consequences.
Certainly, the report of the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” will have negative elements. However, given that, 1) thousands of peaceful assemblies were held without incident throughout the year in every corner of the country, and 2) numerous documents (including visual materials, meetings with victims, agitators, etc.) showing the interference of foreign governments and terrorist groups in turning peaceful assemblies into incidents for criminal and subversive activities, it can be turned into an opportunity to expose the hypocritical and criminal approach of Western countries and also present the achievements of the system. While the fact-finding committee will not reflect any positive points in its report.
Step-by-step approach:
• The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should engage with European countries such as Germany and Poland to determine whether the sponsors of the resolution would agree to refrain from convening a special session or refraining to establish the Fact-finding Mission if the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” is invited to Iran or not.
• If the sponsors agree, the official invitation of the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly” should be postponed until after the session (provided that no Fact-finding Mission is established), considering that Western countries may break their promises. If Western countries demand the invitation of the “Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women” in addition to inviting the “Special Rapporteur on the Right to Peaceful Assembly”, only a promise of consideration shall be made.
Proposed measures regarding the fact-finding committee of the Ministry of Interior:
Given that the main excuse for establishing an international Fact-finding Mission is the claim that there is no independent domestic fact-finding mission and the lack of accountability for possible violations by officials in recent events, the necessity of establishing a domestic fact-finding committee is undeniable. However, its effectiveness in preventing the creation of an international mechanism depends on the following measures:
• Prioritizing the establishment of a fact-finding committee under the legal deputy of the presidency, the Ministry of Justice, or the Human Rights Headquarters
Since the Ministry of Interior should be in a position to respond rather than demand, the subordinate fact-finding committee would not be internationally prestigious. Therefore, given the lack of media coverage in public opinion, it would be suitable to establish the committee under the authority of the Human Rights Headquarters or other government institutions, such as the Legal Deputy of the President or the Ministry of Justice.
• Using true academics or associations in the leadership or membership of the committee and seeking media coverage for the committee actions.
• Providing a report on addressing complaints against officers and compensating victims before the session of the Human Rights Council.
3. Declaration of acceptance of the recommendation of member states of the Human Rights Council to establish a national human rights institution:
Given the commitment made by the Islamic Republic of Iran during the UPR meeting of the Human Rights Council in 2010 to establish a national human rights institution, and the subsequent demand of other countries for its creation, if the Supreme National Security Council agrees, the establishment of the national institution can be communicated to the members of the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council, especially those countries that recommended its creation in Iran. This is important, considering the potential role that the national institution can play in investigating recent events.
However, despite agreeing with the principle of creating such an organization, relevant institutions such as the Human Rights Headquarters, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Intelligence have reservations about its security implications and propose that, in the current stage, a trusted individual, such as a special representative or presidential assistant in the domain of human rights, be appointed with appropriate authorities for this task, similar to the Human Rights Commissioner of Russia, which has been accepted as a national institution in the United Nations.
Holding a trial to address the shortcomings or faults of officers prior to the Human Rights Council session
Holding a court to deal with people’s complaints against officials at the same time as the rioters’ trial, regardless of the conviction or acquittal of the governmental agents, can show the determination of the state to deal with the accusations of the officials and eliminate the excuse of creating a Fact-finding Mission. Currently, a case concerning the killing of a person under the age of 18 (with a pellet gun) has been referred to the judicial organization of the armed forces, which can be expedited.
Extensive interaction at the presidential level with his counterparts of the member states of the council such as China, Brazil, Venezuela
Considering the membership of aligned countries such as China, Brazil, and Venezuela in the Human Rights Council and the membership of Asian countries such as Qatar, the [United Arabic] Emirates, Malaysia, and some African and Latin American countries who have a history of abstaining in resolutions concerning the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is necessary to cooperate with aligned and influential countries to lay the groundwork to change their vote to negative.
Presenting embarrassing reports about false information provided by some human rights organizations
Some individuals under the age of 18 who have been listed as children killed in riots by Amnesty International and the Children’s Rights Committee have died for reasons such as car accidents, gas poisoning, and so on, which can be exploited in media implications.
Ali Shamkhani
Gholamhosein Esmailee Presidential Chief of Staff letter- UN Fact-finding Mission
Office of the President
Islamic Republic of Iran
Number: 41358/M
Date: November 11, 2022
Time: 09:41
Classification: Highly Confidential
Urgency: Very Urgent
Dr. Amir-Abdollahian
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Greetings,
Attached is a copy of letter No. 328473 dated November 8, 2022, from the Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council regarding “proposed measures to prevent the formation of a fact-finding committee at the special session of the Human Rights Council” for necessary action.
Sincerely,
Gholam Hossein Esmaeili
Transcript:
Mr. Shamkhani, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, for follow-up on the implementation of the proposals, until the results are achieved.
Dr. Jamsheedi, Deputy Minister of Political Affairs, for information.