Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Iran (Islamic Republic of) (Ratification: 1964)

A Government representative, the Assistant Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, stated that, whilst participating in the work of the present Committee with the aim of observing the true nature of the debate and the reasons for which the Islamic Republic of Iran was accused of injustice and violation of this Convention, he had observed that his country was asked questions which touched on the fundamentals of the Islamic revolution. His Government had undertaken a careful study of the report of the Committee of Experts, and, in its opinion, there had been no discrimination. The representative of his country had had a legal discussion about the question of the competence of the Committee, and technical reports had been sent; nevertheless, the case had not been settled. The Government had indicated that if there were any complaints, it was ready to examine them: but there had been no complainants. Numerous references had been made to human rights and indeed one might wonder about true human rights, about the role they had played and still played. Referring to the situation regarding human rights in his country before the Islamic revolution, he considered that at the time neither the Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations nor the present Committee had done anything against the regime. Whereas the question of the Freemasons and the Baha'is had been submitted to this Committee on many occasions and would no doubt be submitted again in future. The speaker then undertook an in-depth historical analysis of the role of the Baha'i movement and of Freemasonry in his country, of their links with the corrupt circles of the old regime, the leaders of which had largely been Baha'is or Freemasons or else had had close links with Baha'is or Freemasons, and with the Western powers which had controlled the country; they had even intended to establish Baha'ism as the state religion. Under the old regime, many of the present leaders of the country, including himself, had spent many years in prison and had been tortured, and he wished to know what the organisations concerned with human rights had been doing at that time.

Each year new problems were raised concerning the Baha'is and the question of women; the Committee of Experts had asked for religious minorities to have judges in the legal system, as well as for statistics on this point. The speaker drew the attention of the present Committee to the spies who are in prison in his country for having communicated such information to the outside world.

The speaker wished to point out that no Baha'i, no Freemason, no one holding beliefs other than the Muslim faith had ever been persecuted for his beliefs. Christians, Zoroastrians. Jews, were all represented in Parliament and had volunteered to serve in the defensive war. Baha'ism was merely a political and espionage movement, which acted against public order. Freemasons and Baha'is were prosecuted for acts concerning the misappropriation of public goods and for black-marketeering.

There cannot be any compromise on ideological questions; the Government would never, under any pretext, accept from the international organisations anything that was in opposition to its ideological objectives. The speaker recalled once again that if someone wished to make a complaint they could do so by submitting their case to the competent authorities. There had been no such cases as no minority was discriminated against. Non-discrimination was a fundamental precept of Islam. However, in order to maintain a healthy society. Islam rose up against all those opposed to the law and those people who showed too much indulgence for such actions would naturally have to be punished. In no case would Baha'is be allowed to emerge again in the country and their presence in the international organisations would be prejudicial to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The speaker stated that in future any objection, any point raised against what was obvious, would not be accepted. The speaker asked a number of questions to which he wished to receive written answers: the definition of minorities, the definition of discrimination in general and in particular the definition of religion and the criteria enabling one to recognise a religion.

As the Workers' and Employers' members had asked the Government representative to restrict himself to the actual questions relating to the comments of the Committee of Experts, and as the Chairman had emphasised that it would be wise to deal with the essence of the questions, the Government representative indicated that he would send in his questions in writing. He pointed out that discussion had taken place previously within the Committee on the question of the application of the Convention, but it seemed that his Government's arguments were never taken up. He regretted that the report of the Committee of Experts had not mentioned certain measures that had been taken internally and also certain laws which had been passed. The question of the Baha'is was an internal matter and there was no reason to debate it within the Committee. Just like the other communities, this community had the right to work, the right to live, and the right to make representations to the legal authorities, as well as to the competent authorities which came under the Ministry of Labour, where their case would be considered attentively.

The Workers' members emphasised that, in employment and training matters, there was contradiction with the Convention, both in the law and in practice; that there was discrimination for politico-religious motives, which they considered an extremely dangerous state of affairs; and that this discrimination affected not only the Baha'i group but also other minorities. They mentioned tolerance and respect for civil liberties and hoped that certain signs now becoming perceptible would soon lead to a number of changes. They hoped that the workers would no longer suffer discrimination in employment and in training, a form of discrimination which undermined the reputation of the Convention, and whose existence was unanimously recognised by the international authorities and by a great many independent and objective individuals. Finally, they hoped that their concerns and those of the Committee of Experts and the United Nations would be reflected in the conclusions.

The Employers' members stated that the situation had been clearly described by the Committee of Experts; there was indeed discriminations in training, in employment and in the professions, discrimination against religious minorities, especially the Baha'is, the Freemasons and atheists. They had been disappointed in the statement by the Government representative, since they were not interested in hearing about the history of Iran and because the arguments advanced had been lacking in logic. In fact, they could not accept the reasoning which consisted of saying that, when the people responsible for bad government belonged to a particular religion, then that religion had to be condemned. Under such circumstances, all religions would have to be fought, since there were bad members in many religions. They would have preferred to have heard more specific information about the comments made by the Committee of Experts, in particular on discrimination in training and education. The Government representative had not referred to the changes that were becoming perceptible, and he had not provided any information about whether they were continuing. They expressed their concern about the statement by the Government representative to the effect that there were no more problems concerning Freemasonry because there were no more Freemasons. As for the Baha'is, it appeared that they had access to primary schools but that they encountered great difficulty in gaining access to secondary school and the higher educational levels, for which they had to renounce their faith. Women, for their part, were not allowed to exercised certain professions. They considered that the present Committee should take a position on all these points in a future report, and that it would be good to be able to note progress. They felt that considerable changes were necessary and, in view of the situation, they felt obliged to express their grave concern once more.

The Worker member of the Islamic Republic of Iran referred to the unusual step he was going to take, namely to support his Government. However, he felt that in fundamental problems of a religious nature one had to be guided by one's conscience. He recalled that the formulation of international labour standards usually led to the gratitude of the parties affected, notably the workers. As was well known, the Committee of Experts had to follow the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality in its work. Unfortunately, he believed these principles had not been adhered to. He reiterated the opinion he had expressed in the Workers' group meeting, namely, that the views of members from non-industrialised countries were treated with greater severity by the present Committee than were the views of members from industrialised countries. In the case of the application of the present Convention in the Islamic Republic of Iran, these criteria had been set aside. As he had explained the previous year, the question of the treatment of Baha'is and Freemasons could not be taken into consideration in relation to this Convention. The reason was that the Baha'is were a network of spies, who had held key posts in pre-revolutionary Iran and had themselves been the main agents of discrimination in that period. As a result they had attracted the hatred of the people, including the workers, and this was why the speaker was supporting his Government's stand on this issue. He asked a number of questions, to which he requested written replies addressed to the workers' organisation he represented: (1) Some four years previously, his organisation had submitted documents to the present Committee as evidence of the spying of the Baha'is - he wished to know why the Committee had not replied with its views regarding this documentation and why no mention had been made of it in the report, (2) The Committee of Experts' report emphasised the role of the workers in the application of Conventions, and he wished to know why his organisation had never been contacted by the Committee of Experts in this regard; (3) He wished to know why there had been no reply to this Organisation's repeated invitation over recent years to the Vice-Chairman of the Workers' members to visit his country to observe the measures taken by his organisation to further the interest of the workers. In his view, the problems being discussed here by the present Committee were not the real problems of the workers of this country. He had things to say to this Committee about other problems but could not do so until this problem was dealt with, as his cause might be seen to be affiliated with spying organisations.

There were some doubts in the minds of the workers he represented with regard to the references in this case to the interim report on the situation of human rights in his country which had been transmitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations. He had noted that some countries which had ratified this Convention and had worse records on human rights had also been mentioned in the report of the Committee on Human Rights of the United Nations; however, he pointed out that the present Committee had not mentioned these by name. He also referred to the pressures being put on workers in the occupied Arab territories, and to a number of murdered Palestinian workers. He asked whether the ILO or this Committee did not have duties and responsibilities, quite outside their formulated functions, to defend the rights of the oppressed workers of the occupied Arab territories. He wondered about the operation of a double standard not in accordance with the principles of independence, objectivity and impartiality. He also referred to the time taken for the preparation of the report of the Committee of Experts in March 1989 and expressed doubts about the feasibility of the Committee of Experts having fully examined all the country reports in the short time available. Finally, he requested the present Committee to review their earlier investigations and decisions, and to consider whether indulging in international political questions was compatible with solving the problems of workers. He hoped that the Committee would be able to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding in which the real problems of the workers in his country could be addressed.

The Government representative stated that it was not correct to maintain that some people had had to change their religion and faith; many Baha'is had converted of their own free will, and there had been no pressure on them to change their religion. As regards access to educational establishments, the Government had harmonised the procedures and everyone was treated equally. As for vocational training, he was personally in charge of this and had no knowledge of either rejections or acceptances of Baha'is. There was no discrimination in the employment and investment fields; Baha'is were managers in enterprises and in economic and commercial services, from the lowest rank to the top management. the Public Inspection Organisation dealt with all complaints, without any discrimination. the administrative court dealt with offences committed by civil servants, without any discrimination with all the complaints referred to it. A law had been passed which broadened the scope of the right of appeal to the higher courts.

The speaker concluded by stressing once again that these political questions were polemical, particularly as regards the instructions given by the Committee on Human Rights of the United Nations, and by asking for this issue to be struck off once and for all.

The Committee had taken note of the oral explanations provided by the Government representative. It had observed with regret that there were no changes in the situation regarding the application of the Convention. As each year since 1983, the Committee had expressed once again its serious concern regarding the problems which continued as to the application of the Convention. The Committee had expressed the firm hope that the Government would abolish all forms of discrimination contrary to the Convention, whether on the grounds of sex, religion, political opinions or even social or national origin. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would be in a position to report on decisive and substantial progress as to the application of the Convention already the following year.