Iran: The Regime Feels the Pressure on Stoning

Who says that international campaigns have no effect?

Last week, speaking to a journalist, I said that I had the sense that the Iranian Government was getting rattled over the international attention to the case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the 43-year-old woman sentenced to death, initially for adultery and then for complicity in the murder of her husband. Reactions against the sentence this summer had already pushed Tehran into declaring that the carrying out of the death sentence had been held up and that it would not be by stoning; however, the prospect remained that Ashtiani would die by hanging.

A few days ago the Government confirmed my suspicions through two linked statements. The judiciary tried to explain that, while it protected the rights of all citizens, Ashtiani had been tried fairly and convicted on the weight of evidence. The Iranian Foreign Ministry complained, with notable irritation, about "foreign interference".

Earlier today we noted Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's ill-tempered response to the magazine Der Spiegel, ruling out German criticism of stoning because the country had killed millions of people under a totalitarian regime. And speaking of ill-tempered, Keyhan has called Carla Bruni, the singer and wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, a "prostitute" for joining activists in asking for clemency for Ashtiani.

But it is the high-profile conservative newspaper Tabnak that gives the most telling testimony today. The publication, linked to Mohsen Rezaei, the Secretary of the Expediency Council and 2009 Presidential candidate, carries out a full review of the case.

Tabnak does not say the sentence should be reversed; however, it frets about the criticism of Iran from sources as varied as Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Catherine Ashton, the foreign policy representative of the European Union. In light of the attempt by the "West" to "mobilise public opinion against Iran", Tabnak insists "the country's authorities should seriously watch the next move by the West and not ignore it".

The take-away quote (hat tip to an EA correspondent):

Would it not be better if, right from the beginning, we showed more diligence in issuing stoning sentences rather than incurring the great cost of changing the sentence to execution?

The statement from the Council of Human Rights of the Judiciary was well able to reveal the reality of this case and they must be thanked. However, it must be accepted that this came about very late in the day. If only in those first days of the western media campaign an official had made this statement in an interview with one of the major international media.

Stay tuned....

Gaza: UN Releases Report on War "No Judgement"

UN Releases Reports on Gaza War: On Wednesday, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon released a report reviewing Israeli and Palestinian investigations into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity during Israel's Operation Cast Lead of 2008/9.

Last November, the UN General Assembly gave Israelis and Palestinians three months to undertake "independent, credible investigations", later extending the deadline by an extra five months. With his report, Ban is sending both investigations to a committee of independent experts established by the UN Human Rights Council in March 2010.

Turkey’s Israel “Problem”: Analysing the Supposed Threat from Washington (Yenidunya)

Israelis criticised the UN's recent report for not including any input from Hamas, while the Palestinian Authority's statement criticized both Hamas and Israel. It said:

The numbers and the facts speak for themselves" and accused Israel of acting with impunity, disregarding international law, and justifying "its indiscriminate, disproportionate and collective punishment measures against the Palestinian people, as if no limitations applied to Israel.

Since Hamas took over Gaza legal institutions are being undermined and this has resulted in a high number of violations of international human rights law, negatively impacting the situation of human rights in Gaza.

Here are Ban's "Observations" in the 247-page UN report:

At the beginning of 2009, I visited both Gaza and southern Israel in order to help end the fighting and to show my respect and my concern at the death and injury of so many people during the conflict in and around Gaza. In March 2010, I again visited Gaza and Israel. I was, and remain, deeply affected by the widespread death, destruction and suffering in the Gaza Strip, as well as moved by the plight of civilians in southern Israel who have been subject to indiscriminate rocket and mortar fire.

I reiterate that international human rights and humanitarian law need to be fully respected in all situations and circumstances. Accordingly, on several occasions, I have called upon all of the parties to carry out credible, independent domestic investigations into the conduct and consequences of the Gaza conflict. I hope that such steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.

It is my sincere hope that General Assembly resolution 64/254 has served to encourage investigations by the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side that are independent, credible and in conformity with international standards.

I recall that on 25 March 2010 the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 13/9, in which it decided, in the context of the follow-up to the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, to establish a committee of independent experts in international humanitarian and human rights laws to monitor and assess any domestic, legal or other proceedings undertaken by both the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side, in the light of General Assembly resolution 64/254, including the independence, effectiveness and genuineness of those investigations and their conformity with international standards. Also, in resolution 13/9, the Human Rights Council requested me to transmit all the information submitted by the Government of Israel and the Palestinian side pursuant to paragraphs 2 and 3 of General Assembly resolution 64/254 to the committee of independent experts. I am accordingly sending today a letter to the High Commissioner for Human Rights requesting her to transmit the documents received from the State of Israel and the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations to the committee of independent experts.

Human Rights Watch director Iain Levine harshly criticised Ban:

Israeli investigations still fall far short of being thorough and impartial, while Hamas appears to have done nothing at all to investigate alleged violations. We regret that the secretary-general merely passed on the reports he received from Israel and the Palestinian side instead of making the failings of these investigations clear.

Gaza Latest (11 August): Barak v. the PM, Turkey's Response to Netanyahu, Israel's "No" to the UN and More

Barak v. Netanyahu: On Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met the Turkel Committee, investigating the bloodshed following the incident on 31 May. However, Netanyahu refused to give answers and suggested talking behind closed doors on several occasions. When he was asked who conducted talks with Turkish officials, whether there were alternatives to the military option or the situation could have been resolved with Cairo's assistance, and about the claims that Israel had broken international law, Netanyahu showed the committee the door.

The next day, Defense Minister Ehud Barak appeared in front of the committee. Barak's testimony not only contradicted Netanyahu but said he was taking full responsibility for Israel's deadly raid, pointing out "operational mistakes" if not "failures": "The decision making process at the political level was not the reason for the reality that emerged at the end of the operation."

Barak said that an intelligence assessment and a range of potential outcomes, including the possibility of 'extreme scenarios' were discussed in the inner Cabinet, known as the 'Forum of Seven'. In contrast, Netanyahu had said discussions before the raid focused largely on the likely impact on public relations and the chance of violent confrontation had been mentioned only in passing.

Haaretz reports that Barak --- unlike Netanyahu --- answered all the committee's questions, albeit with some political tactics of his own:

Barak bombarded the panel with names, dates and facts before launching an evasive maneuver in the form of a pompous oration on the dangers of global terror and a nuclear Iran, helpfully informing the committee that Israel was not North America, or indeed Western Europe.

Turkey's Response to Netanyahu: After Netanyahu said Turkey had ignored repeated warnings and appeals "at the highest level" to halt the flotilla, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded on Tuesday:

No one else can take the blame for killing civilians in international waters. Israel has killed civilians, and should take the responsibility for having done so.Turkey has no responsibility in the attack on the flotilla.

Israel's "No" to the UN: The international probe led by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer might have caused a problem for Israel even if this “complementary” commission has no scope beyond "investigating" internal reports on the deadly incident on 31 May.

The problem lies in UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's answer when he had agreed to keep Israel's military forces off limits in the inquiry. He said that "there was no such agreement behind the scenes."

In response, Haaretz reports, from a government source, that Israel will not allow the UN to question Israeli soldiers. Though the commission has no right to issue sanctions but just can give suggestions, Israel's position is firm.

One can only speculate that an investigation finding an Israeli soldier's conduct "inaccurate" could lead to further political consequences in the international arena, especially when arrest warrants for former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and some senior military officials have been discussed in Europe?

Pressure to Dismantle the UNHRC's Probe?: Since the UN Human Rights Committee started its work on Tuesday, it has been reported that "key international players" are trying to persuade the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to dismantle the flotilla probe. The justification is simple: If the Council does not stop as another UN-sponsored probe is in progress, it reinforces the HRC's image as one-sided and arbitrary.

Any guess whom these "key international players" might be?