Eliminate violence
... in all its forms, including the death penalty
By Hossein Bagher Zadeh
September 14, 1999
The Iranian
The following is a translation of an
article published in the Persian daily Nesaht in Tehran on Tuesday
24h August 1999. The article, along with another on the topic of execution
by Emadedin
Baqi, led to a huge outcry by certain politico-religious groups in
Iran, culmination in a statement by Iran's Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei on September 1, denouncing those 'who oppose the religious
law of vengeance' and declaring them being liable to death sentence. Neshat
was shut down three days later. Hossein Baqer Zader is a founding member
and chairperson of the Iranian Human Rights
Working Group.
Is State Violence Acceptable? (*)
The reference to the relativity of violence in this week's Friday Prayer
by Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi has once more made this fundamental social question
into a topical issue. Understandably, supporters of violence and totalitarian
groups are in need of such justifications, and hence Mr. Yazdi's remarks
are not unexpected. But what is surprising is the fact that those calling
for a civil and open society are not persistent in the indiscriminate negation
of violence.
The political and cultural developments in Iran and the institutionalization
of a civil society are dependent on the complete rejection of violence.
Any partial and relative rejection of violence puts the supoorters of a
civil and open society on par with supporters of violence and theoreticians
of totalitarian groups. We can not say, for instance, that violence on
cultural grounds or by the government is permissible, but not by those
acting on their own or in small groups. Totalitarians also allow violence
in certain cases or by certain groups or institutions. Justifying violence,
under any pretext, is against the modern human values and endangers the
health of the human society.
The human society in the modern world, and especially since World War
II, has rejected all forms of violence, and regards it as an anathema to
human values. The crimes and tragedies of WWII which included organized
violence in the form of the holocaust, vividly demonstrated the beastly
nature of violence and its devastating effects. People the world over saw
that violence de-humanizes not only the victim but also its perpetrators,
and devastates human society's achievements. Moreover, when violence is
legitimized, it can easily cross the pre-built borders and turn its former
perpetrators into its next victims.
This put the question of setting up a new institution for a world free
of violence and injustice on the agenda of the human society. One outcome
was the composition and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR) in 1948 (which Iran has been a signatory). Article 5 of the
Declaration says that nobody should be subjected to torture or degrading,
cruel or inhuman treatment. It makes no exception, and also bans violence
as a form of punishment. The complete and unequivocal rejection of violence
in one of the first articles of the Declaration indicates the important
lesson the human society has learned from the tragedy of WWII.
In today's Iran, only with the complete and unequivocal rejection of
violence (and adoption of all articles of the UDHR) can we pin our hopes
for the development of the culture of a civil society. It is noteworthy
to mention that, legally speaking, Iran has reiterated its acceptance of
the UDHR and should cease all violent actions (legal and illegal). But
more important than that is the waking call to supporters of the civil
society that only with a persistent and uncompromising campaign against
the culture of violence, in all its forms, contents, from any direction
and under any pretext, can we hope to uproot this devastating tool of suppression,
and turn the dream of the civil society into a reality.
As mentioned, the UDHR rejected violence 51 years ago and since then,
a world campaign has been carried out for the elimination of one of the
most notorious forms of legal violence: the death penalty. On the verge
of the new millennium, this campaign has been intensified. So far, a clear
majority of United Nations' member countries have practically stopped the
use of this form of punishment. They have accepted that the death penalty
is cruel, inhuman and degrading. Moreover, many empirical and sociological
studies have shown that, contrary to the popular belief, the death penalty
has no effect on reducing crimes, and in fact it is itself a means for
spreading injustice and crimes. Today, not only are human rights organizations
calling for the immediate abolishment of the death penalty, but the U.N.
too has put this recommendation on its agenda. The most notable international
political and religious personalities, from Nelson Mandela to the Pope
and Secretary General of UNESCO, have joined the campaign for a world free
of execution. It is incumbent on the supporters of a free and civil society
in Iran to join this world campaign, and to respond to this international
humanist call so that Iran can be led to a humane society, free of violence.
Violence, in all its forms, should be eliminated. Execution is the most
notable form of (legal) violence. Campaigning against "cell
violence" without a campaign against its cultural roots will be
fruitless. The belief in killing (legal and illegal) as a solution to social
problems, lies at the heart of this culture. Th Iranian society should
accept that killing solves nothing. Similarly, neither ideology nor state
power can justify violence. Official violence (including execution) has
a direct and undeniable effect on the regeneration of the culture of violence.
In order to combat violence, one has to campaign against its totality and
against all its forms and on every level and at every stage. Half-hearted
opposition to violence and explicit or implicit sanctioning of it on special
grounds or by certain institutions, is the characteristic of the forces
of totalitarianism and oppression. Those who are calling for a civil and
open society should refrain from this partialism. (Original
text in Persian)
Notes
* "A [pre] condition for a stable and resilient (and
civil) society is that State is 'the only legitimate institution for exercising
violence'" - Hamid-Reza Jalaayy-pour, Neshat, 7 August 1999.
[Jalaayy-pour is the Managing Editor of Neshat.] ... TO
TOP
* ["Cell violence" is a reference to a spate
of political killings late last year which has been blamed on "rogue"
elements within the Information Ministry.] ... TO TOP
- Send a comment for The Iranian letters
section
- Send a comment to the writer Hossein
Bagher Zadeh
