Human Rights or a Tool of Power? Double Standards and Violations of Human Rights

According to the Communications and Information Department of the Deputy for International Affairs of the Judiciary, the High Council for Human Rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran published an enlightening report on the approaches and double standards of human rights against our country.

The text of this report is as follows:

The UN human rights mechanisms, which should be a symbol of justice and a protector of the rights of all human beings, have tarnished their international credibility with their selective and political behavior.

 Human rights, as one of the fundamental pillars of the international legal system, have always been emphasized by the international community. This concept, which is rooted in the protection of human dignity and fundamental freedoms, has been crystallized in documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, in practice, we witness the selective and instrumental application of these principles in international relations.

The different responses to human rights violations in different parts of the world have not only questioned the universality of these rights, but have also challenged the policymaking of powerful countries and international institutions. This inconsistency, which stems from political interests, has undermined trust in human rights mechanisms and undermined their legitimacy.

A clear example of this selective approach is clearly visible in the functioning of the United Nations Human Rights Council. By adopting successive resolutions on the human rights situation in Iran, while turning a blind eye to numerous and egregious human rights violations in other parts of the world, the HRC has not only revealed its obvious political orientation, but has also deviated from the fundamental principle of impartiality. This systematic discrimination in dealing with the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran has numerous examples, the most important of which will be mentioned below.

Highlighting the I.R. of Iran; Silence on the Crimes of the Zionist Regime

The UN human rights mechanisms, which should be a symbol of justice and a protector of the rights of all human beings, have tarnished their international credibility with their selective and political behavior. In a situation where the Zionist regime commits blatant crimes against humanity in Palestine on a daily basis, the HRC, instead of addressing these human tragedies, has placed the I.R. of Iran at the center of its attention with unjustified priority and obvious political motives. This duality of behavior not only violates global justice, but has also seriously challenged the legitimacy of this international body.

Numerous documents and reports from independent human rights organizations indicate the killing of civilians, the destruction of vital infrastructure, and the inhumane siege of the Gaza Strip, but the Human Rights Council has preferred to divert public attention from the ongoing crimes in Palestine by magnifying the internal issues of the independent countries. This approach not only demonstrates the double standards of this institution, but also confirms the HRC being guided and influenced by the dominant powers in determining its agendas.

The obvious contradiction in the Council's performance becomes even more apparent when we compare the dozens of resolutions issued against the Zionist regime with the swift and serious measures taken against Iran. The resolutions regarding the issue of Palestine, despite their number and repetition, have never been implemented, while the same Council acts with unprecedented speed and intensity on Iran. This disparity in behavior clearly shows how human rights have become a tool for advancing political goals.

The False Mask of Human Rights against Sanctions Terrorism

The Islamic Republic of Iran, which has always adhered to its international obligations, has today become the target of two new forms of global organized terrorism: "pharmaceutical terrorism" and "economic terrorism." These structured crimes, which are implemented in the form of cruel sanctions, violate the fundamental rights of the Iranian people systematically and pre-planned. Pharmaceutical and medical sanctions, which should be referred to as "pharmaceutical terrorism," deliberately deprive citizens of access to vital medicines and medical equipment, leading to the gradual death of patients.

This inhumane act, which directly targets the health and lives of the most vulnerable segments of society, is included in the category of crimes against humanity. At the same time, “economic terrorism” has targeted the vital arteries of the national economy through crippling financial and banking sanctions, endangering the livelihoods of millions of innocent citizens.

Western countries led by the United States, which claim to defend human rights, have not only played a role in designing and implementing these modern forms of terrorism, but have also sought to legitimize these organized crimes by abusing international institutions.

These powers, with double standards and a political approach, continue to make false accusations against Iran, while ignoring the destructive effects of sanctions on the lives of ordinary people. The fundamental question is whether deliberate pharmaceutical and medical sanctions, which cost the lives of thousands of patients, can be considered anything other than State Terrorism? And is not the economic blockade of a nation that causes poverty and deprivation a clear example of economic terrorism? These criminal acts, which violate basic human rights, must be prosecuted in international courts, and the perpetrators and supporters must be tried as war criminals.

Terrorism against Iran; Crimes the World Does Not Want to See

The silence of international organizations claiming to protect human rights in the face of the wave of terrorist attacks against the Iranian people is a gross violation of the very principles that these institutions claim to defend. While these organizations issue political resolutions with remarkable speed as soon as the slightest domestic events occur in Iran, they have maintained a meaningful and complicit silence in the face of the most heinous terrorist attacks that have claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent Iranian citizens. This deliberate silence has not only questioned the dignity and credibility of these bodied, but has also clearly revealed the political and selective nature of their actions.

Bloody terrorist attacks such as the heartbreaking incident at the Shah Cheragh Shrine in Shiraz, which resulted in the martyrdom of 15 innocent pilgrims, or the brutal explosions in Kerman during the commemoration of Martyr Soleimani, which left over 100 dead, clearly demonstrate the systematic pattern of planned violence against Iran’s national security. The targeted assassinations of prominent scientists such as Martyr Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Martyr Dariush Rezaeinejad, and Martyr Majid Shahriari, each of whom were pillars of the country’s scientific progress, are also undeniable evidence of the existence of an organized network supported by foreign actors.

Despite Iran's presentation of documentary evidence about the role of regional and extra-regional countries in these crimes, no serious reaction by the international community has been witnessed. The United Nations and human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have turned a blind eye to these events. This is while these organizations, in similar cases in other parts of the world, immediately publish detailed reports and call for the formation of investigative committees.

These double standards clearly show that the issue of Human Rights is not a universal human value for these bodies and institutions, but a tool serving specific political goals. The fundamental question is why the lives of Iranian citizens are less valuable to these organizations than the others? Why is the assassination of scientists who served the country in vital fields such as medicine, peaceful energy, and strategic technologies not mentioned in the annual reports of these institutions?

The silence of these institutions regarding terrorism against Iran is not only a clear injustice against the victims and their grieving families, but by creating an atmosphere of impunity for terrorists and their supporters, they have actually encouraged and perpetuated these crimes. This selective approach clearly shows that as long as double standards govern the performance of these mechanisms, there is no hope for their impartiality and fairness in dealing with human rights issues.

Discriminatory Monitoring Mechanisms, under the Guise of Fact Finding

The UN Human Rights Council has once again exposed a selective and political approach to examining human rights cases by attempting to extend and expand the mandate of the Special Rapporteur and the so-called Fact-finding Mission. This decision, based on one-sided reports and unsubstantiated claims by opposition groups, comes at a time when the process of selecting special rapporteurs lacks the necessary transparency and is under the influence of Western powers. Interestingly, countries such as the United States and some European governments, which exert the greatest pressure to investigate the human rights situation in Iran, themselves support the biggest human rights violators in the world.

This contradiction in the Westerns’ behavior becomes more apparent when one considers the unconditional support for the Zionist regime despite its ongoing crimes in Palestine, its active participation in human rights violations in Yemen, Afghanistan, etc., and the escalation of the humanitarian crisis in these countries, as well as the discriminatory policies against Muslims and immigrants in Europe and the United States.

However, no special rapporteur has been appointed to investigate human rights violations in these countries, and no similar monitoring mechanism is considered for them. These double standards clearly show that international human rights mechanisms operate not on the basis of justice and fairness, but under the influence of the political interests of Western powers. In the meantime, the appointment of a fact-finding committee on Iran, which has always adhered to its obligations to its citizens and the international community, is considered an illogical and unconstructive act.

The Islamic Republic of Iran, while rejecting the political and selective foundations of the recent resolution, has always expressed concern about making general claims based on false and stereotypical information. In this regard, by constructively interacting and cooperating with international legal mechanisms, it has tried to provide a basis for moving beyond unfair judgments based on unreliable sources.

However, this illegal and unconventional body should be asked why it ignored in its reports the role of terrorist and hostile groups in inciting the unrest? If the real goal is to discover the truth, why didn’t it conduct a documented and impartial investigation into the security dimensions and foreign interference instead of relying on the claims of opposing forces? And why did it distort the facts and justify hostile actions against Iran by using the literature of opposing groups during its mission? It seems that these mechanisms were designed not to uphold human rights, but to advance political goals. The discriminatory approach of the UN Human Rights Council has further questioned the credibility of this international institution and shows that human rights have become a tool for pressuring independent countries.

Reviewing Human Rights Mechanisms: an Undeniable Necessity

The Human Rights Council can only maintain its credibility and legitimacy if it adheres to the principles of impartiality, justice and fairness, and does not become a tool for advancing the political goals of some countries. This international body is obliged to carefully examine human rights violations in all countries—even Western allies—without discrimination and beyond geopolitical considerations, and to condemn any terrorist act or gross violation of human rights solely on the basis of legal and moral criteria.

Now is the time to rethink. Instead of accepting biased claims and one-sided reports, the international community must move towards establishing independent and fair mechanisms for the genuine promotion of human rights. International institutions, especially the UN Human Rights Council, must act beyond the political pressures of great powers and, by abandoning double standards, adopt a uniform and coherent approach to all human rights violations.

Only in this case can we hope for the true realization of human rights goals at the global level. Global justice requires equality in judgment, and this cannot be achieved except through an impartial view and fair practice.

The Islamic Republic of Iran, based on religious principles and human values, has always been a pioneer in constructive and responsible interaction in the field of human rights. Iran supports international cooperation within a fair, independent framework based on mutual respect, because it considers the development and promotion of human rights not only a global obligation, but also a religious and human duty. The performance of some bodies has turned human rights mechanisms into political tools by abusing them. The Islamic Republic of Iran emphasizes the necessity of independence, impartiality, and justice in international institutions and believes that effective human rights mechanisms can only be achieved in the shadow of justice.