A proposal regarding human rights and the Bahman 57 Revolution.

Given the conviction of the Shah and the report of the International Red Cross Organization on the torture of political prisoners by SAVAK in prisons as an example of human rights violations, to what extent were the concerns of the revolution and revolutionaries about human rights standards and principles? How much did the slogans of the revolution refer to human rights concepts? In terms of human rights and freedom of expression, what was the situation in Iran before the revolution in February 1979 and what was the situation after that? What were the main reasons for the people’s protests? Some believe that the revolution itself cannot be free from violence; but what is actually considered violence? Do you consider yourself a revolutionary today or someone who is more committed to human rights standards?

These are the questions that we have wanted to find answers to in order to possibly reach a unified conclusion. Therefore, we have approached a group of political and social activists who were involved in the political and social events of Iran in the late 1950s; most of these individuals were also considered victims of human rights violations before and after the February 1979 revolution.

Ahmad Montazeri, son of the spokesperson and head of the office of Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, is one of the individuals who has answered our questions in this proposal and is appreciated for his cooperation…

In the 1957 revolution, the term “human rights” was not commonly used as it is today, especially among ordinary people. However, there were other terms such as injustice towards innocent individuals and specific demands. A political prisoner is someone who has a different belief and is critical, and in no system can such a person be considered a criminal. Therefore, torturing and even depriving them of their freedom for an hour is considered an injustice, which was recognized at that time and is translated as a violation of the rights of political prisoners, which is still a prevalent issue today.

In the slogans of the revolution, it was possible to see concerns for human rights. For example, the leftists’ slogan was “bread, housing, freedom” or another national and widespread slogan that was raised under the title of “independence and freedom” and in all of these slogans, the necessity of respecting human rights was hidden. But in any case, the phrase “human rights” that has been more prevalent among the masses in recent years – about the past 10 years – I had not heard it at that time.

It must be acknowledged that unfortunately, the situation in Iran before and after the February 1979 revolution has not significantly improved in terms of human rights violations. Specifically, the issue of suppressing and imprisoning dissidents has existed in both regimes. These suppressions occur even though these individuals should be encouraged, as they are well-meaning and sincere, and act as a clear mirror by pointing out flaws and intending to correct them. The only difference between the current government and the time of the Shah, which must be viewed as a negative aspect of the past, is that they did not claim to be Islamic, whereas this government claims to be Islamic. Such undesirable actions in the name of Islam not only harm the freedom and humanity of the people, but also harm the religion itself. This is precisely why we are witnessing an increase in religious extremism.

Currently, I, myself, am undoubtedly aware that I know someone who adheres to the principles of human rights more than being revolutionary. However, there are various types of revolutions; a revolution that adheres to the principles of human rights will essentially be a cultural revolution, and many great figures, such as Ayatollah Motahhari, believed in this same way and did not support the violent struggles that we witnessed after the revolution. Unfortunately, a radical movement emerged before the revolution, like a flood that everyone followed, and even they themselves joined the Revolutionary Council and those who were active in this direction.

In relation to better understanding the concept of cultural revolution that I mentioned, it is not a bad idea to provide an explanation: considering that Ayatollah Motahhari and Ayatollah Montazeri were very close and when I was a student and living in Tehran, Ayatollah Montazeri was imprisoned, my interactions with Ayatollah Motahhari were frequent and I would often go to his house. During that time, I would ask him questions about various issues of the day, including parties and groups such as the Mujahedin Organization and the Firqan group. He always emphasized and explicitly stated that due to my conservative nature, I do not accept struggles that lead to the imprisonment and pressure of fighters. We must work in a way that addresses the root of the problem, changes people’s beliefs, and raises their cultural awareness so that issues can be resolved on their own. Ayatollah Motahhari referred to this type of activity as a cultural revolution. I should also