A proposal regarding human rights and the February 1979 revolution.

Given the conviction of the Shah and the report of the International Red Cross Organization regarding 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 components? 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 February 1979 revolution and what was it like after? 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 different perspectives in order to possibly reach a unified conclusion. Therefore, we have approached a group of political and social activists who were somehow involved in the political and social events in Iran during the late 1950s; most of these individuals are also considered victims of human rights violations before and after the February 1979 revolution.

Dr. Mohammad Maleki, writer, human rights activist, and the first president of the University of Tehran after the February 1979 revolution, is one of the individuals who has answered our questions in this proposal and is appreciated for his cooperation…

Basically, until before the incident of Siahkal in 49-50, when the left and mujahideen groups started armed struggle, there was not much torture in prisons; torture existed, but not in a serious and widespread manner. In fact, with the start of armed struggles, torture also became prevalent in prisons and left and mujahideen children were subjected to horrific torture. In 43-44, when Engineer Bazargan was on trial, he warned the officials and judges in court that “we are the last group who are speaking to you legally and demanding the government to respect the law and human rights”, but the Shah did not back down and continued his tyranny, dictatorship, and monopolization, considering himself at the top of all affairs, and as a result, armed struggles began.

The pursuit of such a trend by the Shah continued until the rise of the Democratic Party in America and the presidency of Carter. Carter believed that there should be changes in Iran and the political space should be opened up, allowing for freedom of expression and criticism of the government. However, this belief was not out of concern for the Iranian people and human rights, but rather from the perspective that if governments become too strict, the people – especially the youth and students – may turn to communism, which at the time, due to the existence of the socialist Soviet Union, was appealing. This led to a relative opening of the political space in 1977, allowing people to enter the scene and hold protests – mostly led by the youth and students. The September 1978 protests were an example of this.

The people were seeking freedom and human rights, saying that we are human and humans have rights that must be respected by the king. The protests spread and even the clergy, who until 1956 were not involved in such movements except for a few, entered the scene and were able to deceive the people with the organizations they had (in every village, there was at least one clergyman) and with the help of the indifference of intellectuals and the disagreement and lack of awareness about what kind of government the clergy would establish, they were able to gain control. After gaining control, from the very first day of 22 Bahman 1357 (February 11, 1979), monopolies began and we have been witnessing widespread violations of human rights that continue to this day, under the rule of the 36th king.

The revolutionaries talked about freedom, democracy, equality, brotherhood, and women’s rights, and such slogans are completely natural in the face of a dictatorship, according to them. However, considering that those who start a revolution usually aim to overthrow the current power and establish a new one, we must examine whether they will still stand by their words when they gain power or not. Even Mr. Khomeini initially spoke of freedom and democracy, but when he came to power, we saw actions that were the opposite. Others did not come to power for us to test them. When a country undergoes a revolution, the condition is that the ruling group must consider the people and act according to their wishes. For example, Mr. Taleghani insisted on the country being run in a council system, where people in every village, factory, university, etc. would form councils and these councils, made up of elected representatives of the people, would be able to manage their own affairs or the

I emphasize that before the revolution, there was tyranny, oppression, dictatorship, and injustice. In fact, if these issues did not exist, the people would not have been driven to madness to rise up or engage in armed struggle and kill. However, if we compare, after the revolution, such cases have spread widely; tyranny, injustice, corruption, and obscenity in this government are more than the Shah’s government. As Mr. Taleghani said, religious dictatorship is the worst and most brutal type of dictatorship in the world. During the time of the Shah, if an individual was arrested or put on trial, there was no talk of implementing religious principles and God’s commandments. And of course, these commandments of God, as they interpret them, are nothing but execution, torture, amputation, and so on.

The necessity of a revolution is not to have violence, aggression, and killing; for example, in South Africa, there was a revolution and Mandela, who came to power, forgave everyone and there was no violence and other examples of this kind. I consider myself a revolutionary in terms of social changes and transformation of everything towards people’s rights, but a revolutionary who believes in human rights principles and social actions; my great belief is that people must be aware because in this way, no one can impose dictatorship and deceive them. In fact, I am a revolutionary who believes in democracy. The formation of change and transformation is inevitable and I have no belief in the so-called reforms today, and basically, in a system of tyranny and dictatorship, no reforms can be made. In this regard, people must be brought to the field and their votes should be the criterion. For years, I have emphasized that in order for the fate of the system to be determined, they should come and hold a referendum