Document Type : Original Independent Original Article
Highlights
Introduction
Human Rights Council issued Resolution A/HRC/S-35/L.1 for the first time for Iran to establish an "International Fact-Finding Mission". The establishment of the fact-finding commission is one of the most important mechanisms of the Human Rights Council for protecting human rights through the investigation of violations in United Nation’s Member States when observing human rights in that country is worrying and the Council should confront with this situation and prevent impunity.
The main mission of this committee is to investigate the alleged violations of human rights in the context of recent protests, especially women's and children's rights, and to collect and analyze evidence with the aim of using them in judicial processes (clause c, paragraph 7 of the founding resolution).
The fact-finding mission appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council presented a report of its investigations to the fifty-third session of the United Nations Human Rights Council. In its report, this committee criticized the performance of Iran's official authorities and emphasized recommendations and suggestions. During the presentation session of the aforementioned delegation, representatives of various countries and some civil institutions and representatives of the delegation of the Islamic Republic also expressed their opinions.
Methodology
The method of this research is analytical-descriptive and the method of data collection is library and English language books, articles and analytical sites have been used in preparing this article. In this article, the institution of the Human Rights Council is briefly explained first, because the fact-finding committees of the Human Rights Council are among the institutions that work under the institution of the Human Rights Council in line with the general task of monitoring and protecting the observance of human rights and then the formation of the aforementioned mission and the legal consequences of the formation of this mission for Iran will be discussed in order to test the hypothesis of the research.
Results and Discussion
Examining the reports of the investigation missions in previous cases shows that international political and judicial authorities pay special attention to the reports of these missions. For example, on January 23, 2020, the International Court of Justice referred to the findings of the independent international fact-finding mission of Myanmar. This was in the request for the issuance of a provisional order in the case of the application of the Convention on the Prohibition and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, "The Lawsuit of Gambia against Myanmar" on January 23, 2020 (Paragraph 27). The fact-finding mission of Myanmar, in its report on August 8, 2019, concluded that Myanmar has international responsibility for violating the obligations contained in the Convention on the Prohibition and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
As mentioned, the mission has submitted its initial report. Sara Hossein emphasized several times that the Islamic Republic did not allow the members of this mission to travel to Iran, and the fact-finding mission's repeated requests to travel to Iran have remained unanswered. According to her, this is against the resolution of the Human Rights Council, which asked Iran to cooperate with this committee and provide the necessary documents and evidence to this committee. Of course, she mentions that the delegation met with the "Special Committee to Investigate the Riots of 1401" which was formed by the President of Iran. Also, according to the oral report presented, the delegation also deals with the issue of poisonings that happened in Iran. Sara Hossein states: “The fact-finding committee of the reports that only two months after the beginning of the protests, a series of poisonings took place in dozens of schools in 28 provinces and directly and indirectly, the human rights of thousands of girls, including the right to education of these girls has affected strongly expresses concern. Reports that these poisonings have been coordinated and planned as a tool to punish or prevent the participation of these girls in the protests, are appropriately investigated in the framework of the mission of this committee”.
At the end, it should be noted that Iran's non-cooperation will not prevent the action of the council and the committee will prepare and publish its report. In its oral report, the mission stated: "The mission of this truth-seeking committee, as stated in the executive clause 7 of the resolution, is defined in three layers. First, conducting a comprehensive and independent investigation regarding human rights violations reported in the Islamic Republic of Iran in connection with the protests that began on 25 Shahrivar 1401, especially violations related to women and children; second, specifying the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding these reported violations. And thirdly, collecting, harmonizing and analyzing documents and evidences related to these violations and maintaining them, including in line with cooperation with any judicial processes.” Therefore, if the report of this international body accuses the government of Iran of committing a crime against humanity, a serious case will be opened against the government of Iran, and this can be the basis for proposing responsibility for protect and military intervention; or provide sanctions.
Conclusion
Considering that the resolution for the formation of the fact-finding mission has been approved and the first report was submitted on July 14, 1402, the report of this committee undoubtedly has legal consequences, regardless of the political consequences it will have for Iran and will cause the destruction of Iran's international image and international isolation. Although one should not exaggerate the consequences of the reports and findings of the fact-finding missions, but their effects and consequences cannot be underestimated, especially if some kind of agreement between the permanent Member States of the Security Council emerges to deal with the relevant government.
Apart from the mere trial of the perpetrators of the crimes, in the event that an international crime is confirmed by the government and the report is submitted by an independent international fact-finding mission, it will not be possible to impose the responsibility of protect. Of course, it is obvious that the responsibility of protecting the citizens lies with the government itself in the beginning, and in case of inability or unwillingness and in the later stages; it is an obligation that is transferred to the international community. It can be said that if the components that are considered as gross violations of international human rights from an international point of view are identified, this responsibility will be handed over to the international community and the United Nations at the top of them, and it may cause military action against Iran. The difference that should be noted here is that the handling of the crimes committed by the perpetrators in national or international courts is only aimed at the perpetrators of possible crimes. However, the project of responsibility for support and military intervention should not be considered only against the country's government structure and its agents. Military intervention is an action that will harm the entire nation. This is what we are witnessing in Libya, and this country has not yet seen peace after the military intervention of countries after the Security Council's authorization, and this country has disintegrated from within. Of course, on the other hand, despite the occurrence of widespread violations of human rights in North Korea or systematic and widespread violations of human and humanitarian rights in Darfur, Sudan, or Syria, based on political considerations and lack of agreement among the permanent members of the Council, from the theory the responsibility of support has not been used. This is despite the fact that the report of the international independent investigation commissions established by the Human Rights Council emphasized the widespread systematic violation of human rights. It is obvious that the contents of these reports, by themselves, are not binding and the implementation of the team's recommendations depends on the approval of the Security Council. In this connection, the dual policy and past actions of the members of the Security Council should not be overlooked.
In general, the most likely action that can be imagined is the imposition of sanctions by some countries, including the European Union, following the reports of this committee, against the officials accused of violating human rights, which has been done since the beginning of the protests against Iran.
Subjects
