Joining on the Condition to Discriminate

Parvin Ardalan

On December 18, 1979, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).  With the assistance of a UN established monitoring committee, CEDAW entered into force on September 3, 1981, and to date, 168 nations have ratified, and 97 have signed.  Currently, 44 of the 56 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference have joined, and 12 have declared their intention to join with reservations and conditions.  Among CEDAW’s provisions is the recognition of nations’ rights to submit reservations [which modify or restrict the applicability of contested provisions in the document].

For several years a great number of Iranian women’s rights advocates have highlighted CEDAW’s provisions and have viewed Iran’s joining as a means of improving women’s legal status and of ending legal discriminations.  However, such claims have only been made by secular women and unofficial sectors of society, who have neither a platform from which to publicly voice their opinions, nor the power to influence policy and law making institutions.  As such, these institutions represent some of the most intense opposition to Iran’s joining the Convention… 

Examples of secular women’s attempts to highlight legal inequalities include attorney Mehrangiz Kar’s book, Elimination of Gender Discrimination, in which Iran’s domestic laws were measured against the articles of the Convention.  During an International Women’s Day celebration in 2001, the Women’s Cultural Center collected and sent approximately 500 signatures to petition various decision-making institutions to join without reservation…

Membership to the Convention has been a taboo subject that has cast a shadow of doubt over official sectors for some time.  In 1997, the High Council of Cultural Revolution reviewed and rejected adoption of CEDAW by a majority vote.  The Research Center of Seda and Sima and the Center for Religious Studies for the judiciary studied the possibility of membership from legal, religious, social, and cultural perspectives.  The Supreme Leader and several other high-ranking clerics were also requested to assess the Convention.  In the meantime, a number of theology students and their teachers at the Islamic Seminary of Qom wrote two separate letters addressed to high-ranking clerics and members of the High Council of Cultural Revolution, expressing their negative opinions towards Iran’s membership, and as a result, a sanction was put against Iran’s joining.  The reason stated was, “Unless certain provisions are removed, the Convention’s contents are in contradiction with Islamic laws.” (Azad newspaper, 17 Bahman, 1380/ February 6, 2002).

In December of 2001, Iranian television broadcast a short report in which  Zahra Shojaee, head of the Center for Promoting Women’s Participation, was quoted saying that the Cabinet had approved the bill on Iran’s joining CEDAW, providing that it did not contradict Islamic law.  On December 31, 2001, in a letter addressed to the head of Majlis, the President of Iran declared that, “With the recommendation of the Foreign Ministry in a session held on [December 19, 2001], the government approved joining the Convention” (Zanan magazine, no. 84, p. 18).  Earlier, Kofi Annan, in a letter to President Khatami, had requested Iran’s position on this matter. 

It seems that Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention (quoted below) have been obstacles to Iran’s membership:

Article 2

States Parties condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women and, to this end, undertake:

(a) To embody the principle of the equality of men and women in their national constitutions or other appropriate legislation if not yet incorporated therein and to ensure, through law and other appropriate means, the practical realization of this principle;

(b) To adopt appropriate legislative and other measures, including sanctions where appropriate, prohibiting all discrimination against women;

(c) To establish legal protection of the rights of women on an equal basis with men and to ensure through competent national tribunals and other public institutions the effective protection of women against any act of discrimination;

(d) To refrain from engaging in any act or practice of discrimination against women and to ensure that public authorities and institutions shall act in conformity with this obligation;

(e) To take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women by any person, organization or enterprise;

(f) To take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women;

(g) To repeal all national penal provisions which constitute discrimination against women.

Article 3

States Parties shall take in all fields, in particular in the political, social, economic and cultural fields, all appropriate measures, including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men.

Upon comparison, it is apparent that the civil, constitutional, and penal laws of Iran do not adhere to the aforementioned principles of equality.  Or put another way, if Iran submits reservations to CEDAW, no real change will occur.

Since the Cabinet’s approval there has been renewed and widespread discussion concerning the Convention.  Newspapers such as Azad, No Rouz, Hayat-e No, and Bonyan, and magazines like Zanan have analyzed Iran’s position and its resulting implications and have engaged specialists, jurists and religious authorities in a dialogue.  However, most importantly, they have been publishing the views of high-ranking clerics, the mojtaheds, since Islamic sharia law and those who implement them have always played an important role within Iran’s legal framework.  Quoting Ayatollah  Mazaheri, head of the Islamic Seminary of Isfahan and a traditional religious jurist, Azad newspaper argued that the question of joining CEDAW is such that “If there is any carelessness, we will all be held accountable.  This Convention, which denies any difference between men and women’s rights and duties, is in fact a grave step by the UN towards establishing Western dominance and global hegemony of Western materialistic culture. And unfortunately, some of the people in charge, particularly women, are for ill-founded and baseless reasons trying to persuade Iran to join a convention that guarantees problems with religious jurisprudence.”  Of course, there was no specific mention of these ill-founded and baseless reasons.  Furthermore, Ayatollah Fasel Lankaroni, addressing theology students stated, “Being students of theology, you must not get the impression that intellectualism necessitates violating certain Islamic principles.  Who said there is no difference between men and women?  There are many differences… We don’t want to say that women are intellectually and socially inferior, but God has set aside some exclusive advantages for men, and vice versa.”   At the same time, Azad newspaper reflected the views of those who support a dynamic fegh (religious jurisprudence), such as Ayatollah Boujnourdi, “Changes can be made in many of the laws that are considered discriminatory.  I believe that the rights that currently exist for women in shi’i jurisprudence are not fixed, and can be changed…” (Azad, 17 Bahman1380/ February 6, 2002)  Finally, on the question of joining, he stated, “I don’t believe that Iran should join with reservations, because in this respect, many of our domestic laws are in the process of changing.” (Bonyan, 1 Esfand 1380/ February 20, 2002)

If gender equality, and concern for “the world’s impending end” are the reasons for clerical opposition, for the government, above all, joining CEDAW means the removal of international obstacles, “For the fourth time, Iran’s request for membership to the World Trade Organization has been rejected, chiefly due to Iran’s refusal to adhere to international copyright regulations and to formally recognize the principle of human rights, especially concerning women.  Additionally, it is rumored that the International Monetary Fund’s rejection of Iran’s loan request was due to its violation of human rights”  (Shadi Sadr in Zanan, no. 84).  Not only of concern to male politicians, the issue caught the notice of women politicians as well, drawing their attention to improving international relations more than to ending gender discrimination.  According to the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), Zahra Shojaee, while emphasizing that “Due to the rising number of supportive countries, the removal of gender discrimination is becoming an international norm” also said, “Given the Islamic Republic’s attention and emphasis on religious law, the most appropriate way to make use of this international opportunity is to join the Convention, with general and intentional reservation.”

In the opinion of the Center for Promoting Women’s Participation, “As long as enforcement of the Convention’s contents does not transgress the red line of religious principles, there is no reason for concern.  Not only do we not stray from the demands of religion and allow women to enjoy the benefits and power contained in international documents, but at the same time, the government’s credibility is saved in terms of its international responsibilities.” (Aftab-e Yazd, 7 Bahman 1380/ January 27, 2002).

Ashraf Boroujerdi, the Deputy Minister of Interior in charge of social affairs and councils, referring to the fact that Iran’s rejection of the Convention has given rise to speculation, hopes that by joining the Convention, international opinion of Iran will improve.  In her opinion, “Some countries, by seizing upon this issue, are asserting that Iran discriminates against women.” (Aftab-e Yazd, 7 Bahman 1380/ January 27, 2002). 

Regretfully, when articulating the importance of membership, these women do not speak of the necessity of abolishing the written and unwritten discriminations against Iranian women.  In fact, it is wishful thinking to believe that by joining CEDAW- with conditions and reservations no less- we will change international opinion.  If we enter reservations, gender discrimination in Iran will not be eradicated.  And with respect to the government and all its interests, nothing will be gained.

On February 14, [Majlis deputy] Fatemeh Rakei announced that the bill proposing the Islamic Republic’s membership was ratified in the 6th Majlis’ Cultural Commission.  She announced that, “The Islamic Republic of Iran considers those parts of the Convention which do not contradict Islamic tenets acceptable.  Additionally, Iran does not consider itself accountable to the execution of the first part of Article 29 concerning the referral and resolution of disputes to international court.”  Naturally, she emphasized that “since there are two interpretations among clerics, we might not be able to implement many of the Convention’s contents.” (Hayat-e No, 25 Bahman 1380/ February 14, 2002).

Now that the Cultural Commission has endorsed the bill, we now wait for its passage in the Majlis, followed by the requisite Guardian Council authorization.  If the Guardian Council gives its consent, the Convention will become enforceable.  Otherwise, the bill will be returned to the Majlis for revision.  It is obvious that adoption of the Convention on the “very broad and vague condition that it not be against Islamic principles, will give an excuse to enemies of women’s rights to call whatever they do not approve of as being such, and prevent any progress in legislation and implementation towards the removal of discrimination (Mehrangiz Kar in Zanan, no. 84)                             

Some believe that conditional acceptance of the Convention will pave the way for the removal of discrimination against women.  However, joining the Convention without any change in discriminatory laws will only improve Iran’s image and facilitate Iran’s entry onto the international economic arena.  But this kind of joining, to quote the 5th Majles, is nothing but the “exploitive use of women” at the international level, and a form of state violence against women.  Joining the Convention without any restrictions and conditions, however, may be a small step towards changing the unequal status of women.

Transl: MS

Since the writing of this article, the 6th Majlis has announced that the CEDAW bill will be brought to the floor in mid-May.  Originally scheduled for early March, the debate was postponed due to concern over insufficient support for the bill, and to buy time to garner more votes.

Back to top