Chronology of Events in Iran, April 2004*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Chronology of Events in Iran, May 2004*
Chronology of Events in Iran, May 2004* May 1 Three Iranian dissidents given week's leave from prison. (Islamic Republic News Agency / IRNA) Three members of a dissident Iranian group, who are held for acting against the Islamic Republic, have been granted temporary leave. Taqi Rahmani, Reza Alijani and Hoda Saber, members of the so-called religious-nationalist group, were granted a one-week leave from Evin prison by Tehran general and revolutionary court, the head of the court's public relations office, Mohammad Shadabi said. Rahmani faces 11 years in prison, while Saber has been given nine years and Alijani six years. They were among a group of 14 dissidents who received their punishment from the Revolutionary Court in May 2003 for attempting to topple the Islamic establishment. May 2 Iranian judiciary allows four dissidents to go on leave. (Agence France-Presse / AFP) Iranian judiciary authorities allowed seven prominent dissidents jailed for speaking out against the regime and students jailed during unrest in 1999 to go on leave. According to the paper, Akbar Ganji, who was jailed in 2000 after he alleged top regime officials were behind a spate of grisly serial murders of dissidents, was given seven days of leave. Ahmad Batebi, Nasser Zarafshan and Akbar Mohammadi were each given five days out of prison. Batebi had been initially condemned to death for his participation in the demonstration in 1999 where he was featured on a famous photograph holding aloft a blood-soaked T-shirt. His sentence was revised to 13 years imprisonment. In August 2002, Zarafshan, a prominent lawyer was sentenced to five years in prison and 50 lashes for "distributing secret information". -
The Candidate Screening in Iran's Parliamentary Elections, 1984-2012
OSIPP Discussion Paper: DP-2020-E-003 The Candidate Screening in Iran’s Parliamentary Elections, 1984-2012 April 23, 2020 Tomoyo Chisaka Ph.D. student, Osaka School of International Public Policy (OSIPP), Osaka University Research Fellow, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 【keywords】Iran’s parliamentary elections, candidate screening, the Guardian Council 【summary】 This discussion paper examines historical development of the candidate screening for Iran’s parliamentary elections from 1984 to 2012. Scholars have discussed disqualification of reformists by the Guardian Council, but little is known about to what extent the pattern of disqualification was consistent in the elections. Using various local newspapers, I identified who were disqualified at elections in a long period of time. The result shows that the Guardian Council gradually expanded the target of disqualification. In some cases even incumbents who were once allowed were later disqualified. The paper concludes that the Guardian Council played an important role in excluding those who challenge the Supreme Leader’s authority. Acknowledgment: This research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant Number 19J10368). I thank Professor Akihisa Matsuno for his guidance and comments. All errors are my own. The author's email address: [email protected] 1. Introduction1 This paper examines the Guardian Council's practice of candidate screening for parliamentary elections in Iran. Scholars have argued that candidates who seek political reform (reformists) tend to be disqualified by the Guardian Council, whose members are appointed by the Supreme Leader. Sarabi writes, for instance, “[T]he most controversial barriers are the requirement that candidates demonstrate a practical commitment to Islam and to the Islamic government and the constitutional power of the Guardian Council to supervise elections(Sarabi1994,95).” The question is to what extent the pattern of the candidate screening was consistent. -
Engaging Iran Australian and Canadian Relations with the Islamic Republic Engaging Iran Australian and Canadian Relations with the Islamic Republic
Engaging Iran Australian and Canadian Relations with the Islamic Republic Engaging Iran Australian and Canadian Relations with the Islamic Republic Robert J. Bookmiller Gulf Research Center i_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uB Dubai, United Arab Emirates (_}A' !_g B/9lu( s{4'1q {xA' 1_{4 b|5 )smdA'c (uA'f'1_B%'=¡(/ *_D |w@_> TBMFT!HSDBF¡CEudA'sGu( XXXHSDBFeCudC'?B uG_GAE#'c`}A' i_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uB9f1s{5 )smdA'c (uA'f'1_B%'cAE/ i_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uBª E#'Gvp*E#'B!v,¢#'E#'1's{5%''tDu{xC)/_9%_(n{wGLi_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uAc8mBmA' , ¡dA'E#'c>EuA'&_{3A'B¢#'c}{3'(E#'c j{w*E#'cGuG{y*E#'c A"'E#'c CEudA%'eC_@c {3EE#'{4¢#_(9_,ud{3' i_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uBB`{wB¡}.0%'9{ymA'E/B`d{wA'¡>ismd{wd{3 *4#/b_dA{w{wdA'¡A_A'?uA' k pA'v@uBuCc,E9)1Eu{zA_(u`*E @1_{xA'!'1"'9u`*1's{5%''tD¡>)/1'==A'uA'f_,E i_m(#ÆA Gulf Research Center 187 Oud Metha Tower, 11th Floor, 303 Sheikh Rashid Road, P. O. Box 80758, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Tel.: +971 4 324 7770 Fax: +971 3 324 7771 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.grc.ae First published 2009 i_m(#ÆAk pA'v@uB Gulf Research Center (_}A' !_g B/9lu( Dubai, United Arab Emirates s{4'1q {xA' 1_{4 b|5 )smdA'c (uA'f'1_B%'=¡(/ © Gulf Research Center 2009 *_D All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in |w@_> a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, TBMFT!HSDBF¡CEudA'sGu( XXXHSDBFeCudC'?B mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Gulf Research Center. -
Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy
Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs August 14, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL32048 Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy Summary Since the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, a priority of U.S. policy has been to reduce the perceived threat posed by Iran to a broad range of U.S. interests, including the security of the Persian Gulf region. In 2014, a common adversary emerged in the form of the Islamic State organization, reducing gaps in U.S. and Iranian regional interests, although the two countries have often differing approaches over how to try to defeat the group. The finalization on July 14, 2015, of a “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA) between Iran and six negotiating powers could enhance Iran’s ability to counter the United States and its allies in the region, but could also pave the way for cooperation to resolve some of the region’s several conflicts. During the 1980s and 1990s, U.S. officials identified Iran’s support for militant Middle East groups as a significant threat to U.S. interests and allies. A perceived potential threat from Iran’s nuclear program emerged in 2002, and the United States orchestrated broad international economic pressure on Iran to try to ensure that the program is verifiably confined to purely peaceful purposes. The international pressure contributed to the June 2013 election as president of Iran of the relatively moderate Hassan Rouhani, who campaigned as an advocate of ending Iran’s international isolation. -
Kirk US Institute of Peace Speech
The Conviction of Our Own Convictions Remarks by Congressman Mark Kirk November 4, 2009 U.S. Institute of Peace Thank you for the warm welcome. I worked with the Institute for more than 20 years. Your efforts are critical to our foreign policy – and I thank you all for your commitment. And to the protestors gathered in Tehran, I say this: the American people stand with you in your fight for democracy. This is the 30th anniversary of the attack on our embassy in Iran. On November 4, 1979, Iranian militants raided the Embassy and took 53 Americans hostage – a siege that lasted 444 days and changed history. As we gather here today, 30 years later, we see an Iran rotting from the inside out – a regime trying to silence a people crying out for freedom. Today, the Islamic Republic of Iran looks much like other dictatorships of the 20th century. They wear a different uniform and speak a different language, but the repression rings familiar. In Iran, the basic human freedoms we take for granted in America do not exist. Men, women and children are rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to prisons, never to be heard from again. Some for their religion, others for their politics and others because they dare to stand for the human dignity of all mankind. /// According to Freedom House’s 2009 Report, “freedom of expression is severely limited in Iran. The government directly controls all television and radio broadcasting. Satellite dishes are illegal… “Press freedom remains extremely limited. The Ministry of Culture must approve publication -
Post-Revolutionary Iran's Foreign Policy Toward the United
POST-REVOLUTIONARY IRAN’S FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD THE UNITED STATES: A HISTORICAL SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF STATE TRANSFORMATION AND FOREIGN POLICY A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY GÜLRİZ ŞEN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SEPTEMBER 2013 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences ________________________ Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________ Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________ Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. Faruk Yalvaç (METU, IR) _________________________ Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık (METU, IR) _________________________ Prof. Dr. Recep Boztemur (METU, HIST) _________________________ Prof. Dr. Elisabeth Özdalga (BİLKENT, POLS) _________________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özlem Tür (METU, IR) _________________________ I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Gülriz Şen Signature: iii ABSTRACT POST-REVOLUTIONARY IRAN’S FOREIGN POLICY TOWARD THE UNITED STATES: A HISTORICAL SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF STATE TRANSFORMATION AND FOREIGN POLICY Şen, Gülriz Ph.D., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Prof. -
One Revolution Or Two? the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic Republic
ONE REVOLUTION OR TWO? THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION AND THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC By Val Moghadam Introduction The bicentennial of the French Revolution happens to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the Iranian Revolution. While the first has been widely regarded as the quintessential social and transformative revolution, the sec- ond is problematical both theoretically and politically. Whereas the October Revolution was in many ways the vanguard revolution par excellence, the Iranian Revolution appears retrograde. In the Marxist view, revolution is an essential part of the forward march of history, a progressive step creating new social-productive relations as well as a new political system, consciousness and values. In this context, how might events in Iran be termed 'revolutionary'? Precisely what kind of a revolution transpired between 1977 and 1979 (and afterward)? Surely clerical rule cannot be regarded as progressive? In what sense, then, can we regard the Iranian Revolution as a step forward in the struggle for emancipation of the Iranian working classes? Clearly the Iranian Revolution presents itself as an anomaly. The major revolutions that have been observed and theorized are catego- rized by Marxists as bourgeois or socialist revolutions.1 This is determined by the revolution's ideology, leadership, programme, class base and orientation, and by changes in the social structure following the change of regime. Fur- ther, there is a relationship between modernity and revolution, as discussed by Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, suggested by Marshall Berman in his engaging All That Is Solid Melts Into Air, and elaborated by Perry Anderson in a recent essay .2 Some academic theorists of revolution and social change (Banington Moore, Theda Skocpol, Charles Tilly, Ellen Kay Trimberger, Susan Eckstein, taking their cue from Marx) have stressed the modernizing role played by revolutions. -
1. Scope of Document
IRAN COUNTRY REPORT October 2004 Country Information & Policy Unit IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY DIRECTORATE HOME OFFICE, UNITED KINGDOM Iran Country Report October 2004 CONTENTS 1 Scope of Document 1.1 - 1.10 2 Geography 2.1 - 2.2 3 Economy 3.1 - 3.10 4 History 4.1 Pre - 1979 4.2 - 4.3 1979 - 1989 4.4 - 4.6 1990 - 1996 4.7 - 4.9 1997 - 1999 4.10 - 4.14 2000 4.15 - 4.17 2001 onwards 4.18 - 4.23 Student Unrest - June 2003 4.24 - 4.29 Parliamentary Elections - February 2004 4.30 - 4.33 5 State Structures The Constitution 5.1 Citizenship and Nationality 5.2 - 5.4 Political System 5.5 - 5.7 Political Parties 5.8 - 5.13 Judiciary 5.14 - 5.31 Court Documentation 5.32 - 5.34 Legal Rights and Detention 5.35 - 5.41 Death Penalty 5.42 - 5.45 Internal Security 5.46 - 5.52 Prisons and Prison Conditions 5.53 - 5.59 Military Service 5.60 - 5.62 Medical Services 5.63 Drugs 5.64 Drug Addiction 5.65 - 5.66 Psychiatric Treatment 5.67 - 5.69 HIV/AIDS 5.70 - 5.72 People with Disabilities 5.73 Educational System 5.74 - 5.77 6 Human Rights 6.A Human Rights issues General 6.1 - 6.14 Freedom of Speech and the Media 6.15 - 6.25 Press Law 6.26 - 6.40 Internet and Satellite 6.41 - 6.45 Freedom of Religion 6.46 - 6.52 Legal Framework 6.53 - 6.54 Sunni Muslims 6.55 Christians 6.56 - 6.58 Apostasy/Conversions 6.59 - 6.62 Jews 6.63 - 6.65 Zoroastrians 6.66 - 6.67 Sabeans (Mandeans) 6.68 Baha'is 6.69 - 6.82 Freedom of Assembly and Association 6.83 - 6.90 Employment Rights 6.91 - 6.95 People Trafficking 6.96 Freedom of Movement 6.97 - 6.106 Refugees in Iran 6.107 - 6.112 -
From Protest to Prison: Iran One Year After the Election 5
from protest to pri son IrAn onE yEAr AftEr tHE ELECtIon amnesty international is a global movement of 2.8 million supporters, members and activists in more than 150 countries and territories who campaign to end grave abuses of human rights. our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of human rights and other international human rights standards. We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion and are funded mainly by our membership and public donations. amnesty international publications first published in 2010 by amnesty international publications international secretariat peter Benenson house 1 easton street london Wc1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org © amnesty international publications 2010 index: mDe 13/062/2010 original language: english printed by amnesty international, international secretariat, United Kingdom all rights reserved. this publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee for advocacy, campaigning and teaching purposes, but not for resale. the copyright holders request that all such use be registered with them for impact assessment purposes. for copying in any other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications, or for translation or adaptation, prior written permission must be obtained from the publishers, and a fee may be payable. Cover phot o: Demonstration in tehran following the disputed 12 June 2009 presidential election. © Javad montazeri Back cover phot o: a mass “show trial” in tehran’s revolutionary court, 25 august 2009; defendants are dressed in grey. © ap/pa photo/fars news agency, hasan Ghaedi CONTENTS 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................5 2. -
Iran April 2002
Iran, Country Information http://194.203.40.90/ppage.asp?section=178&title=Iran%2C%20Country%20Information COUNTRY ASSESSMENT - IRAN April 2002 Country Information and Policy Unit I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT II GEOGRAPHY III HISTORY IV STATE STRUCTURES VA HUMAN RIGHTS - OVERVIEW VB HUMAN RIGHTS - SPECIFIC GROUPS VC HUMAN RIGHTS - OTHER ISSUES ANNEX A - CHRONOLOGY ANNEX B - POLITICAL ORGANISATIONS ANNEX C - PROMINENT PEOPLE ANNEX D - SOURCE 1. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information & Policy Unit, Immigration & Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources. 1.2 The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive, nor is it intended to catalogue all human rights violations. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3 The assessment is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4 It is intended to revise the assessment on a 6-monthly basis while the country remains within the top 35 asylum producing countries in the United Kingdom. 1.5 The assessment will be placed on the Internet: (http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk.) An electronic copy of the assessment has been made available to the following organisations: 1 of 71 07/11/2002 5:06 PM Iran, Country Information http://194.203.40.90/ppage.asp?section=178&title=Iran%2C%20Country%20Information Amnesty International UK Immigration Advisory Service Immigration Appellate Authority Immigration Law Practitioners' Association Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants JUSTICE Medical Foundation for the care of Victims of Torture Refugee Council Refugee Legal Centre UN High Commissioner for Refugees 2. -
Iran: Internal Politics and U.S
Iran: Internal Politics and U.S. Policy and Options Updated April 30, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32048 Iran: Internal Politics and U.S. Policy and Options Summary The United States and Iran have been at odds, with varying degrees of intensity, since the 1979 Islamic Revolution there. U.S. officials have identified Iran’s support for militant Middle East groups as a significant threat to U.S. interests and allies, but Iran’s nuclear program took precedence in U.S. policy after 2002 as that program advanced. In 2010, the Obama Administration led a campaign of broad international economic pressure on Iran to persuade it to agree to strict limits on the program—an effort that contributed to the June 2013 election of the relatively moderate Hassan Rouhani as president of Iran and the July 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement—the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA). That agreement exchanged sanctions relief for limits on Iran’s nuclear program, but did not contain binding limits on Iran’s ballistic missile program or on its regional influence or human rights abuses. The Trump Administration cited the deficiencies of the JCPOA in its May 8, 2018, announcement that the United States would exit the JCPOA and re-impose all U.S. secondary sanctions. The stated intent of that step, as well as subsequent actions such as the April 2019 designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO), is to apply “maximum pressure” on Iran to compel it to change its behavior. A stated goal of the policy is to reduce Iran’s support for pro-Iranian regimes and armed factions. -
Iran April 2004
IRAN COUNTRY REPORT April 2004 Country Information & Policy Unit IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY DIRECTORATE HOME OFFICE, UNITED KINGDOM Iran Country Report April 2004 CONTENTS 1 Scope of Document 1.1 - 1.7 2 Geography 2.1 - 2.2 3 Economy 3.1 - 3.9 4 History 4.1 Pre - 1979 4.2 - 4.3 1979 - 1989 4.4 - 4.9 1990 - 1996 4.10 - 4.13 1997 - 1999 4.14 - 4.20 2000 4.21 - 4.28 2001 to Current 4.29 - 4.37 Student Unrest - June 2003 4.38 - 4.42 Parliamentary Elections - February 2004 4.43 - 4.45 5 State Structures The Constitution 5.1 Citizenship and Nationality 5.2 - 5.4 Political System 5.5 - 5.9 Political Parties 5.10 - 5.15 Judiciary 5.16 - 5.34 Court Documentation 5.35 - 5.37 Legal Rights and Detention 5.38 - 5.42 Death Penalty 5.43 - 5.45 Internal Security 5.46 - 5.52 Prisons and Prison Conditions 5.53 - 5.58 Military Service 5.59 - 5.61 Medical Services 5.62 Drugs 5.63 Drug Addiction 5.64 - 5.65 Psychiatric Treatment 5.66 - 5.68 HIV/AIDS 5.69 - 5.71 People with Disabilities 5.72 Educational System 5.73 - 5.76 6 Human Rights 6.A Human Rights issues General 6.1 - 6.18 Freedom of Speech and the Media 6.19 - 6.28 Press Law 6.29 - 6.48 Internet and Satellite 6.49 - 6.53 Freedom of Religion 6.54 - 6.60 Legal Framework 6.61 - 6.62 Sunni Muslims 6.63 Christians 6.64 - 6.68 Apostasy/Conversions 6.69 - 6.72 Jews 6.73 - 6.78 Zoroastrians 6.79 - 6.80 Sabeans (Mandeans) 6.81 Baha'is 6.82 - 6.95 Freedom of Assembly and Association 6.96 - 6.103 Employment Rights 6.104 - 6.109 People Trafficking 6.110 Freedom of Movement 6.111 - 6.119 Refugees in Iran 6.120