Iran – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

The Forgotten Tragedy of the Yemen Crisis

With the increase in world crises, others become forgotten. Seven years and the Yemen Crisis is still one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. Unnoticed, unseen, and unheard, the cry for help from the suffering in Yemen has been largely forgotten. Yemen has always been the most vulnerable country in the Middle East, even prior to the 2015 Civil War. With the worst rates of malnutrition, more than half of the Yemeni population has been living in poverty with limited to no access to resources need to live. With such an important, detrimentally impactful crisis, why has there been silence surrounding solutions?

Protestors holding guns chanting something in Yemen — Source: Yahoo Images

Why is there a Crisis?

The Yemen Crisis began with a civil war between the government forces and the Houthis, also known as Ansar Allah. In the past seven years, the residue of the civil war in Yemen continues to worsen tremendously. The conflict has been between the internationally recognized government, backed by the Saudi government, and the Houthi rebels backed by Iran. The war was caused by many factors. Given that Yemen was already one of the poorest Arab countries, any change would cause a political division. These factors include fuel price increasing, the Houthi rebels taking over and causing a military division, and the involvement of Saudi Arabia. Many countries have gotten involved – not to solve the crisis, but to pick the side supporting its agendas and send military equipment and personnel in support of these goals. This has left civilians in grave danger.

Protest during the Yemen War — Source: Yahoo Images

Conditions of the Crisis

The country’s humanitarian crisis is said to be among the worst in the world, due to widespread hunger, disease, and attacks on civilians. There have been around 6 million individuals displaced from their homes since the beginning of the catastrophe. There are 4.3 million civilians internally displaced. As of 2021, Yemen had one of the largest numbers of internally displaced people (IDP) in the world. Many IDPs have been living in a constant state of fear and suffering. Being in a state of exile, having insufficient environmental and living conditions, they have no access to the resources needed to survive day to day. In addition, food insecurity, lack of clean water, healthcare, and sanitation services have caused tremendous issues for countless of civilians still living in Yemen.

Women and Children

In the heart of the crisis, the most affected have been found to be women and children. With the state of the country, inflation, along with scarcity of economic opportunities, many families can no longer afford basic meals, leading to high cases of starvation. Further, many cases of gender-based violence, exploitation, and early marriage are on the rise. Malnutrition rates for women and children in Yemen are the highest in the world. About 1.3 million breastfeeding and pregnant mothers are in need of treatment for malnutrition. There have also been found problems with children being forced to fight in the war. In 2019, there were 1,940 children fighting as soldiers.

Mental Health

Mental health in Yemen has deteriorated over the causes and outcomes of the conflict. Individuals have dealt with losing family members and friends, their homes, suffering from displacement, violence due to war, food insecurity, unemployment, diseases, torture…the list can go on and on. With all these factors causing grief then leading to long term depression, individuals in Yemen are not able to seek the proper resources needed. There are about 30 million people living in Yemen in 2020 but only 59 psychiatrists. Meaning, for every half a million, there was only one psychiatrist. With the mental health stigmas already a huge concern in the Middle East, many individuals either do not know they need mental health services or are not allowed to seek them. For instance, women have to ask for permission from their families, particularly their husbands, in order to seek mental health services.

What is the World doing?

The United Nations (UN) has backed and presented peace negotiations, but it has only seen limited progression. The UN found that regional actors involved in the conflict have played a strong role in slowing down the peace process. Observers of the crisis see that the involvement of Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, have prolonged the war and worsened its conditions. The response of the world needs to strengthen when dealing with the Yemen crisis. As we have seen support from the world given to the Ukrainian crisis and the crisis in Afghanistan, as a whole, a change is possible. The most important thing we can do is talk about the crisis. This has gone unheard, but with a collective voice we can urge and find a solution.

Children during the Yemen conflict — Source: Yahoo Images

What can you do?

The best thing you can do regarding the Yemen crisis is to educate yourself, engage in conversations, and make others aware of what is happening. Below are a list of books and sources to keep you updated in ways you can help.

The World Food Programmee has created a website with ways you can help

Books to Read:

Yemen: Dancing on the Heads of Snakes – Victoria Clark

2. Tribes and Politics in Yemen: A History of the Houthi Conflict – Marieke Brandt

3. A History of Modern Yemen – Paul Dresch

4. Yemen Divided: The Story of a Failed State in South Arabia – Noel Brehony

Iranian Women Burn Hijabs in Response to Killing of Mahsa Amini

Imagine living in a world where a woman showing her hair is considered “immoral” but killing a woman for showing her hair is not. Unfortunately for Mahsa Amini, that is the world we live in. On September 14th 2022, the 22-year-old was visiting the Iranian capital of Tehran with her family when she was arrested by Iran’s police. The reason for her arrest was wearing an “improper” hijab that did not adhere to the strict Islamic dress code laws. While in custody, she was beaten within an inch of her life and was comatose before being pronounced dead the following day. Iranian officials claim she died of a heart attack while in custody.

Public outcry

The Iranian government is implying that a dress code carries more significance than a young woman’s life. However, many Iranians disagree. In fact, women across the country have started publicly removing and burning their hijabs in protest. Burning head scarves is a powerful display that highlights the demand to end mandatory hijab laws. It is a direct objection to the controlling state’s policing of women’s bodies. Many people have taken to the streets to protest this blatant violation of human rights. Article 3 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights states, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.” Iranian women’s liberty is in grave danger. Under Iran’s authoritarian regime, personal freedoms and the right to choose are in grave jeopardy. During the protests on September 21, Iran’s armed forces shot and killed more than 8 individuals. In the last 5 days, 15 protestors have died as a result of direct fire from government forces, with an additional 733 people injured and dozens imprisoned.

Morality Police History

Iranian authorities have a long history of violent and inhumane enforcement of dress codes, specifically, compulsory veiling. This can be traced back to the Islamic dress code, a strict dress code that requires women to conceal their hair and neck with a head scarf and to cover their body. This law has been in effect in Iran since 1979, after Iran’s Islamic Revolution. The “Gasht-e-Ershad,” which translates as “guidance patrols”, patrol the streets of Iran enforcing these laws. They arrest individuals they deem in violation of this law, including women who do not adhere to the strict concealment of their body. In 2017, dozens of women removed their hijabs in defiance of the dress code. They waved their white hijabs standing on utility boxes. Since then, the morality police have taken severe measures to prevent women from disobeying the dress code. The arrests often involve verbal abuse and physical violence, targeting women and girls as young as 9 years old. Violent videos have emerged on social media depicting the “morality” agents forcefully detaining women, dragging them by their hair, administering beating with batons, and even spraying them with pepper spray.

Protests Are Not Anti-Islamic

The presence of the morality police is a violation of freedom and dignity of the women in Iran. Western practitioners of Islam may misconceive these acts of protest as an attack on Islam. However, these individuals have the freedom to choose their religion; they are not forced to adhere to religiously influenced governmental action. It is important to make the distinction between burning symbols of the state and disrespecting religion. To many Iranian women, the mandatory hijab enforcement is not a religious symbol, but rather a symbol of their oppression. These protests are the result of religious trauma and not Islamophobia. This movement is not Anti-Islamic, but pro-liberty. Citizens across the nation are fighting against the unjust criminalization of women due to the strict, mandatory dress code. They are fighting against an authoritarian regime that weaponizes Islam as a tool of oppression.

What Can You Do

Protestors hold a sign that says "Say Her Name #MASHAAMINI" — Source: Flickr

The courage and solidarity these women are showing is quite moving. This may serve as a catalyst for the liberation of women around the world. As of now, Instagram is blocked in Iran. However, these activists’ valiant efforts will not be stifled. Now the baton passes to us. We must amplify their voices and raise awareness about the atrocities endured by these women by sharing hashtags and saying her name: Mahsa Amini. Follow these informative accounts and repost their posts:
@middleeastmatters
@masih.alineejad
@farnanak_amidi
@golfarahani
@negah_amirii
@duzenetekkal
Use this link to help people in Iran bypass the internet blockade Middle East Matters (mideastmatters.carrd.co). Donate to United for Iran and help fund the app Gershad that alerts woman the whereabouts of the morality police and protects women across Iran from unjust arrest. Everyone is entitled the most basic human right of choice. Women all around the world should be at liberty to wear what they want without fear of jeopardizing their lives.

Justice for ISIS Child Suspects

What is happening in Iraq — An infographic displays the treatment of children by the authorities. Source: Yahoo Images.

The Human Rights Watch collected evidence in between January and June 2020 that closely reviewed the trial cases of 75 alleged child offenders who were recruited by the Islamic State (ISIS). The cases had led to the misconstrued holding of the children, but upon review, the Human Rights Watch ordered the release of the children, using reasons like a lack of evidence and preventing double jeopardy, as well as provisions of Iraq’s amnesty law. The 2016 Iraq Amnesty Law offers amnesty to persons who can show that they joined ISIS or another terrorist group against their will and did not commit a serious offense prior to joining the group.For years, Iraqi and Kurdistan judicial authorities have charged hundreds of children with terrorism for alleged ISIS affiliation. Several of the charges have been based on the dubious accusations and forced confessions of these children, regardless of the extent of their involvement with ISIS, if any. Such behavior from authorities has led to an international norm that children recruited by armed groups should be treated as victims, first and foremost, not as criminals.

In January 2020, a committee formed under the Nineveh Federal Court of Appeal and Bar Association, consisting of a judge, a general prosecutor, and a social worker. This committee adjudicated the cases of suspects who were children at the time of their alleged alliance with ISIS. The approach taken by this committee was one of compassion and complied very well with acknowledging the human rights of these child suspects. In June 2020, Iraqi judicial authorities dissolved the committee, saying it had reviewed all the pending cases, but another committee in Nineveh, Iraq, continued adjudicating such cases. In August 2020, an anonymous source close to the Nineveh Bar Association told the Human Rights Watch that the committee had reviewed 300 case files before being disbanded in June. They convicted 202 people, dropped charges against and released 31, and pardoned and released 44 under Iraq’s 2016 Amnesty Law. Three cases were dropped because the defendant had already served a sentence for the same crime, so to not invoke double jeopardy, the committee permanently ceased proceedings against the three people.

Arrested child suspects line a corridor, awaiting response from the police. Source: Yahoo Images.

The committee, unlike other Iraqi courts, attempted to review individual cases more fairly and better apply international standards. By doing so, it was able to convict the guilty and release the innocent, which Iraqi courts do not have the best record for. In the Iraqi-Kurdistan regions, children have been tried in Kurdistan and re-tried for the same crime in Baghdad-controlled territory, with courts ignoring whether or not the child had been acquitted or convicted and already served a sentence in Kurdistan.

This has been the case since the advent of ISIS in Iraq: hundreds of children have been charged with crimes of terror, and such convictions have been justified under Iraq’s 1983 Juvenile Welfare Act. The Act states that the minimum age of criminal responsibility is 9 in Iraq and 11 in the Kurdistan region. Children that are under 18 at the time of the alleged crime are sent to a “youth rehabilitation school” which is designed to provide social rehabilitation and reintegration via educational or vocational training. However, a source within the Tal Kayf prison said that “the cells are identical to those for adult detainees, with no access to any reading or studying materials besides the Quran.”

What needs to be done?

The Nineveh committee is the first step towards attaining a more efficient and fair judicial system in Iraq where ISIS affiliation does not automatically translate to imprisonment. Children should only be detained as a last resort and for the shortest appropriate period, in compliance with international law. Countries should provide proper assistance for children illegally recruited by armed groups and/or forces, including assistance for their physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration. The Iraqi government and Kurdistan Regional government should amend their counterterrorism laws to end the detention and prosecution of children solely for participating in ISIS training or membership with recognition of international law that prohibits recruiting children into armed groups. And the High Judicial Council should permit committees to delve into more counterterrorism cases to avoid the trend of double jeopardy, while instructing judges across Iraq to release all children who have not committed crimes and ensure their proper rehabilitation and reintegration.

In the first half of 2020, Iraq has taken an essential step towards protecting the rights of children rather than trampling them. But this progress is at risk of Iraqi officials do not implement such steps elsewhere.

A Legal Organ Market: Should it Exist?

For those of us who have obtained a driver’s license, there is an option to mark oneself as an organ donor upon death. However, for kidneys, living donors are also a possible option. Afterall, everyone has two and most people can function well with only one. Even so, live donors are few and far between. In the United States, donations are the only legal option for people to obtain organs and often those donations fall short of actual demand. For example, One source states that the amount of kidney transplants able to be administered in a year within the US is about 20,000, far less than the 100,000 a year that would be needed in order to meet the demand. Furthermore, the same source explains that under the current laws, some people have to wait nearly 10 years in order to receive a kidney transplant, and often people on the waiting list die before they are able to receive a transplant. There are many arguments as to why organs should only be acquired through donations. However, there is also compelling evidence as to why making the buying and selling of organs a legal practice is the best way to save the greatest number of people.

One of the arguments against making the buying and selling of organs legal is that it would likely lead to a society where only the rich would be able to access life saving organ transplants and the poor would be the main contributors of those organs. Currently, the US system wards against this inequality by not paying or charging people for organs and only granting people organ transplants by putting them on a first come first served waiting list. This means that regardless of whether someone is rich or poor, an individual will have the same chance of receiving an organ transplant as the next person. When there is an organ market, it creates an exploitative dynamic between the rich and poor where the poor sell their organs and are often not compensated fairly. This is a big reason why the World Health Organization implored states to put an end to “Transplant Tourism.” Transplant tourism has caught the eye of the international community as a deeply exploitative practice due in large part to the process of it. This is because it often happens in such a way where the poor sell their organs cheaply to a middleman who then sells those same organs for large sums of money to rich buyers. For example, one source points out that in Pakistan, people will give up their kidneys in order to be released from slavery. However, the same article states that when people sell their organs their health often plummets and this can cause them to be further plunged into a life of poverty. Therefore, while more organ transplants may be performed under a more capitalist system, it would likely only benefit the upper classes, creating a deeply exploitative and unequal system.

However, systems like the one within the US and similar ones, such as those within the United Kingdom, are not the only viable options. Even though they are the more globally accepted ways of dealing with the demand for organs, they are not the only ways; Iran has its own method for handling the demand. Starting in 1988, Iran began a program in which donors were compensated for giving up their organs, thus removing the waiting list for kidney transplants. Within the current system, buyers and sellers are able to buy and sell kidneys for a fixed price of $4,600. While exploitative side deals have been struck outside of the government regulated system, Iran has been able to avoid many of the ethical problems that often arise from the selling of organs. For instance, one study found that while the majority of kidneys sold in Iran came from people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, everyone whether rich or poor was able to have equal accessibility to kidney transplants because of funding from charitable organizations. Additionally, as previously mentioned, when a financially desperate individual donates organs, it often results in poor health outcomes, causing that person to become only more economically unstable. However, in Iran’s system, donors obtain healthcare coverage for at least a year after the operation and discounted coverage for additional time following the end of that coverage. While the system is not perfect, it allows those in need of kidneys to gain access to them with relative ease and reduces the exploitation of the poor that is prevalent in countries like Pakistan and the Philippines. It is estimated that if the US set up a similar legal market for the selling of kidneys and paid donors $45,000, it would not only eliminate the waiting list for kidneys but also save tax payers $12 billion annually.

In essence, the pros and cons are hard to weigh in the argument for a legal organ market. Monetary rewards for organs cause problems where the poor are at a disadvantage. Even so, compensating donors is an easy way to drastically increase the supply of organs, potentially saving thousands of lives every year. In either situation there will be ethical dilemmas. However, it is obvious that if the US wants to eliminate the current waiting list, something will have to change. If highly regulated, it is not impossible to have a system that both eliminates the waiting list for kidneys and protects donors from being exploited. Iran is a prime example of this; building off of their foundation, the US, as well as other countries currently struggling to meet the demand for organs, could use Iran’s model to meet the demand and reduce the risks of exploitation often associated with the organ market. It seems hopeful that in the coming years, as research continues to be made on the topic, a more viable solution to the demand for organs will be implemented within the US.

Sonita

On Tuesday, November 13, the Institute for Human Rights and Consulate General of Switzerland – Atlanta co-sponsored a showing Sonita, a film based on a 15-year-old girl from Afghanistan who immigrated to Iran in order to flee the Taliban. Over the course of the three years Sonita is filmed, she is able to receive assistance at a center for refugee children in Tehran, Iran where she works on her dream of becoming a rapper by performing for her classmates and pursuing a place to record her music.

What many people are unaware of is the Afghani tradition of forcing children into marriage, with Sonita’s family setting her price as $9,000. Without intervention from the filmmaker, Rokhsareh Ghaem Maghamim, who paid her family $2,000 to postpone her marriage, Sonita might have not made it to where she is now. To make matters worse, women are not allowed to sing in Iran. So, in order for Sonita to continue her dream of becoming a rapper, the shelter could no longer be affiliated with her. Maghami then managed to take Sonita to the United States, without her parent’s permission, to pursue a career in rap.

Maghami claimed, “I can’t film people who are suffering for something I can afford, when they are giving their life, their story, to me,” she says firmly. What about a film-maker’s duty to be an objective observer? She shakes her head. “It’s always a lie. You are never a fly on the wall. You are always an elephant in the room. You change everything with your presence. I don’t believe objectivity is important or even happens. Human stories are always subjective and personal. The film-maker decides, creates.”

Maghami started filming this documentary to help her cousin who worked at the refugee center, while her cousin just wanted to help Sonita find some training for her music. However, these selfless acts dramatically changed a young woman’s entire life.

Sonita shares the story of one young woman’s strength, perseverance, and the ability to use music as a vehicle to confront social injustice. This film not only gives the audience an inside look to both a tradition and country many are unfamiliar with, but also provides Sonita with the voice she needs to have her story heard.