ministry for peace meeting in Portcullis House, March 1st, 2006

Speaker: Dr. Elaheh Rostami Povey, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London

Women Human Rights Defenders in Iran, their achievements and the challenges that they are facing

Women in Iran, despite strict ideological rules and structural limitations, in the context of Shia Islam, have shown a great deal of courage, imagination and commitment to struggle for their gender interests, human rights and democracy. They have challenged gender construction dictated by the patriarchal institutions such as the state, family, education, employment, parliament, media….

In the last two decades the interaction between economic and ideological factors led to gender consciousness and women's struggle for change. In the 1980s, the women’s movement was divided. The secular women's movement, along with other movements was defeated in the process of Islamisation of state and other institutions. The disassociation of Muslim feminists from secular feminists and their strong association with the Islamic state and institutions led to the rise of state-sponsored religious women's institutions. Muslim feminism became popular and the majority of women related to it. This is because as an institution similar to other Islamic institutions, Muslim feminism seemed to be representing the stable patterns, norms and behavior which were recognized and valued by society.

By the late 1980s, women's issues became important social and political issues throughout the society. In this period Muslim feminists gradually changed their position in relation to their men-folk and to the state that they had given their support to in the previous period. The secular feminists also began to realize and discuss that women’s oppression cannot be solely attributed to Islamic ideology. Issues such as divorce, custody of children and other family laws and regulations affected the economic contribution of all women. Similarly, poverty, access or lack of access to education, health and employment affected women’s lives, especially poorer women in urban and rural areas.

Therefore, in the 1990s, many professional women, whether secular or religious, as lawyers, as members of the Majles, the parliament, as media workers and so on had to leave aside their differences on issues such as hejab and respond to pressure from ordinary working women. Reforms were made because of the pressure put on the government and the parliament by the women human rights defenders. Throughout the 1990s a strong democracy movement was born. Women were and still are in forefront of the democracy movement, which is diverse. It consists of Grassroots Non-governmental (women, youth, environment, human rights and children rights) Organisations, Muslims, non-Muslims and secular individual women and men, mainly young generation. This period is also known as the period of reform movement associated with President Khatami. In fact, Khatami became president with the vote of women.

As a result the past two decades represents an unprecedented historical transformation, responding to profound changes in women’s and men’s consciousness and visions of social change.

For example, between 1979 and the early 1990s, women were not allowed to be judges, and the law gave men the exclusive right to obtain a divorce and have custody of the children. Since the early 1990s and until today, as a result of pressure from below and through the efforts of women lawyers and women members of parliament, a number of reforms were made. Women are allowed to be research judges or investigative judges and reforms were made in laws regarding marriage, divorce, and custody of children. Women became entitled to right to divorce, custody of children and refusing the husband to marry a second wife under a clause in the marriage law.

Furthermore, 64% of university students are women. According to UNDP 2004 and UNICEF 2005, the number of seats in parliament held by women as percentage of total is 4%, in Turkey it is 4.4%. Female professional and technical workers, as percentage of total are 32.9%. In South Korea it is 33.7%.

This is also a period of economic development. Throughout the 1990s and until today the increase in oil revenue meant an increased GDP - an average annual growth rate of 2.4% was achieved since 1990. This resulted in rising wages, rising consumption level and high expectations. The Iranian state, under political pressures exerted from various civil society organizations, headed by women’s NGOs and women human rights defenders, invested in public services. This led to a significant improvement in health (93% of population use clean water; 99% of children are immunised; HIV prevalence rate is the lowest in the region), mortality rates (female life expectancy as a percentage of male is 104) and literacy rate increased to 94% for both sexes. One important impact of Islamic welfare state was provision of education to a majority of the population. In fact the Islamic state gave priority to Islamists and working classes in urban and rural areas to become educated and prosperous. This is very important because the secular pro West state of the Shah in the 1960s and 1970s only served to enrich small elite and did little to develop the rest of the country.

Contrary to Islamophobia and the popular view in the West that women in Muslim societies are oppressed because of Islamic ideology, the level of female employment, education, health and gender consciousness in Iran is much greater in 2005, under the Islamic state, than they were at the height of Westernisation and modernisation in the 1960s and 1970s. These achievements were made as the result of women’s human rights defenders advocacy. They were able to make an impact through campaigning and taking gender issues to a wider public in a way that has made them worthy of attention.

Prior to 2005 presidential election, once again, women activists took the initiative to use this period to raise their demands. According to Mahbobeh Abbasgholizadeh, ‘we were in favour of participating in the election and not to boycott it. Not because we had illusion in the male candidates, but to force them to acknowledge women’s rights demands, to understand that women’s rights are equal to democracy and we reject the idea that democracy first and then women’s rights and we succeeded to do this. Our aim was to show that our movement is diverse, but we are an independent movement and united in raising our voices, and continue our struggle until we win all our demands’.

During this period 89 Women activists declared themselves as candidates for the presidential election. This was to challenge the constitution which does not allow women to be president of the Islamic state. Following this, democracy and women’s rights activists staged a number of sit ins and demonstrations. Among them Azam Taleghani, a long standing Muslim woman, fighting for women’s rights and democracy; Shadi Sadr, a woman lawyer, Marzieh Mortazi, a woman’s rights activists and Mahbobeh Abbasgholizadeh, NGO and civil society activists who was arrested in November 2004 for her women’s rights and civil society activities including attending Beijing Plus Ten conferences in Asia and European Social Forum in London in October 2004.

In one of these demonstrations women activists entered Azadi (Freedom) Football stadium when Iran played against Bahrain. There is a VIP section in this stadium where sometimes VIP women watch football. Some women demonstrators had VIP cards but they did not use it. They all tried to enter from the public entrance. They clashed with the police who tried to close the door on them, some injured, Mahbobeh Abbasgholizadeh was left with a broken leg. But they entered the stadium shouting their slogan ‘Freedom (referring to the stadium) we have entered, not as VIP, but ordinary citizens’, ‘Iran will win with our presence’. Iran team won and the women activists shouted ‘Iran’s football team is on its way to the world cup, we women are on our way to win our citizenship rights’.

In another demonstration 700 women attended outside Tehran University. Nushin Ahmadi Khorasani, the leading member of Women’s Cultural Centre NGO who established the First Women’s Library in Iran ended this gathering by reading the women’s statement. This called for the women’s protest to continue until gender equality, as well as religious and ethnic minority equality, is guaranteed by the constitution.

These women’s rights activists are diverse individuals and groups. They argue that they will continue their struggle until the male reading of the Islamic laws, including rejecting women to be president, to be changed. In another demonstrations outside the President’s office, their slogans read ‘to reject women is to reject half of the population; we do not accept men’s choices’ gender equality is the necessity of life; women’s rights are human rights…’. Azam Taleghani turned to the police who were surrounding women and said to them ‘thank you brothers for allowing us to raise our voices. We will be here for ever to continue our struggle and you will have to cooperate with us’.

What is the prospect for Women Human Rights Defenders in Iran, after the 2005 presidential election? What are the key challenges?

The result of the presidential election in June 2005 was a lesson and a challenge for the women’s movement.

The majority of the population voted for President Ahmadinejad, the conservative candidate, not for religious purposes but for economic reasons. He did not call for a greater process of Islamisation; he stood for resolving economic problems. The leadership of the reform movement failed across the board to take this up. In fact the root of their failure lied in their inactivity during the 2000 – 2004 local and parliamentary elections when they called for the boycott of these elections and concentrated on political and social issues and ignored economic issues which are affecting a large number of working people.

In the 1980s, many Islamic organisations were set up [Mostazafeen, (Downtrodden); Janbazan (self-sacrificing people) - Soldiers and their families, engaged in the Iran ‑ Iraq war; Bonyad Shahid (Martyred Foundation) ‑ those who died in the Iran-Iraq war; Baseej (Mobilization of the irregulars for the Iran-Iraq war); Komiteh Imam Khomeini (Ayatollah Khomeini Committee) to help the poor; Nehzate Savad Amouzi (Literacy Corp); Jahad Sazandegi (Reconstruction Crusade)….] These Islamic organisations were funded by the state and provided social services to millions of the urban and rural working classes.

However, by late 1990s, the reformist administration was following the major proponents of free market economy by curtailing the role of state and encouraging privatization. The Islamic organisations, mentioned above, gradually turned into massive capitalist organizations and followed the logic of private capital accumulation. Today they control 80% of the economy by establishing large industrial enterprises, are engaged in the money market and gradually are becoming private enterprises rather than providing public welfare to a large number of population.

Every year approximately 1,000,000 educated and potential skilled workers are added to job seekers. But privatisation and NGOisation can only absorb one third of the job seekers per year. The NGOs provide some paid, unpaid and voluntary work which is important but like NGOs in other parts of the world, they cannot replace the state either in job creation or in the provision of basic care. Moreover, the continuing economic growth has led to 24% inflation and consequently a fall in real wages.

Therefore, the vote for the president elect was a protest vote by some of the poorer sections of the population against the reformist government which moved to a free market economy and attempted to shrink the Islamic social welfare system.

The women human rights activists are convinced that the victory of the conservatives in political institutions highlight the limitations of the leadership of the reform movement and their defeat, but not the defeat of the democracy movement itself. They believe that the women’s movement and the democracy movement will continue its struggle for democracy and reform and the conservative administration will have no choice but to meet the demands of the majority of the population, including their own supporters.

However, the women’s rights activists in Iran will be far more able to press for their democratic demands if they have a much clearer economic programme which addresses the needs of the poor. Also a minority of intellectuals including women activists e.g. Shirin Ebadi, the winner of Nobel Peace Prize 2003 boycotted the election on the ground that it was not a legitimate election because the Council of Guardian a male/clergy dominated institution rejected women candidates. But the participation of the majority of the population, mainly women and young indicated that the boycott of elections of local and parliamentary elections in 2003-4 and the presidential election of 2005 was a wrong tactic.

Finally, it is important to conclude that the international responses to events in Iran can also have a negative impact on the democracy movement and the women’s movement in Iran. For 25 years women’s rights activists have been trying to construct emancipatory models that derive from their own experiences and have achieved a great deal. Constant threat of sanction, war and regime change from the US and Israel and their supporters in Europe and Britain weakens the women’s movement and the democracy movement in Iran. Iranians are proud of their country and they are determined to protect its independence. If three is a choice to believe either in Washington or Tehran, then the majority of people in Iran, even those who are critical of the Islamic state and Islamisation of society, will choose Tehran. This view has strengthened in the last 12 months as Washington’s position in Iraq and Afghanistan and Israel’s position in Palestine have been discredited more than ever before.