The Islamic Republic and the 'Dominance of Infidelity of Secularism and Deceptive Human Rights over the World'

Mohammad Javad Larijani, the Secretary of the Human Rights Headquarters, is essentially Iran's representative in the field of human rights in international organizations, with other branches of the Islamic Republic playing no role in this matter. He has been appointed by his brother (Sadeq Larijani) to respond to human rights organizations and defend the actions of the Islamic Republic. On October 15, 2018, Larijani elaborated on human rights in 'international documents and Islamic thoughts' during a meeting with students and professors at Tehran's Judicial Sciences University. He teaches students and professors how to respond to reports from the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights regarding Iran. His theoretical claims initially address the differences between the foundations of Western thought and Islamic thought, attempting to approach the subject from a theoretical position. Larijani uses accusations and insults to describe Western thought. For example, he states: 'Today, the world is caught in a very bad, foolish, superstitious, and deceptive infidelity called secularism. Secularism says to abandon the root meaning of existence and indulge in pleasure. God has placed signs so that we do not fall into this trap; secularism is a type of ancient infidelity and a great contemporary superstition.' Describing and criticizing a thought—here secularism—with terms like infidelity, deception, superstition, and foolishness, obstructs the path to understanding. Insults are neither descriptions nor critiques. Where have secularists like Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa, etc., said to abandon the meaning of existence and pursue hedonism? This claim—actually an accusation—is neither part of the meaning of secularism nor its necessary and logical consequence. Secularism means the separation of religion from the state. Are secularists like Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, and Mother Teresa only concerned with pleasure? Thousands of secularists who sacrificed their lives for moral and human values were not hedonists, and this is the best refutation of his claim. Next, he attempts to deepen his discussion. He claims that secular thinkers are against ontology and its foundations. In the important subject of justice, they have followed the same method. John Rawls based the concept of fairness on justice, and Ronald Dworkin based the concept of equality on justice. However, the distinguishing line between Islam and secular-liberal thought is that Sheikh Ansari first defined and determined oppression and then built justice upon it. The differences are as follows: First—oppression of oneself. Second—oppression of others (spouse, family, others). Third—oppression of the authority. Fourth—oppression of God, which is the greatest oppression. A just person is one who does not oppress anyone (oneself, others, authority, and God). Is oppression of oneself or others a requirement of the justice theories of John Rawls, Ronald Dworkin, Raz, Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum, Thomas Nagel, Hilary Putnam, etc.? On the other hand, which of these promoted hedonism? The issue is that Muslim thinkers have lacked theories of justice and equality, and the discrimination is the foundation of the jurists' theory regarding justice. Essentially, Javad Larijani denies the equality theories of secularists (liberals and non-liberals) to justify the legal discriminations (inequality of women and men, inequality of slave and free, inequality of Muslim and non-Muslim, inequality of jurist and non-jurist). They consider governance a 'special right' of the jurists and regard the denial of this discrimination by critics as oppression of the authority. Does calling liberal and non-liberal secularism and human rights constructed by Westerners infidelity leave room for theoretical discussion? Claims about the Islamic Republic Larijani claims that the experience of the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic is the best experience for Muslims. This experience is better than Erdogan's Islamism and the Muslim Brotherhood's Islamism in Egypt. He says the Egyptians overthrew Hosni Mubarak's regime and handed the revolution over to the Muslim Brotherhood. From the Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafi Nour Party emerged and took power. He then resorts to falsehood and states: 'The Nour Party came to power because it had an Islamic hue; in the first two weeks, they killed Shia scholars, tied their bodies to cars, and paraded them in the streets. The people of Egypt saw these crimes and rejected the secular regime they had also rejected. As a result, the people's uprising in Egypt collapsed due to a theoretical vacuum.' What documents support this claim? This is not about a few thousand or a few centuries ago; it is about a few years ago when Morsi came to power through free elections and was then overthrown and imprisoned in a bloody coup by General Sisi shortly thereafter. Did such an incident occur during Morsi's brief rule? He then makes exaggerated claims about the Islamic Republic, stating, 'In 40 years, we have become the most powerful country in the region in terms of military, scientific, and technological capabilities.' Global indicators refute these claims. He says, 'Trump said if we do not support Saudi Arabia, Iran will take the region in 12 minutes. If he had said 10 minutes, it would not have been far from reality; I must say he understands this issue very well.' Trump fabricates these claims for Iranophobia and his social base. The United States, as the largest military power in the world, after 17 years of war in Afghanistan, spending hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of casualties, has not been able to take that country or establish stability; how could Iran take the entire Middle East in 12 minutes (Trump's claim) or 10 minutes (Larijani's claim)? 'Such a lion has not been created by God.' Larijani states that Darwinian theorists have said that the first complete human mutation (Homo sapiens) occurred in Abyssinia and then moved to Yemen. The Aryan race's authenticity is due to this Homo sapiens lineage that came from Yemen to Qeshm and from Qeshm to the Caspian Sea and beyond. From there, several branches emerged, one towards Central Asia, one towards Europe, and one towards India. Thus, Yemen is the cradle of civilization and the cradle of human evolution. After this introduction, he concludes that 'the Zionist West, which has a Zionist engine and its flag is held by America, England, and France,' intends to destroy Yemen for this reason. Therefore, 'we will definitely react' and defend the Yemenis. Thus, he invents a so-called scientific basis—Darwinism—for supporting the Yemenis. Response to the UN Special Rapporteur's Report A significant part of Larijani's speech is his response to the UN Rapporteur. His response is quite thought-provoking. He states: 'Javid Rahman, who has recently become the Special Rapporteur on Iran, is practically a loudspeaker for the Zionist West. A loudspeaker that speaks to us on their behalf.' He also comments on Ahmad Shaheed, saying: 'The former rapporteur Ahmad Shaheed, like an actor, went from one channel to another, positioning against us. He was a person immersed in human desires, and his focus was on two things: women and money. In the Maldives, due to the illegal plurality of wives, which was pursued, his statements were always aligned with the statements from London or the White House.' Javad Larijani tells students and professors that he has five responses or critiques to the UN rapporteurs. Before that, he speaks about the West's double standards, stating: 'The Islamic Republic is the largest democracy in West Asia. Saudi Arabia has not smelled democracy at all.' His five responses are: First—the UN Special Rapporteur lacks legitimacy because the Human Rights Council of the UN that appointed him is itself illegitimate. Second—reporters act as political tricksters, fabricating political cases against Iran. Third—Westerners are racists who consider themselves superior to others. They do not consider adultery a crime. Larijani tells them: 'You who live like animals, why do you consider yourselves the center? At least respect others.' Fourth—the secular-liberal ideology is nothing but coercion. They want to forcibly impose Western secular liberal democracy on everyone. While 'in Iran, democracy exists, elections are held, officials are elected by the people's votes, and we have a democratic mechanism. We have experienced it... The Westerners refuse to acknowledge in any of these reports and documents that Iran has a democratic system and government, why? Because we are not secular. Because our democracy is based on Islamic rationality, and thus we must be pressured. Last year, the European Parliament, under the title 'Strategy for Working with Iran,' wanted to open an office in Iran with the aim of uniting secular forces to potentially change the Islamic system in the future. Where in human rights documents is this allowed to you?... Does a nation in the world not have the right to say I want to build my life based on Islam? They say no, you must build your life based on secularism.' Fifth—groups like the Mojahedin-e Khalq, PJAK, etc., are referred to by Javid Rahman in his report as 'human rights activists.' While 'he should be prosecuted for speaking with terrorists.' He has not spoken with clerics, Hezbollah members, bazaar merchants, and other people in Iran; 'it is dishonorable to only speak with hypocrites.' He has spent a year talking to these terrorist groups and written 470 accusations against Iran, and then he says: 'I want to stay in Iran for 3 days.' Larijani adds that they deny the punishment for blasphemy and insults to prophets under the guise of freedom of expression while simultaneously turning the Holocaust into a sacred matter and punishing its denial. He states that in the third generation of UN human rights documents, a dangerous game is being played under the title of revising concepts. For example, in the concept of marriage, they say a partner can be a man, woman, or animal. We do not accept this, and it has not been voted on. The concept of the right to life has also been expanded to include the right to free access to sex and adultery. Larijani concludes that so far, 4 to 5 special rapporteurs have been appointed for Iran, and we have not accepted any of them. This blessed field is 'defending the school of Ahl al-Bayt.' Javad Larijani's defenses regarding systematic human rights violations in the Islamic Republic are accusations, insults, and ridiculous statements. These defenses, instead of benefiting the Islamic Republic, harm this very system that violates human rights. What kind of justice is based on discrimination? No individual or group can defend the Islamic Republic in any form or manner because discrimination constitutes the foundation of this system, not justice and equality. Human equality is the basis of human rights, and thus justice as the absence of ethnic, religious, sexual, and class discrimination is the foundation of the work.