۱۳۹۶ تیر ۵, دوشنبه

U.S. Congress Sponsors Resolution Seeking Justice for MEK Members Massacred by Iran Regime in 1988




 U.S. Congress Sponsors Resolution Seeking Justice for MEK Members Massacred by Iran Regime in 1988
Iran Focus
London, 22 Jun - Forty-Six US Congressmen and women have sponsored a resolution which calls on the US Government and its allies across the world to publically condemn the 1988 massacre of Iranian political prisoners and calls on the UN to launch an investigation into this crime against humanity.
Unlike much in Congress nowadays, Resolution 188 (officially titled: The condemnation of the Iranian government for the massacre of political prisoners in 1988 and the invitation to call for justice for the victims) receives wide bipartisan support.
The main victims of the massacre were members of the People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI/MEK), an anti-fundamentalist group who espoused equal rights, a secular government and a ban on the death penalty, whom the Regime wanted to exterminate because the opposition was becoming too strong.
The resolution stipulates that those responsible for the brutal massacre of the MEK should be held to account for their roles. None of them have ever been punished for this slaughter, not even under the supposed moderate Hassan Rouhani; who interestingly cannot account for his whereabouts during the massacre.
Last year, the Iranian Resistance, which includes the MEK as its largest group, revealed the names of 59 current Regime officials who were involved in the massacre of the MEK, including “Justice” Minister Mostafa Pourmohammadi. Head of the Supreme Disciplinary Court for Judges Hossein-Ali Nayyeri, and Ebrahim Raisi, a member of the Assembly of Experts and 2017 presidential candidate.


Some of the co-sponsors include:
• Michael McCaul (Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee)
• Ed Royce (Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee)
• Eliot Engel (ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee)
• Pete Sessions (the Chair of House Rules Committee)
• Barbara Comstock
• Tom MacClintock
• Bill Keating
• Brad Sherman
• Donald Young
• Judy Chu
Back in March, six human rights organisations who consult with the UN signed a joint statement calling for justice for the MEK titled: “The 1988 massacre of political prisoners in Iran constitutes a crime against humanity”.
They recommended that the UN appoint a commission to investigate the massacre of the MEK and that the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Iran, Asma Jahangir and Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, Pablo de Greiff, carry out an inquiry into the massacre.


Massacre of MEK
Then-Supreme Leader of Iran, Ruhollah Khomeini ordered a Fatwa to slaughter MEK members and supporters, even if they had already been sentenced to jail for their beliefs or already served their sentence in full.
The MEK supporters were put through a mock trial which lasted all of five minutes, where they were asked ‘What is your political affiliation?’ before being sentenced to death. They were then buried in secret mass graves and their families were given no information on them.
This move was criticised by then-heir to the supreme leader Hossein Ali Montazeri, who wanted the Death Commissions against executing pregnant women as it violated Shiite law and called the massacre "the greatest crime that the Islamic Republic of Iran has committed and the history will condemn us".
He was then stripped of his power and sentenced to house arrest until his death in 2009. His comments came to light last year, after his son, Ahmad, released the audio of the conversation online. Ahmad was then sentenced to 21 years in prison.
In February, a political science professor at Tehran State University, who supported President Rouhani admitted to the massacre on his website.
Sadegh Zibakalam wrote: “The Iranian regime, has killed thousands of MEK members just like killers of Imam Hossain (a 7th-century revolutionary Shiite leader who made the ultimate sacrifice for social justice in the face of corruption and tyranny). Thousands of members of the People's Mujahedeen opposition organisation (MEK) were killed without any trial and any proof of the crime on them, during the first years after the revolution.”
More about the People’s Mojahdin Organization of Iran (PMOI/ MEK)

The People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (Also known as MEK, or Mujahedin-e-Khalq / Mujahedeen-e-Khalq), was founded on September 6, 1965, by Mohammad Hanifnejad, Saeed Mohsen, and Ali-Asghar Badizadgan. All engineers, they had earlier been members of the Freedom Movement (also known as the Liberation Movement), created by Medhi Bazargan in May 1961.1
The MEK’s quest culminated in a true interpretation of Islam, which is inherently tolerant and democratic, and fully compatible with the values of modern-day civilization. It took six years for the MEK to formulate its view of Islam and develop a strategy to replace Iran’s dictatorial monarchy with a democratic government.
MEK’s interpretation of Islam
The theocratic mullah regime in Iran believe interpreting Islam is their exclusive domain. The MEK reject this view and the cleric’s reactionary vision of Islam. The MEK’s comprehensive interpretation of Islam proved to be more persuasive and appealing to the Iranian youth.
MEK’s founders and new members studied the various schools of thought, the Iranian history and those of other countries, enabling them to analyze other philosophies and ideologies with considerable knowledge and to present their own ideology, based on Islam, as the answer to Iran’s problems.
MEK’s leadership’s arrest during the 70s.
The Shah’s notorious secret police, SAVAK, arrested all MEK leaders and most of its member’s in1971. On May 1972, the founders of the MEK, Mohammad Hanifnejad , Saeed Mohsen and Ali Asghar Badizadegan, along with two members of the MEK leadership, Mahmoud Askarizadeh and Rasoul Meshkinfam, were put before death squads and were executed after long months of imprisonment and torture.
They were the true vanguards, who stood against the dictatorial regime of Shah. However, they are also recognized for their opposition to what is today known as Islamic fundamentalism.
Kazem Rajavi

The death sentence of Massoud Rajavi, a member of MEK’s central committee, was commuted to life imprisonment as a result of an international campaign by his Geneva based brother, Dr. Kazem Rajavi (assassinated in April 1990 in Geneva by mullahs’ agents) and the personal intervention of the French President Georges Pompidou and Francois Mitterrand. He was the only survivor of the MEK original leadership.

Massoud Rajavi’s critical role in characterizing religious extremism
Massoud Rajavi
From 1975 to 1979, while incarcerated in different prisons, Massoud Rajavi led the MEK’s struggle while constantly under torture for his leading position.
Massoud Rajavi stressed the need to continue the struggle against the shah’s dictatorship. At the same time, he characterized religious fanaticism as the primary internal threat to the popular opposition, and warned against the emergence and growth of religious fanaticism and autocracy. He also played a crucial role when some splinter used the vacuum in the MEK leadership who were all executed or imprisoned at the time, to claim a change of ideology and policy. Massoud Rajavi as the MEK leader condemn these individual’s misuse of MEK’s name while continuing to stress the struggle against dictatorship. His efforts while still in prison forced these individuals to no longer operating under the name of MEK and adopting a different name for their group. These positions remained the MEK’s manifesto until the overthrow of the shah’s regime.
Release of Political Prisoners on the last days of the Shah

A month before the 1979 revolution in Iran, the Shah was forced to flee Iran, never to return. All democratic opposition leaders had by then either been executed by the Shah’s SAVAK or imprisoned, and could exert little influence on the trend of events. Khomeini and his network of mullahs across the country, who had by and large been spared the wrath of SAVAK, were the only force that remained unharmed and could take advantage of the political vacuum. In France, Khomeini received maximum exposure to the world media. With the aid of his clerical followers, he hijacked a revolution that began with calls for democracy and freedom and diverted it towards his fundamentalist goals. Through an exceptional combination of historical events, Shiite clerics assumed power in Iran.
Khomeini’s gradual crackdown on MEK in fear of their popular support
In internal discourses, Rajavi the remaining leader of the MEK, argued that Khomeini represented the reactionary sector of society and preached religious fascism. Later, in the early days after the 1979 revolution, the mullahs, specifically Rafsanjani, pointed to these statements in inciting the hezbollahi club-wielders to attack the MEK.
Following the revolution, the MEK became Iran’s largest organized political party. It had hundreds of thousands of members who operated from MEK offices all over the country. MEK publication, ‘Mojahed’ was circulated in 500,000 copies.
Khomeini set up an Assembly of Experts comprised of sixty of his closest mullahs and loyalists to ratify the principle of velayat-e faqih (absolute supremacy of clerical rule) as a pillar of the Constitution. The MEK launched a nationwide campaign in opposition to this move, which enjoyed enormous popular support. Subsequently, the MEK refused to approve the new constitution based on the concept of velayat-e faqih, while stressing its observance of the law of the country to deny the mullahs any excuse for further suppression of MEK supporters who were regularly targeted by the regime’s official and unofficial thugs.
Khomeini sanctioned the occupation of the United States embassy in 1979 in order to create an anti-American frenzy, which facilitated the holding of a referendum to approve his Constitution, which the MEK rejected.
MEK’s endeavors to participate in the political process avoiding an unwanted conflict with government repressive forces
The MEK actively participated in the political process, fielding candidates for the parliamentary and presidential elections. The MEK also entered avidly into the national debate on the structure of the new Islamic regime, though was unsuccessful in seeking an elected constituent assembly to draft a constitution.
The MEK similarly made an attempt at political participation when [then] Massoud Rajavi ran for the presidency in January 1980. MEK’s leader was forced to withdraw when Khomeini ruled that only candidates who had supported the constitution in the December referendum – which the MEK had boycotted- were eligible. Rajavi’s withdrawal statement emphasized the MEK’s efforts to conform to election regulations and reiterated the MEK’s intention to advance its political aims within the new legal system”. (Unclassified report on the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran(PMOI/ MEK) by the Department of State to the United States House of Representatives, December 1984.)
However, the MEK soon found itself in a direct struggle against the forces of the regime’s Supreme leader. The MEK’s differences with Khomeini dated back to the 1970s, and stem from its opposition to what is known today as Islamic extremism. Angry at the position taken by the MEK against his regime and worried about the MEK’s growing popularity, Khomeini ordered a brutal crackdown against the MEK and its supporters. Between 1979 and 1981, some 70 MEK members and sympathizers were killed and several thousand more were imprisoned by the Iranian regime.
June 20, 1981- Khomeini’s order to open fire on peaceful demonstration of half-a-million supporters of MEK

The turning point came on 20th June 1981, when the MEK called a demonstration to protest at the regime’s crackdown, and to call for political freedom which half-a-million supporters participated at. Khomeini ordered the Revolutionary Guards to open fire on the swelling crowd, fearing that without absolute repression the democratic opposition (MEK) would force him to engage in serious reforms – an anathema as far as he was concerned; he ordered the mass and summary executions of those arrested.
Since then, MEK activists have been the prime victims of human rights violations in Iran. Over 120,000 of its members and supporters have been executed by the Iranian regime, 30,000 of which, were executed in a few months in the summer of 1988, on a direct fatwa by Khomeini, which stated any prisoners who remain loyal to the MEK must be executed.
Having been denied its fundamental rights and having come under extensive attack at the time that millions of its members, supporters and sympathizers had no protection against the brutal onslaught of the Iranian regime, the MEK had no choice but to resist against the mullahs’ reign of terror.
“Towards the end of 1981, many of the members of the MEK and supporters went into exile. Their principal refuge was in France. But in 1986, after negotiations between the French and the Iranian authorities, the French government effectively treated them as undesirable aliens, and the leadership of the MEK with several thousand followers relocated to Iraq.” (Judgment of the Proscribed Organizations Appeal Commission, November 30, 2007.)
MEK Today
The MEK today is the oldest and largest anti-fundamentalist Muslim group in the Middle East. It has been active for more than a half century, battling two dictatorships and a wide range of issues. The MEK supports:


• Universal suffrage as the sole criterion for legitimacy
• Pluralistic system of governance
• Respect for individual freedoms
• Ban on the death penalty
• Separation of religion and state
• Full gender equality
• Equal participation of women in political leadership. MEK is actually led by its central committee consist of 1000 women.

• Modern judicial system that emphasizes the principle of innocence, a right to a defense, and due process
• Free markets
• Relations with all countries in the world
• Commitment to a non-nuclear Iran
The MEK remains a strong and cohesive organization, with a broad reach both worldwide and deep within Iran. MEK is the leading voice for democracy in Iran, supported by its interpretation of Islam that discredits the fundamentalist mullahs’ regime.