Pages

Monday 20 December 2010

Guardian: From discrimination to death – being gay in Iran








Ahmadinejad caused hilarity when he said gay people don't exist in Iran. But his regime's treatment of them is no joke

It is now more than three years since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made his famous claim during a visit to New York: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like you do in your country. This does not exist in our country."

His words caused laughter among the audience at Columbia University but – unintentionally on Ahmadinejad's part – they have probably done more than anything else to raise awareness in the west of the problems faced by sexual minorities in Iran.

Unfortunately, the LGBT issue – epitomised by the notorious photograph of two male teenagers being hanged – has also been embraced unscrupulously by some, in the hope of bolstering support for a military attack which has entirely different goals and motives. This, in turn, leads to accusations from the other side that anyone who complains about the treatment of LGBT people is simply picking on Iran and trying to start a war.

Regardless of motives, though, it's a fact that Iran's treatment of sexual minorities is bad and, by international standards, somewhere near the bottom of the league. It is one of only seven countries worldwide that retains the death penalty for consensual same-sex acts (the others are Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan and some parts of Somalia and Nigeria).

But disappointingly for those who like to keep things ultra-simple, the picture is not uniformly black. Small numbers of Iranians (mainly in the middle and upper classes) identify themselves as gay or lesbian, and some are surprisingly open about it. There are also embryonic LGBT communities in major cities, such as Tehran, Esfahan, and Shiraz, with well-known cafes, restaurants and parks that serve as meeting places.
Despite what Ahmadinejad says about their non-existence, gay men get official recognition of sorts when it comes to military service. They can claim exemption on grounds of "behavioural disorder" or "sexual deviancy" (without admitting to ever having sex, of course) – and many do. They may be quite pleased about avoiding the military, though of course it's a form of discrimination and the downside is that having "sexual deviant" on their exemption certificate is likely to prevent them from getting a job.

Iran has also been something of a pioneer in the field of gender reassignment operations, which might count in its favour – except that gay men who are not transgendered can be pressurised into having operations in order to avoid punishment.
All this has led to a lot of arguments about what the LGBT situation in Iran is really like – an argument that hasn't been helped, up to now, by a lack of detailed or reliable information.

A report issued today by Human Rights Watch, running to 102 pages and based on testimony from more than 100 Iranians, goes a long way towards remedying that problem. One thing it makes very clear is that the persecution of sexual minorities in Iran is not just the fault of the regime: it happens in homes, schools and society at large – though of course the law helps to reinforce these attitudes.

On the vexed question of how many gay or lesbian people are actually executed, the report does not commit itself, though it does explain why it's so difficult to arrive at an accurate figure.

One reason is that trials on moral charges in Iran are usually held in private and the regime, conscious of the international outrage that its executions cause, tightly controls press reporting of the death penalty. Also, Human Rights Watch says, "the conservative nature of Iranian society and the shame associated with homosexuality (and non-conforming sexual or gender expression generally) often complicate any inquiry into whether the individual charged is actually an LGBT person".

A further complication is that Iranians who have been convicted of lavat (sodomy) and then executed have rarely, if ever, been charged solely with that crime. The report continues:

"In most cases the court also convicted them on other charges, some of which carry the death penalty … In several notable death-penalty cases during the past decade, the government charged defendants with a variety of sexual crimes warranting the death penalty, including, for example, sodomy, adultery, or rape. In at least some cases, Iranian prosecutors have included serious moral or sex charges when prosecuting individuals primarily for political reasons."
Iranian law does not target LGBT people per se; it criminalises all sexual relations outside traditional marriage, though the report says that in practice the law is applied disproportionately to Iran's sexual minorities.
The punishments are severe. Lavat is punishable by death where a judge determines that penetration was involved.

For lesser "crimes" there's flogging. Tafkhiz (frottage) is punishable by 100 lashes for each partner (with death for a fourth conviction). "Lustful" kissing between two men or two women is punishable by up to 60 lashes, while if two men or two women who are "not related by blood are found naked under the same cover without any necessity" each will receive up to 99 lashes.
The punishment for women convicted of lesbianism, or mosaheqeh, is 100 lashes, with death for a fourth conviction.

Regardless of whether such acts ought to be treated as crimes in the first place, correct application of Iranian law should make it very difficult to convict anyone – at least in theory.

Securing a conviction requires four "righteous men" to testify that they have witnessed the act (highly unlikely unless it's done in public in broad daylight). Alternatively, it requires four confessions by the accused in front of a judge (again unlikely unless the confession is forced, and even then there's scope for a pardon if the accused repents) or, finally, a ruling based on the judge's "knowledge" (which is supposedly derived from evidence and not just a personal belief that the accused looks guilty).

In practice, though, "those charged with engaging in consensual same-sex offences stand little chance of receiving a fair trial", Human Rights Watch says. Judges "often rely instead on confessions extracted through physical torture and extreme psychological pressure", while the "judge's knowledge" provision "makes it easy in practice for a judge's individual prejudices toward a defendant's appearance or demeanour [to] sway his rulings".

No comments: