Statement of the International Organisation to Preserve Human Rights (IOPHR)
IOPHR expresses its deep concern regarding recent developments within the structures affiliated with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), where representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran have been nominated to assume roles in bodies and commissions related to sensitive areas such as human rights, women’s rights, and disarmament, and have been approved through a consensus-based process without any formally recorded objection.
This is deeply concerning and appalling. Following the recent mass killing of civilians, it raises serious questions as to how such appointments are being permitted at all, and how member states have allowed this process to proceed without formally opposing it.
While such appointments are typically conducted within the framework of regional allocations, the very nature of these commissions, directly linked to human dignity, the rights of women, and international security, requires that states act with a heightened sense of responsibility and principled commitment regarding their composition and leadership. In this context, the manner in which states respond to such nominations becomes a critical measure of their adherence to human rights values.
IOPHR notes the role of the United Kingdom, Spain, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia, Switzerland, Austria, and Finland, all of which have consistently presented themselves as defenders of human rights and, on numerous occasions, have voiced criticism regarding the human rights situation in Iran.
However, a fundamental question arises: why did these same countries, at such a critical juncture, refrain from adopting a clear and active position, instead settling for a passive approach and declining to formally register their opposition? Is silence in such decisive moments consistent with their declared commitments to human rights? And does such silence not, in practice, contribute to the erosion of the very principles they claim to uphold?
IOPHR emphasises that within multilateral mechanisms, the absence of opposition cannot be regarded as neutral; rather, it carries tangible and consequential effects. Such an approach, even if unintended, risks undermining the credibility of international institutions and weakening public trust in the global human rights system.
IOPHR calls upon the aforementioned states to adopt transparent, responsible, and principled positions when confronted with decisions that directly affect fundamental human rights. The defence of human rights is measured not merely by stated positions, but by actions taken at critical moments.
IOPHR reaffirms the necessity of transparency, accountability, and the avoidance of double standards, and declares that it will continue to closely monitor and responsibly report on such developments.