Under whose wing?
The pre-trial investigation into the death of Iranian-Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi raises important questions about dual citizenship and a country's ability to protect its citizens abroad, writes Jaideep Mukerji
A scathing report issued last week by Iran's parliament in connection with the death of Iranian-Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi has been welcomed by Canadian officials as "a positive development". The report accuses Tehran's Prosecutor-General Saeed Mortazavi of hiding facts and intimidating witnesses in the case and calls for a strong international showing to ensure justice is carried out. For months now, Kazemi's death has been at the centre of an intense diplomatic row between Canada and Iran over the extent to which Canada has a right to seek justice in the case.
Kazemi died while in police custody on 10 July 2003 after being arrested for taking pictures of a protest in the Iranian capital of Tehran. Kazemi's lawyers allege that over several days she was subjected to numerous interrogations and routine beatings by officials who accused her of being a spy. After initially blaming Kazemi's death on a stroke, Iranian officials eventually conceded that Kazemi had in fact died from a massive haemorrhage caused by a sharp blow to the head during an interrogation. The Iranian government ordered an investigation into the death, after which Intelligence Ministry Agent Mohamed Reza Aghdam Ahmadi was charged with "quasi-intentional murder". A trial is set to begin on 15 November.
By implicating a high-ranking official like Mortazavi, however, Iran's parliament has added another dimension of scrutiny to the case. Mortazavi is leading a crackdown on the media in Iran and has closed dozens of papers in the last year. French media watchdog Reporters Without Borders recently ranked Iran 160th out of 166 countries for press freedom, noting that dozens of journalists are currently detained in Iranian prisons. With less than two weeks before the start of the Kazemi trial, Iran's parliamentary reformers now seem ready to use the case to push for greater freedom of the press and to challenge government hard-liners.
In Canada, these developments are regarded as a sign that Iran is serious about bringing those responsible for Kazemi's death to justice. Bernard Patry, the chairperson of Canada's Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, told Al-Ahram Weekly that, "The trial is a chance for Iran to show the world that their justice is working," adding that Canada was sending independent observers to monitor the trial. "This case for us is not just a case for one person. It is a case for freedom of expression, freedom of press and freedom in general."
Canada's ability to protect its citizens abroad is also at stake. Although Kazemi was travelling in Iran on her Iranian passport, Canada argues her rights as a Canadian citizen were still in effect. According to international law, however, as an Iranian citizen in Iran, Kazemi was subject to all of Iran's laws, meaning that technically Canada has very little recourse in the matter.
Not so, says Catherine Duhamel, director of the International Legal Resources Centre. Along with a dozen other human rights and legal groups, her organisation is part of a coalition pressuring the Canadian government to take action in the Kazemi case. Duhamel told the Weekly that international law is not static and must adapt to the complexities of mixed nationality.
"As human rights have evolved, the attitude of government towards human rights protection in the special case of dual nationality has also changed," she said. Duhamel feels international law must make a distinction between nationalities, effectively setting one nationality as being predominant over the other. Such dominance should be established based on "where the major interests of that person lie, where that person has been living and where that person's family and important links are," she says. If one applies this principle to the Kazemi case, Duhamel argues that Kazemi's Canadian citizenship was clearly predominant and that Canada therefore has a right -- and an obligation -- to demand justice for Kazemi's death. Duhamel points out that, "We are not denying that Iran has some jurisdiction over [Kazemi], but that they can do anything they want with that person? That is dangerous precedence."
The outcome of the Kazemi case and its impact on dual citizenship has important repercussions for millions of people in the world who hold dual nationality. Duhamel notes that the UN's International Law Commission is currently studying a proposal that would allow the concept of predominant nationality to be used in cases like Kazemi's.
In the meantime, Canada's handling of the case could likewise provide an important precedent. A clear definition of predominant nationality would help countries protect their citizens when they travel to their countries of origin. Perhaps realising this, the European Union and Russia have both lobbied in Iran on Canada's behalf.
As chairperson of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Patry is keenly aware of the implications Kazemi's case presents. "In Canada alone," he says, "there currently 230,000 new immigrants, many of whom are asking for dual citizenship rights. It is quite important that if they go back to their home countries that Canada be able to protect them under dual nationality."
Duhamel says Canada's credibility is on the line in this case. "Canada cannot be pushing for international criminal courts, pushing for human rights to be respected everywhere, but then when one of its own nationals has its human rights violated say 'well, take care of yourself in your country of origin'."
Patry says Canada is doing everything it can. He points out that Canada has already officially requested that the UN special reporter on Human Rights for Iran conduct an investigation into the matter. Kazemi's detention and subsequent torture were in violation of several UN human rights instruments. However, Patry concedes that any UN investigation would require Iran's consent, which seems unlikely given that Iran is conducting its own investigation. For now, all eyes are on Iran and whether the reformers or hard-liners will prevail when the trial gets underway.
