Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh has strongly denounced an anti-Iran resolution adopted by the UN Human Rights Council with the votes of a group of countries.
In a statement on Wednesday, Khatibzadeh said certain European countries were behind the resolution, which was passed owing to ill-founded, non-consensual, and internationally illegitimate votes.
“This resolution has extended the mandate of a special rapporteur whose reports fail to make any mention of the deaths of dozens of innocent children and hundreds of patients lacking access to medicine and medical equipment, and one who does not care about the blatant violation of the ‘right to live’ and ‘right to access healthcare’ of thousands of Iranian citizens,” he added.
The spokesman said all anti-Iran resolutions adopted by the Human Rights Council since March 2011 have been anchored in one-sided allegations made by the sponsors of the resolution and supporters of the special rapporteur’s agenda against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“Countries that abuse other nations’ rights can neither portray themselves as advocates of human rights, nor can they judge other states on the situation of human rights. They must, instead, be held accountable for their own crimes regarding blatant violations of human rights,” Khatibzadeh noted.
He said some of the main sponsors of the politically-motivated resolution who impose the greatest international pressure on Iran for its human rights situation are in fact among the biggest violators of human rights in the world.
According to Khatibzadeh, these countries impose or implement cruel sanctions against the Iranian nation, sell advanced weaponry to Saudi Arabia [to be used] against the people of Yemen, have strategic cooperation with the Zionist regime against the people of Palestine, and support terrorist groups against the people of Iraq and Syria.
“As repeatedly emphasised earlier, it is basically unjustifiable and non-constructive to appoint a special rapporteur for the human rights situation of a country like Iran.
“Iran has always lived up to its commitments towards its own citizens and the international community despite being subject to US economic terrorism and its cruel pressures,” he added.
The spokesman said Iran is a religious democracy that has strived for and feels committed to the promotion of human rights at national, regional and international levels within the framework of its religious obligations and Constitution.
He said the destructive approach of the sponsors of the anti-Iran resolution have numerous shortcomings including “instrumental and political use of human rights”, “ignoring the values, beliefs and special cultural characteristic of different communities”, “not paying attention to realities as a result of the influence of media fuss and propaganda”, and “ignoring and remaining silent towards the flagrant violations of the Iranian nation’s rights under cruel sanctions.”
“Supporters of this resolution should primarily condemn the US administration’s acts of economic terrorism and escalation of unilateral and oppressive sanctions, and acknowledge how the sanctions impede the Iranian people’s access to basic necessities such as medical supplies at the time of the global pandemic,” Khatibzadeh said.
He said such efforts to portray the plaintiff as the defendant and vice-versa will not yield any result for the sponsors of this resolution.
He then expressed regret over the politicized and instrumental use of human rights and the adoption of double standards on the issue of human rights, which is getting normal.
Khatibzadeh said the quality of the reactions and stances of the resolution sponsors regarding the suppression of recent protests in the US is a good yardstick against which to measure and verify the human rights concerns of this group of countries.
He finally denounced Iceland’s move to draft the anti-Iran resolution at the 46th meeting of the Human Rights Council with the support of certain European countries, saying the resolution was drafted and adopted based on a selective, biased, confrontational, and politically-motivated attitude.