In an interview with Medya News, Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi delves into her profound concerns regarding the imprisonment of Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leader Abdullah Öcalan and the systemic imprisonment of women in Iran. Ebadi, a staunch advocate for human rights and, prior to 1979, the first woman to head a court in Iran, discusses her motivations for supporting the campaign to release Öcalan, highlighting the broader implications for resolving ethnic tensions in the Middle East. She also sheds light on the inadequacies of international law in safeguarding human rights in general, drawing parallels with the plight of women activists in Iran.
The full interview is given below, lightly edited for clarity:
Mrs Ebadi, what factors motivated you to participate in the campaign to sign a letter for the release of Mr Öcalan, whose release is closely connected to the potential for a solution to the Kurdish issue in the Middle East?
As a staunch defender of human rights, I firmly believe that human rights issues transcend borders. It is crucial to respond to any incident leading to human rights violations, regardless of where it may occur. When my fellow Nobel laureates asked me to sign the petition in support of Öcalan, I readily accepted their invitation. In my view, Öcalan’s arrest, the manner of his trial, his prolonged political and social isolation, and the denial of regular leave, which every prisoner should be entitled to, constitute serious human rights violations. That is why I signed the letter.
From your point of view, to what extent could resolving the issues related to Mr Öcalan’s release from prison in Turkey help to reduce ethnic, sectarian and religious tensions in the Middle East?
When a person is wronged and his rights are violated, the conscience of society feels the pain. From my point of view, Öcalan will only be free when he is sitting at the negotiation table. Solving problems through dialogue can certainly help a lot in resolving ethnic tensions in the Middle East. Considering a historical trend, a question is raised; since Öcalan’s arrest and imprisonment, have the ethnic tensions in the Middle East and especially in Turkey decreased? No, the tensions still continue as on the first day. In order to solve the ethnic tensions, at some point we should come to the belief that we need to sit at the negotiation table and talk to solve the issues. You know, in such cases, the conflicting parties cannot obtain their maximum demands, but each of the parties must give up some of their demands in order to reach a fair agreement. Other than choosing this path, I don’t see any other solution to resolve the ethnic tensions in the Middle East, including the Balochs, the Arabs, etc. Because it is only through negotiation and accepting the middle ground of the parties’ demands that some kind of understanding can be achieved.
I remember that many years ago, you said that intellectuals, scholars and reformists can guide societies toward the rule of law and provide correct interpretations of laws. As you know, Mr Öcalan’s strategic aim is to achieve peace in the Middle East, foster coexistence among Middle Eastern nations and peoples, and respect differences among them. In your opinion, why has the intellectual and peaceful view of Mr Öcalan been met with stubborn resistance from the Turkish government?
Such issues should not be resolved behind the bars of prisons but at the negotiation table. When talking about peace… you can’t talk about peace at the same time [as the main interlocutors are in prison]. Peace and achieving it become meaningful when a person who has been oppressed and imprisoned because of his beliefs is freed, and is able to solve problems at the negotiation table. I believe that the Kurdish issue in Turkey, in Iran, in Syria and in the whole Middle East can be solved through dialogue and negotiation. We must remember that violence reproduces violence. A slap is answered with a slap. Violence and the continuation of violence cannot solve the problem. Only negotiation should be emphasised.
Mrs Ebadi, considering your expertise in judicial procedures, why have European states, the main human rights institutions, despite their commitments to human rights principles, not been able to prevent the continuing hegemony of politics over the judicial apparatus and human rights procedures in relation to the isolation and freedom of Mr Öcalan?
In general, I have no hope that European states will solve the problems. Because these states make decisions based on economic interests, and human rights are not of primary importance to them. This issue can be seen even in the relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Europe. We have no hope in them. But regarding what action human rights institutions can take, human rights institutions can only protest and inform the public about the events occurring in society. For example; the United Nations can only issue a resolution on this matter. But we all know that such resolutions do not carry an executive guarantee. For example, the UN cannot solve a problem even by issuing ten resolutions, and this is one of the weak points of international law. International law needs many changes in order to strengthen human rights practices. In order to eliminate the violation of human rights at a global level, international law needs to have an executive guarantee.
As an expert in human rights, do you have any suggestions for addressing the shortcomings of international law in ensuring they are respected and protected?
I will give an example. Russia has attacked Ukraine. This attack was a clear violation of international law. This aggression was raised at the UN Security Council; but in practice, it was observed that Russia, the aggressor country, vetoed this resolution because Russia has the right of veto in the council. When I talk about the lack of executive guarantee in international law, I am referring to this issue. This is why I emphasise that international law needs a fundamental transformation. Despite these problems, we should not be disappointed with current international law. In this regard, the defenders of human rights continuously have to emphasise the implementation of human rights issues, in order to get the principles of human rights gradually accepted and implemented in the practical procedures of international law. It should become a part of international ethics, so that no one can violate the fundamentals of human rights or, in case anyone does violate them, they should face the consequences. There is criticism of the current state of human rights and Mr Öcalan’s situation not only because of the lack of attention and disregard for Mr Öcalan but also because human rights do not have executive guarantees.
Mr Öcalan’s ideas are also known in Iran, and during the uprising of Jin Jiyan Azadî (Woman, Life, Freedom), his discourse resonated with the masses in Iran. From your point of view, what effect could the solution of the Kurdish issue in Turkey – and the way it interweaves with Mr Öcalan’s freedom – have on the countries of the region, including Iran, and the elimination of discrimination even in Iran?
The Jin Jiyan Azadî movement in Iran took place with the murder of a girl named [Jina] Mahsa Amini, an Iranian Kurd. The people of Iran united in protest against her murder, and this slogan was spontaneously chanted at her funeral. I know that the Jin Jiyan Azadî slogan had been used before in some countries, including Turkey. This slogan resonates universally, especially if a society values respect for women, demands freedom, and seeks a normal life. It is welcomed everywhere. The emergence of this slogan in Turkey and the fact that it aligns with the things Mr Öcalan says, mean it embodies significant values. Regardless of who uses this slogan, it represents ideals appreciated worldwide. Following the killing of a young Kurdish girl, this slogan gained global traction, particularly among international feminists.
Mrs Ebadi, you were the first woman to become the head of the court in Iran. You were also among the first women to experience the bitter experience of discrimination after the Iranian revolution in 1979. From your point of view, to what extent can the hidden values in the discourse of Jin Jiyan Azadî be effective in removing not only discrimination against women, but also patriarchal and religious hierarchies?
From my point of view, the basis of what the people of Iran and all the residents of the Middle East are demanding is hidden in the norms and values of the Jin Jiyan Azadî slogan, because in the Middle Eastern countries, including Iran, women have always been discriminated against. Where there is a desire for life with human dignity and freedom, that long-standing desire of humankind, a life in which human beings can freely demonstrate their human values, such a slogan will be welcomed without a doubt. I hope that the people of the Middle East will be able to achieve this long-standing dream.
Sharifeh Mohammadi and Pakhshan Azizi are among the women who have tried to promote the discourse of Jin Jiyan Azadî, and have recently been sentenced to death by the Iranian courts. To what extent can the efforts and cooperation of personalities like yourself be fruitful in preventing the execution of the rulings against these women?
As you said, two courageous Iranian women have been sentenced to death for advocating equality, feminist demands and freedom. Many in Iran have vigorously protested against these harsh sentences. Even the women imprisoned in Evin prison, where Pakhshan Azizi is held, staged a two-day sit-in to protest against the death sentences, and have continued to demonstrate on subsequent Thursdays. The women’s fellow inmates have protested inside Evin prison, while numerous activists have written letters, submitted petitions and organised protests outside the prison. These actions have extended to European capitals, where demonstrators have gathered outside Iranian embassies to oppose the executions and the broader injustices. I hope these widespread protests will compel the Iranian government to revoke these severe sentences. It is crucial to note that the Iranian people are committed to non-violent struggle. Their ongoing civil struggle has already led to significant change even if it takes time to achieve its aims. The Iranian government in 2024 is markedly different from that of forty years ago, and this reflects a considerable loss of its former power. This shift is a direct result of the persistent, peaceful efforts of the Iranian people.
As one of the signatories of the letter and a protester against the shortcomings of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT), how hopeful are you about the effects of the letter in reducing the restrictions imposed on Mr Öcalan and his freedom?
I remain hopeful. Losing hope means losing the drive to take action. I am naturally optimistic because nothing can be achieved without hope. Therefore, I believe in the power of continued peaceful efforts and their potential impact. We must keep faith that justice will eventually prevail.
Thank you, Mrs Ebadi. If you have any additional words, we would love to hear them.
I wish for the release of Mr Öcalan and all political and intellectual prisoners around the world.
