UN Special Rapporteur Report on Iran’s Human Rights Abuses

The UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Iran, Dr. Ahmad Shaheed, is included below. When the interim report was announced last year it sent ripples through diplomatic and human rights channels.

Iran’s human rights violations are many, the section below (section F) highlights the plight of Baha’is. At the bottom you can view and download the report in full.

F. Unrecognized religious communities

59. The Special Rapporteur continues to be alarmed by communications that demonstrate the systemic and systematic persecution of members of unrecognized religious communities, particularly the Baha’i community, in violation of international conventions. Moreover, the Government’s tolerance of an intensive defamation campaign meant to incite discrimination and hate against Baha’is violates its obligations as set out in article 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. According to one report, 440 instances of slanderous speech against Baha’is were published or broadcasted in the past two years. One such article, posted by the Rasa news agency on 8 March 2011, accused the Baha’i community of attempting to subvert Islam.

60. Baha’is continue to be arbitrarily arrested and detained for their beliefs, in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In a report submitted to the Special Rapporteur, it was alleged that 474 Baha’is had been arrested since August 2004. Of that number, 97 were currently imprisoned (see annex, table IV); 199 had been released on bail and were awaiting trial; 26 had been released without bail; 96 had been tried and sentenced, and free pending appeal or summons to begin serving their sentences; 34 had been tried and sentenced and had completed their prison terms and/or paid a fine; 14 sentences had been overturned on appeal; and 5 Baha’is had served their prison sentences and begun their terms of internal exile. An additional 35 arrests were reportedly made between August and November 2011.

61. Baha’is are subjected to severe socio-economic pressure, in violation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; in some cases, they have been deprived of property, employment and education. In recent months, for example, 10 shops and a well owned by Baha’is in two cities in Semnan Province were sealed by the authorities. Moreover, copies of several unsettling Government documents dating back to 1991 prescribe deprivation of education, the establishment of an office to counteract Baha’i publications, the denial of “positions of influence” to them and the trades prohibited for them. One Baha’i student reported in an interview that 800 Baha’is were denied university admission the year that his application was denied. In addition, several Baha’is recently arrested were affiliated with the Baha’i Institute for Higher Education (BIHE), which is a university designed to educate Iranian Baha’is that are excluded from education.

  • Baquia

     wahid, you are far too intelligent for me to attempt to explain how the Baha’i Faith is in no way even in the same universe of comparison to “a Salafist organization committed to the creation of an Islamist state”. The Baha’is in Iran just want to be allowed to live their lives as free citizens of Iran and have repeatedly shown by their actions and words that they are happy to live within the civil laws of the country and have no political intentions.

  • http://wahidazal.blogspot.com/ wahidazal66

     The Haifan Baha’i apparatus in Iran and its activites are as much a national security threat to Iran as a Salafist organization committed to jihad and an Islamist state would be in any Western society. They are absolutely analogous relationships. Baha’ism’s internationalism and globalist commitments are one; Baha’ism’s own theocratic commitments are another as is the closest political proximity of the Haifan Baha’i establishment to the Anglo-American and Israeli estabishments, Washington/London lobbies, and specifically the North American foundation regimes such as the NED, AIPAC and the Project for a New American Century. Individual Baha’is by and large were left alone in Iran for a while, and the Baha’i community somewhat thrived during the Rafsanjani and Khatami years (1989-2005). The fact that an ad hoc NSA existed in the form of the Ma’arif-cum-Yaran in Iran until recently for all these years is proof. The fact that there was serious Baha’i investment pouring into provinces like Mazandaran (around Nur and Takur) is another. Now the fact is the Haifan Baha’i apparatus took serious liberties and reneged on promises and undertakings it had made to the state earlier, which is why once the hardliners took the presidency under Ahmadinejad the state clamped down again. But the fact remains that Haifan Baha’i ideology wishes 1) to convert Muslims to Baha’ism and 2) wishes to turn Iran into a Baha’i state. Given this, Haifan Baha’ism, at least, is very much a political organization whose agenda and foreign alliances are explicitly a threat against the IR state and its national security (and, I would argue, any future post-IR state in Iran as well). Currently you people are expending millions of dollars in paying professional lobbyists to promote your human rights issues, and generally to promote your creed/cult in the corporate Western media. This promotion is done exclusively  because your organization and the propaganda it diffuses plays right into the hands of both Israel as well as those forces in Britain and the USA who wish to start a war against Iran. Your issues are not as innocent as you portray them. You are pawns in the 21st Century Great Game.

  • Baquia

    Wahid, we get it. You don’t like the Baha’i Faith – in fact it is clear you hate it. Valuing freedom of expression as a right, you’ve had complete leeway write all you wanted and to link to you site. However I’m not sure that such an indulgence has been wise since what you write is not only incorrect, it dangerously approaches hate speech.
    There are so many false assertions it is beyond my quota of patience to refute them all here but it would be obvious to any reasonable observer that:
    Baha’is have been consistently persecuted in Iran they did not “somewhat thrive” during 1989-2005. The IRI mandated the dissolution of the NSA of Iran, the Baha’is acquiesced and with their permission appointed the Yaran to administer the affairs of their community. IRI changed its mind and jailed them a few years later.
    Baha’is have no political designs on Iran or any other country – the Writings specifically outline separation of “Church and State”.
    Baha’is raise awareness about the human rights abuses perpetrated on Iranian Baha’is but it is wrong to characterize it as “expending millions to lobbyists”. A good example of a grass-roots campaign is Education Under Fire.
    These pseudo-allegations are without merit or evidence and therefore more apt from an uneducated Mullah in a small village in Karaj than a person of your education and background.
    Wahid, as a fellow human being concerned for your well-being I respectfully suggest that you re-examine the perpetual cultivation of hate within yourself as it can lead to some really ugly consequences.

  • http://wahidazal.blogspot.com/ wahidazal66

    Baquia, like most Haifan Baha’i apologists diffusing propaganda instead of facts, and like Zionists who hide behind the Holocaust that happened ’70s years ago while slaughtering millions of Arabs today, you are speaking total nonsense! Thankfully I am also not in Canada where PC fascists can hide behind silly laws, or where you can scare me with those laws, while running away from answering uncomfortable facts by calling it hate-speech. Sorry that ZioNazi game of yelling hate-speech in a crowded threatre doesn’t work anymore and there are more people clued in to these silly tactics who don’t buy it than do anymore. Now if you want to correct my “false assertions,” go right ahead with facts rather than propaganda. Firstly, Sen McGlinn’s book (a pseudo-intellectual piece of tripe) is not a consensus piece, and it is certainly not the views shared by the Haifan Baha’i offiociocracy or the majority of Haifan Baha’is, and furthemore Sen McGlinn is not an enrolled Baha’i, so quoting his views as consensus is typical liberal Baha’i intellectual dishonesty. FYI, the Yaran was the ad hoc NSA of Iran! I am not talking about the 1980 NSA. Finally, instead of commenting on my wellbeing, be concerned about your own collective well-being should AmeriKKKa and IsraHell start a war with Iran where Iranians start getting hurt due to something you cultists explicitly lobbied your Washington and City of London patrons for!

  • Desir0101

     Hi Baquia,
     One thing we must not forget that the Bahai faith has been built up upon the Babi religion, which is another debate, but don’t forget that the Babi movement who  started the attacks on the then government, perpetrating atrocities on the innocent population, attempted murder on the government leader and the uprisings, the heresies. And the action have met with the reaction.
    The Babi movement encourage war and destruction.
    I am sure you know better than me the famous Dawn Breakers Narrative or any reliable source.
    So if the Bahai movement has it’s foundation rocked on the Babi ones it’s obvious that the former will suffer at the hand of any present ruling government. Babi and Bahai form one identity. may be someone will say the contrary.

    I don’t think that Bahais and institution are that bad or spies but they only lack of spirituality.
    They are arrogant people, boasting to much of themselves and always abase other belief and shunning of non conformist.
    And thus God have deprived them of the gift of wisdom and spirituality.
    Religion can’t be imposed and take control of people life as in the Bahai faith.

    As the headquarters are in Israel it will be legitimate that the Iranian govt. will prosecute the Bahais.

    Man is born free but are every where in fetters and chains.

    Regards.

  • Barbruthw

    Hi Baquia -

    How do you see this “clarification” from the UHJ fitting in with the interpretation of “church and state” in Sen’s book?

  • Barbruthw

    Oops, forgot to in include the link in my reply to Baquia below   http://bahai-library.com/?file=uhj_theocracy

  • Baquia

    Wahid, your reference to Section 13 of the HRC is a non-sequitur. This is not a public domain but a personal website. You can write whatever you want on your own blog.
    You deal in empty assertions, innuendo and smears. There are no facts presented that need to be refuted – refined vitriol devoid of any redeeming qualities. This is why it borders on hate speech in my view.
    It is irrelevant what Sen’s membership status is or is not. His book stands on its own as an academic work that uses sources and citations to prove beyond a doubt the division of Church and state within Baha’i docrine.

  • Baquia

    The Babi movement most certainly did not “encourage war and destruction” – it allowed for self-defense. Bahau’llah then mitigated this injunction and told Baha’is that it would be better to die as martyrs than to kill others in self-defense. For more see, We Have Annulled the Rule of the Sword

    The attempted assassination of the Shah was the stupid idea of a few Babis and can not be used to smear the religion just as we do not judge all of Christianity by the atrocious conduct of the loonies in the Westboro Baptist church or judge Islam by Osama bin Ladan and company.

    The placement of the Baha’i world center in Israel most certainly does legitimize in any way whatsoever the persecution of Baha’is in Iran. First, when it was established, Israel as a state did not even exist! This preposterous link has been used by the Mullahs in Iran to cast Baha’is as “spies” for many years and it is simply false.

    No matter how much we may agree or disagree with the policies of the current Baha’i administration, it in no way provides a license to the IRI to persecute the Baha’is in Iran. This is a matter of human rights and I hope that we would protect the rights of everyone, no matter if we agree with their viewpoints or not.

  • Baquia

    Barbruthw, this letter was discussed on Talisman last year and Sen had this to say:

    The National Assembly statement which the Guardian was commenting on through his secretary in the December 11, 1935 letter was a general letter sent to all local spiritual assemblies on October 8, 1935. Most of the statement in the Baha’i World Vol. VI, pp. 198-202 consists of the October 8, 1935 letter but **they added the third and fourth paragraphs.**

    It is these paragraphs which contain the NSA’s misleading words about Church and State. The version which the Guardian saw and approved was only about membership of churches and the like. So he never had the chance to advise them on the wording of the last paragraphs.

    There was more to the discussion and there were another separate reference to it in 2010 also. Since you are a member you can view them in full glorious detail by searching the archives of Talisman.

  • Barbruthw

     thanks, Baquia – somehow I missed that, or had forgotten it.

  • Desir0101

     Hi Baquia,

    Baquia say “”No matter how much we may agree or disagree with the policies of the
    current Baha’i administration, it in no way provides a license to the
    IRI to persecute the Baha’is in Iran. This is a matter of human rights
    and I hope that we would protect the rights of everyone, no matter if we
    agree with their viewpoints or not.””

    I too agree with you on that point.

    Baquia say”The Babi movement most certainly did not “encourage war and destruction” – it allowed for self-defense.”
    You should go through the Bayan. War and destruction was the only way to submit the world to babism.
    I have nothing against but i I believe if the Iranian Govt are acting in such a way because of the past  history of the babi/bahai movement uprisings and other disobedience which have caused so much trouble in Persian govt.
    I have quoted it somewhere else in Bahai Rants.

    Baquia do you really know why Bahais CAN”T TEACH THE BAHAI FAITH IN ISRAEL.????

    regards.

  • http://wahidazal.blogspot.com/ wahidazal66

    Bacquia, I made no reference to HRC Section 13 so the non sequitor is all your own. That you also are attempting to kick under the carpet the fact that the Haifan Bahai organization has been expending millions of dollars through Washington/London lobbyists to push an exagerrated HR violations narrative vis-a-vis the Iranian Baha’is as a pretext to add ammunition to drives by Anglo-American governments and democracy manipulators such as the NEH, AIPAC and the PFNAC to start a war against Iran also speaks volumes about your personal motivations, since this fact is widely known and has been written about. Much of these activities by you Haifan Baha’is and your BIA’s attempts to marginalize and ostracise voices who are speaking against it can very much be construed as a hate-crime. The manner in which you Haifan Baha’is have hacked into emails, websites and domains belonging to alternative Baha’i sects and the Bayanis, not to mention the fact that prominent Haifan Baha’is have been promoting outright Islamophobia on sites such as Iranian.com, can contextualize Haifan Baha’i activities online against ideological rivals and enemies as ‘hate-crime’ even further, so those who live in glass houses ought not to be throwing stones. That said, Sen McGlinn’s book is an ideological piece of pseudo-scholarship which I have been meaning to dismantle systematically for quite some time. Thank you for reminding me that the time is well due for me to finally do this. In my review I will show how McGlinn’s mastery of both Persian and Arabic is quite rudimentary and questionable at best, and that many of his arguments constitute intellectual dishonesty of the highest order.

  • Baquia

     Wahid, as I wrote previously if you have any proof for your smears, please present them. Otherwise they will remain just that.

  • Baquia

    Again you are conflating Babi and Baha’i theology as well as history. The Baha’i Faith explicitly practices non-violence and there is no history of any such violence to draw upon in order to legitimize persecution of Baha’is in Iran.

    Regarding your question, the superficial answer is that it is the continuation of a policy first established by Baha’u’llah during the Ottoman rule of Israel (Palestine). Why it existed in the first place, or why exactly it continues, however is not clear. The UHJ simply mandates it. Perhaps they will discontinue it in the future.

    One intelligent speculation regarding the true rationale is that it is akin to similar restrictions placed upon other countries which are hostile to the Baha’i Faith. For example, Saudi Arabia or Iran. While for the vast majority of countries there is no issue, some countries have intertwined their identity, government and institutions so tightly with religion that they see other Faiths as threats. In this light, to protect the individual believers and the Faith itself, it is wiser to restrict individual lead teaching efforts completely.

    With regards to Israel specifically, there is not only a restriction of individual or collective teaching efforts but also a restriction of movement and emigration. Except for visitors and workers going to or living at the BWC and other sites, Baha’is are not allowed to move to Israel and they must not relocate or move about the country.

    I wish I had a better answer to give you since this is an issue which I have wondered about before. As I’m sure so have many other Baha’is.

    The only actual response from the UHJ which somewhat addresses the question is this:

    23 July 1995

    Dear Baha’i Friend,

    The Universal House of Justice has received your email message dated 29 June
    1995 and we have been asked to respond.

    You have asked how the policy of not teaching Israelis applies in the
    situation in which you have contact with an Israeli via an “interactive relay
    chat” (IRC) connection. The House of Justice has not asked the friends to avoid
    contact with Israelis. When you discover that a person you are in contact with
    via IRC is an Israeli, you should feel free to maintain friendly contact, but
    you should not teach the Faith to him. If he has already developed a personal
    interest in the Faith and seeks more information, you should refer him to the
    Offices of the Baha’i World Centre in Haifa.

    For your information, the people in Israel have access to factual
    information about the Faith, its history and general principles. Books
    concerning the Faith are available in libraries throughout Israel, and Israelis
    are welcome to visit the Shrines and the surrounding gardens. However, in
    keeping with a policy that has been strictly followed since the days of
    Baha’u’llah, Baha’is do not teach the Faith in Israel. Likewise, the Faith is
    not taught to Israelis abroad if they intend to return to Israel. When Israelis
    ask about the Faith, their questions are answered, but this is done in a manner
    which provides factual information without stimulating further interest.

    With loving Baha’i greetings, Department of the
    Secretariat

    There are a small group of Baha’is who are attempting to change the mind of the UHJ on this issue.

  • Baquia

    ? that’s your proof? that someone anonymous wrote something bad about you? and then their post was removed by a mod? that proves what exactly? this is the same tactic that you’ve used against myriad other people, including Badi in that very same thread!

    It is entirely possible that you or someone you know wrote that as a hatchet job to make the BIA look bad. Notice how that person erased their original and subsequent comments with the exception of the self-incriminating one. How convenient.

    The chosen nick, MrBlackSunshine is also telling. Subhi-Azal means “morning of eternity”.

    Your own words of hate and vitriol are spread wide across the internet and demonstrate for all what manner of person you are currently. There is no need to make you look bad, you do that yourself. Even that very thread shows your response, without knowing the facts you come in and attack, attack, attack.

    And then you write some more unsubstantiated smears and innuendo about someone who works at GS in London.

    The truth of the matter is that had you any real evidence for your fevered imaginings you would not only present it but trumpet it from the rooftops.

    Wahid, you are better than this. I am truly sorry for the way that you were treated and I’m equally sorry that you chose to turn that hurt into a ball of hate. As a fellow human traveler on this earth it is my humble wish that you find true solace and contentment.

  • http://wahidazal.blogspot.com/ wahidazal66
  • Baquia

    Wahid, the onus is not on the Baha’i Faith to defend itself from baseless charges but for those who bring these charges to also bring forward evidence and prove them. Otherwise they are merely smears, innuendo, libel and slander. Things which you are intimately familiar with because you commerce in them daily.

    I’ve entertained your fevered imagination far too long. Please respect this space and do not pollute it further with smears, you have exhausted my patience.

  • Desir0101

    Hi Baquia,

    It’s nice to hear from you after a long time and your style have changed.
    Baquia said:
    “”Again you are conflating Babi and Baha’i theology as well as history. “”

    In a letter on behalf of Shoghi Effendi “” The Bab’s dispensation will last as long as Bahaullah’s lasts””Dec.27 1941.
    So they are both interwined.
    Most philosophy of the Bahai teaching  has been copied from the Bayan.

    Baquia said:

    “”The Babi movement most certainly did not “encourage war and destruction”
    – it allowed for self-defense. “”
    ‘Wahid VII, Chapter 16. God has made it incumbent on every King who is
    raised up in the Religion of the Bayan to allow no one in his land who believes
    not this religion, and the same is incumbent on all men, …”
    ”Wahid VI, Chapter 6. The command to destroy all books except such as
    have been or shall be composed in this religion. So, though there had been many
    heavenly…”
    Wahid V, Chapter 5. Concerning the command to take the possessions
    of those who do not believe in the Bayan, and the command to restore it, if
    they enter the Faith, except in those countries wherein its seizure is
    impossible. …”
    …Concerning
    the removal of all shrines upon the earth. In each Manifestation which appears
    from God, the shrines which were aforetime are taken away, as today you see in
    the Religion of the Apostle of God that his followers know not the shrines, nor
    even the very names, of the Saints of Jesus, much less their tombs. Tombs of
    ancient prophets and patriarchs, shown in some places,12 must also be
    abolished.”
    .This
    abstract was completed at 12.40 a.m. on the morning of the 1st of January AD
    1889. Edward G. Browne

    Summary of the Persian Bayan is a Section 3 (pages: 316 – 406) of the book
    “Selection from the Writings of E. G. Browne on the Babi and Baha’i
    Religions” by Moojan Momen (Oxford: George Ronald, 1987),

    Bab and Bahaullah both gave their approval and blessing for the uprisings at TABARSI.
    And according to Comte de Gobineau it was not self defense.

    Baquia said:
    Bahau’llah then mitigated this
    injunction and told Baha’is that it would be better to die as martyrs
    than to kill others in self-defense.;;

    If the Babi movement did not “”encourage war and destruction”” why should …””Bahaullah then mitigated this injunction and told Bahais that it would be better….””

    Baquia said””to die as martyrs
    than to kill others in self-defense.;;””

    In a letter july 24 1943..

    “” a Bahai is perfectly justified to defend his life””..
    It’s a question now of interpretation. Defend his life means the right to the extend to kill which is the last recourse in a banal  situation or allow to be killed. Whose life is more valuable ??

    Letter dated May 26, 1969.

    Bahaullah said is preferable to be killed in the path of GOD’s good pleasure than to kill….”” And this one is totally different compare with the one above, to die as a martyr in the path of God but not in any other situation.

    Why in the Aqdas it’s say. “”Should anyone intentionally destroy a house by fire, him also shall ye burn: should any one deliberately take another’s life, him also shall ye put to death….life imprisonment  also is permissible””

    Baquia said
    ”The attempted assassination of the Shah was the stupid idea of a few Babi.”

    We are not experiencing neither enduring the suffering at that time so we will never understand the behavior of those babis.
    They are no stupid.
    they have planned it wisely but unfortunately they failed in their attempt to kill. They were from  Azal’s and Bahaullah’s family.

    Baquia said.

    “”Regarding your question, the superficial answer is that it is the
    continuation of a policy first established by Baha’u’llah during the
    Ottoman rule of Israel (Palestine). Why it existed in the first place,
    or why exactly it continues, however is not clear. The UHJ simply
    mandates it. Perhaps they will discontinue it in the future.””

    I have heard Bahais said that if the Whole country and GOVT adopt the bahais faith they can no longer protect the faith and the country  because it is not permissible to raise weapons and make war.

    No, Bahaullah has said that Govt. must kept enough weapons to defend it’s territory.
    So don’t let you be killed but kill.

    Search the answer and you will find it.

  • Baquia

    The Babis would defend themselves when attacked (famous example of Fort Tabarsi). When Baha’u’llah declared this was then removed and replaced with martyrdom.

    Collective defense of a country is an entirely different matter than individual defense as a result of violence originating from religious persecution. Governments are required to protect their populace from external attacks, this is what Baha’u’llah allowed. Again it was mitigating the huge defense budgets that went beyond mere defensive capabilities and placed a huge burden on the government’s budget.

    As a Baha’i my Faith teaches me that religious persecution should not be responded to by violence. We can see Baha’is all around the world abiding by this teaching. As a result of crushing persecution, denial of education, confiscation of property, torture, death, maiming, rape, etc. no Baha’i has taken up arms against the perpetrators of these crimes, whether the state or the individuals acting on behalf of the state.

    The Baha’is endure this pain and only seek to bring about the world’s attention to their suffering as a means to end it. If we look at other examples around the world, this is a most singular situation. The closest might be the suffering of the Buddhist monks in Tibet – Baha’is do not commit suicide of course. Other cases like Chechnya, the Balkans war, etc. show what happens when a religious group takes up arms to defend themselves or to be the aggressors. Baha’u’llah’s injunction prevents this.

    re collective defense: Baha’u’llah was saying that curtailing military spending is better for a country and we see this fact borne out today. I’m not sure what you’ve “heard Baha’is say” but you shouldn’t take anything any person says, including me (especially me!) without confirming it via the actual writings.

    I stand by this: “The attempted assassination of the Shah was the stupid idea of a few Babi.” because the point was that this was not sanctioned or ordered by the Bab or Baha’u’llah but a decision taken upon by individuals acting of their own accord. We can not judge a whole religion based on the actions of a select few individuals.

  • Fubar

     Baquia, I couldn’t reply directly to your comment (below), so I’m replying here. The fact is that the current haifan bahai administration kicked Sen out for holding, or publishing those views. the whole point of having “democratic” institutions is for the people to be able to correct corruption and abuses of authority. Clearly the haifan bahai administration is opposed to separation of church and state because it seeks to impose a mythic-conformist interpretation of religion, and because it wishes to send a message that reformist ideas (or any other kind of nonconformance) are COMPLETELY UNWELCOME.This is reinforced by the manner in which the BWC took harsh action against Ismael Velasco’s attempt at a free (uncensored) bahai scholarship web site, and shut it down for competely dishonest reasons.wrt. AIPAC, etc., the pro-Israeli lobby in the USA is deeply corrupt. The BWC has most likely completely failed to take a principled stand on the issue, and that is ALL ANYONE NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT BAHAI “POLITICS”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Gray/100001692531472 Stephen Gray

    The contribution of Bayanis to the constitutional movement in Iran at a
    time when the brutality of the rulers was at peek and their struggle to
    have governments that treat its citizen with respect and dignity and a
    tolerant society is acknowledged by Iranian and Western historians.

    Unfortunately Bahais have attempted to ignore facts and portray a false
    impression of Subh-i Azal. This work of Subh-i Azal provides an insight
    into how people should react in face of heads of government who rule
    with injustice. The approach recommended by Subh-i Azal is a non violent
    opposition accompanied with admonishing the unjust ruler. Violence is
    completely ruled out. In case the unjust ruler does not heed and
    continues to oppress its citizen, as a last resort people are entitled
    to remove the unjust ruler but emphasises that it must be non-violent
    and no bloodshed.

    It is important to note that some of the attributes attached by Subh-i
    Azal to a head of a state applies only to a situation where the religion
    of Bayan is the religion adopted by the majority of the citizens, the
    head of the state is a Bayani and that Bayani teachings re implemented.
    One being that a council of 25 of the witnesses of Bayan acts as a
    council to the Bayani ruler of a Bayani state.

    When Subh-i Azal refers to a divine mandate for a ruler, he refers to
    the Bayani head of a Bayani state. Subh-i Azal does not consider a
    particular style of government be a republic or monarchy as a
    requirement of a just system. Today, we can see regimes that are based
    on either and provide (relative) justice to their citizens and we see
    regimes that are based on either whilst their cistisens are subjected to
    hardship and injustice.
    Actually, by the time Baha’u’llah declared that, Subh-i-Azal had already been the first to declares so for a big chunk of time.

  • Pingback: Sentinel Project Monitors Safety of the Baha’is of Iran | Baha'i Rants