Different conventions which have been written after the second world war about the social and civil basic rights and have
Different conventions which have been written after the second world war about the social and civil basic rights and have been accepted by countries, have been completed by adding protocols to them, have been analyzed and clarified and also each convention and its additional protocol needs legal analysis so that its applicability in a special case is proved.
These days Mojahedin are using Convention 1949 and Refugees Convention without having a clear and expert analysis.
They are trying to create a paradigm so that to find a legal run-away method. Simultaneously with posing the case of their refugee case, they want to rely on some conventions in order to be treated as a non-military group. On the other hand, they insist that they're impartial, so that to prove they're captives and by this, they want to force occupying forces to accept the responsibility of protecting them.
What we should know about UN Conventions is that in these conventions there're differences between "refugee" and "captive"; that is, no body can claim of being "captive" and "refugee" at a same time and these to cases are completely different. According to the Convention 195, refugee has no citizenship while war prisoner has the citizenship of his/her own country, wears the official clothes of his/her country with known signs and symbols of that country.
Based on these differences, Geneva Convention 1951 (on Refugees) has items and acts which are different from those of Geneva Convention (on war prisoner) on 1949, August 12th.
In reviewing conventions and legal matters, what is related to Mojahedin and helps them clarify their condition is avoiding from generality and playing with names and items in conventions and these legal matters should be reviewed carefully.
What is more emphasized by the spokesmen of this group is the case of their asylum in Iraq.
So, in order to clarify the asylum condition of Mojahedin according to definitions of laws, we bring some notes from conventions (related to the presence of Mojahedin in Iraq):
In section C of article One in Geneva Convention 1951 about the following persons' asylum, convention is not executive:
3. He has acquired a new nationality, and enjoys the protection of the country of his new nationality; or
5. He can no longer, because the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, continue to refuse to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality;
6. Being a person who has no nationality he is, because of the circumstances in connection with which he has been recognized as a refugee have ceased to exist, able to return to the country of his former habitual residence;
as seen in the above items and regarding the public pardon by the Iranian government even in the case of having the conditions of getting asylum, convention don't ban movement of the body of organization .
but about those members who have committed a crime, convention has not stayed silent but it has clarified the case. In section F of Convention 1951 it says that the mentioned conditions are not applicable for those people who have done a crime:
F. The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to
whom there are serious reasons for considering that:
(b) he has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refugeprior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
(c) he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
And as it's been mentioned in parts A and F of article 1 of refugee convention, the one who has committed a crime against the peace of humanity or is a war criminal is not able to get refugee and terrorism is a part of crime against humanity and of the cases which violate human rights and is a part of JUS COGENS in International laws.
So, terrorist groups do not meet the conditions of this convention and Mojahedin, for long, have been called "terrorists" in Europe and the U.S.
In addition, according to the next part (B), those who have committed a crime and need public punishment can't apply for asylum. So, those MKO members who have committed a crime can't request asylum, but they're guilty and should be tried.
And even the request of Iraqi Governing Council to try MKO members, who were involved in suppressing Kurds and Shiites, has been posed by referring to Part F from this very convention.
Although according to the definition which was given at first, one can't introduce himself as a captive and refugee at a same time, but even if they introduce themselves as war prisoners they will be sent back to their countries after the end of enmities according to the Geneva convention on treating war prisoners(12 August, 1949).
So, as it can be seen, even international laws don't let this group from justice
Spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s National Security Council said that Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) that has received asylum from France is today supported by the upholders of human rights though...