13
Examination of witnesses
Chloe Cheung and Hossein Abedini.
Q18 The Chair: Welcome to the 12th meeting of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. I should declare an interest at the very outset as someone who is a patron of Hong Kong Watch and has worked with the parliamentary committee for Iran freedom. As the name implies, our central concern is the defence of human rights of British citizens and people resident in the United Kingdom. We compromise 12 members drawn from all the different political traditions, so there are six Members of the House of Commons and six Members of the House of Lords.
Today we are also joined by a member of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Paul Kohler, who is guesting here today. He is Member of Parliament for the Wimbledon constituency, and he will participate in our proceedings as well. We will be hearing from two people, two witnesses, who have been directly affected by intimidation and threats because of their advocacy for democracy, the rule of law and human rights. They have been targeted as a result of transnational repression, which of course is the title of our inquiry.
We will hear from Chloe Cheung, a young woman who, along with others, has a bounty of 1 million Hong Kong dollars, around £100,000, placed on her head by the Chinese Communist Party. Chloe tirelessly champions the cause of the nearly 2,000 political prisoners incarcerated in jails in Hong Kong.
We will hear also from Hossein Abedini, a long‑standing advocate for democracy and freedom in Iran. He is deputy director of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. A profile in the Times newspaper described assassination attempts on his life.
In the second session, we will hear from Rhys Davies, a barrister at Temple Garden Chambers, and Ben Keith, a barrister at 5 St Andrew’s Hill. Our four witnesses today will explore with us what can be done internationally by Interpol and by the United Kingdom in combating transnational repression, which itself is a relatively new term, but it does raise profound concerns and questions about the defence of fundamental human rights.
The United Kingdom’s working definition of transnational repression describes it as a crime perpetrated by certain foreign state‑directed crimes against individuals. This activity can take place physically or online, with examples including intimidation, surveillance, harassment, forced coerced return, abduction and even assassination at the most serious end of the scale.
To help us understand this issue of transnational repression better, we are joined by these two courageous, brave, remarkable people. I am going to turn first to Chloe Cheung and then to Hossein Abedini, to ask why you have been made targets of transnational repression. What lies behind this? Chloe, would you like to go first?
Chloe Cheung: Thank you, Chair and members of the committee, for allowing me to speak today. I am a pro‑democracy activist from Hong Kong currently living in the United Kingdom. On Christmas Eve 2024, the Hong Kong authorities placed a 1 million Hong Kong dollar bounty on my head, branding me as a fugitive and accusing me of violating the national security law. This was solely because of my work with the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation, where I have been advocating for Hong Kong democracy and the release of political prisoners such as British citizen Jimmy Lai here in the UK.
The Hong Kong authorities have charged me with two offences. The first is inciting secession, which essentially means speaking out for democracy. The second is colluding with foreign forces, which simply means talking to foreign politicians or international media about Hong Kong’s human rights violations.
These charges are entirely politically motivated and are designed to intimidate and silence activists such as me, but let me be clear: I have never committed a crime. My offence is speaking out for democracy, freedom and human rights, and for that I have a 1 million Hong Kong dollar bounty on my head, essentially placing a price tag on my life.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms Cheung, for being so eloquent in the way that you have described how transnational repression is affecting you. Can we hear from you now, Mr Abedini?
Hossein Abedini: Thank you very much, Lord Alton and honourable members of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. I am very honoured to testify in this committee, because I speak on behalf of many of my friends and colleagues who have unfortunately been killed at the hands of the Iranian regime’s terrorists in different parts of the world.
The reason I have been the target of this transnational repression by the Iranian regime is that I gave my first interview more than 30 years ago with Lord Eric Avebury, who was the chair of the parliamentary human rights group in those days. My name is in the Iran: State of Terror book. Since then, I have always been considered by the police as somebody who is under serious threat from the Iranian regime.
I first went to Turkey when I was very young, after I finished my studies here in London. I co‑ordinated an Amnesty International and United Nations office event in Turkey with two colleagues, to help some Iranian refugees who had crossed the border and were political prisoners. If they were sent back to Iran, they would face execution and threats.
We were fortunately successful in preventing their extradition to Iran, after they had been arrested by the Turkish police, but after three months, when I wanted to leave Istanbul, my car was ambushed in broad daylight by so-called Iranian diplomats who closed the motorway and had guns in their hands. They trapped our car and two of them ran towards our car. They were pointing their guns at me and I tried to stop them somehow—I had a briefcase, and I opened the door. It was then that they started shooting me. I was shot in the chest and in the abdomen, very seriously.
I was very lucky because, although the bullet in my chest was very close to my heart, it narrowly missed my heart. When they wanted to fire a final shot, the bullet jammed—this is what the police said later—in the muzzle of the gun. I was bleeding very badly. They thought it was all over. I was taken to hospital and spent a long time there, going through many surgeries.
They thought there was no chance of surviving, but they performed many operations. I was in a coma for nearly 50 days. Finally, they were able to stop the bleeding and I was taken out under police protection from Turkey, because, even when I was in hospital, they tried twice to come and finish me off in order to stop me speaking to the police to reveal who they were and what had happened.
The ambassador of the Iranian regime in those days was somebody who then became its Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki. They had tried to abduct my colleagues a year before. It was absolutely clear that it was the Iranian regime behind this, because they announced the news of the attack on my life in the main television bulletin at 8 pm. They called it the work of the Turkish Hezbollah, but the Iranian mullahs were the first to announce this news.
They once tried to come under the disguise of the police, saying they wanted to interview me, but the mother of the Turkish President in those days was in the same hospital and the President wanted to come and visit his mother. They sealed off the whole area, and they found out it was a bogus call by the police and it was the Iranian regime.
On the third time, they hired two people who came to the hospital. I was under all sorts of tubes and instruments. They claimed they were my friends at the university but, before they were able to enter my room, my true friends arrived and they escaped from the scene.
Since then, I have been approached by the police a number of times here in the UK. Recently I had a visit from them and they gave me precautionary measures to be careful, since there had been threats against Iranian dissidents’ lives in this country as well.
The Chair: In both your cases, you have become targets because you are pro‑democracy advocates.
Hossein Abedini: Yes, exactly.
Q19 Afzal Khan: Thank you both. Can you describe the transnational repression tactics that have been used against you?
Chloe Cheung: The most consistent form of harassment has been a barrage of sexual harassment messages and threatening comments on social media. Since my bounty was announced, I have received numerous messages not only to degrade me but explicitly referencing the bounty. Some individuals have even suggested that the Hong Kong Government should increase the reward to incentivise my capture, while others have made comments about how I should be physically harmed or handed over to the Chinese embassy. This has been incredibly distressing, especially given the very real fear that someone in the UK could act on these threats.
However, perhaps the most alarming and direct incident I have experienced was being followed by two suspicious Chinese-ethnicity-looking men in January. This encounter left me deeply shaken. I was now genuinely concerned that these individuals had been sent to monitor me and, in the worst‑case scenario, potentially attempt to kidnap me.
I knew that some of my bountied Hong Kong friends in the UK have had their neighbours receiving suspicious letters. These letters explicitly stated that the Hong Kong police are offering a 1 million Hong Kong dollar reward to any member of the public who can either provide useful information or bring him or her to the Chinese embassy.
This is for me an outright act of transnational repression, because the intention behind these letters is first to isolate the activist from their community by turning their neighbours against them. Secondly, it is to create a surveillance network in the UK by using ordinary citizens as potential informants. Thirdly, it is to encourage kidnapping by urging people to physically bring the activists to the embassy, which directly threatens our safety.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: I wanted to ask you, Ms Cheung, whether you have any copy of this bounty offering. I assume it was circulated online or something by the authorities in Hong Kong. Is that right?
Chloe Cheung: Yes, that is right. On Christmas Eve, the Hong Kong authorities held a press conference announcing that they will be placing a bounty on six overseas individuals from Hong Kong. They have been putting these bounty posters outside Hong Kong police stations and Hong Kong airports. I have had friends take pictures of these and send them to me, so I have evidence of this. We also have evidence of these threatening letters sent to bountied Hong Kongers’ neighbours, telling these neighbours to bring him or her to the embassy.
Afzal Khan: Mr Abedini, can you explain the attack you experienced in Turkey? There were a number of them in Turkey, at the same time, I suppose. Have there been any other physical attacks towards you?
Hossein Abedini: There have not been any physical attacks, but the Iranian regime has put tremendous pressure on my own family, because one of the methods of transnational repression that the Iranian regime uses is intimidation and harassment of the family members of those who are active against the regime.
For example, they put a lot of pressure on my father, and he finally died as a result of those pressures at the age of 74. He had a heart attack. They put a lot of pressure on him, asking him a lot of things. In particular, they wanted all the assets that belonged to me to be transferred to the Government. They have done that to many Iranians who are living in this country. They have confiscated their assets and all their belongings in Iran. I know personally of a number of people who have been a target of this.
Another method that they use are these so‑called cultural centres and religious centres. One of them is in Maida Vale, and everybody knows about that. Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the regime, even has an envoy here, who is a mullah himself, and the British Government know this. They have revealed this information.
I held a press conference myself here in Parliament with two parliamentarians, and they revealed very specifically how this mullah, or cleric, who is the representative of Khamenei, is working and how they recruit people. They send them to Iran—not only Iranians but other nationals—and they train them. They come back here. We had all the names and everything, but this has not been stopped. It was temporarily shut but then they reopened that centre.
They have also used different methods of demonising those who are active against the regime. This demonisation campaign is one of the methods the Iranian regime has been using, with its own spies and different lobbyists who are not registered here. Especially after this new plan by the Security Minister, it makes it very important and necessary to expel these people who are so openly supporting the Iranian regime.
Afzal Khan: You mentioned these cultural centres. How many such cultural centres are operating in the UK?
Hossein Abedini: They have centres in Scotland, Liverpool and different parts of the UK. They are using mosques as well. This cultural centre is very well known, because many Members of Parliament asked for the closure of this cultural centre. It is called a cultural centre, but they are only doing spying activity against Iranian dissidents.
The Chair: In answering Mr Khan’s question, it would be helpful to the committee if in writing, subsequently, you could give us a list.
Hossein Abedini: Yes, sure. We can work on this and we will certainly provide you with all the information.
Q20 Peter Swallow: Thank you both for being here. Could you describe for us, please, the impact that transnational repression has on your activism, your ability to travel and your day‑to‑day lives?
Hossein Abedini: As far as I am concerned—I spoke to the Times and the media in this regard—we believe that this is the price of freedom. We know that the Iranian regime has its agents, and the IRGC and the Quds Force are very active in different countries. Whenever they find an opportunity, they will do whatever they can, especially when the regime is encircled by lots of crises and faces lots of problems inside Iran. Whenever this happens, they resort to terrorist activities against Iranian dissidents and all sorts of transnational repression.
As far as I am concerned, I have to take lots of precautions in my home. I never travel on my own. Even today, I asked one of my dear colleagues to accompany me here. I have to take all these precautions, but we know that they are not going to present us a free Iran on a silver plate, so we have to stand up and struggle for that, and we will do.
The Chair: If I can just say in parenthesis, you mentioned the IRGC. Are you disappointed that it has not been proscribed?
Hossein Abedini: Yes. This is ridiculous, to be honest, Lord Alton, because, with the IRGC, it is very clear to everyone. This came to Members of Parliament. There was a Motion here in the House of Commons, which was unanimously passed, as well as by all Members of the House of Lords. The IRGC has been responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, tens of thousands of executions inside Iran, as well as what it has done in the region across Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and all over the place. Its Quds Force is responsible for lots of terrorist activities.
In addition to the IRGC, it is about closing the religious and cultural centres of this regime as well as shutting down its embassies. This is what we think. If this embassy is not good for any improvement in relations between the UK and Iran, what is it good for? It has to be closed.
The Chair: Would you describe the IRGC as agents of the Iranian state? Are you saying that they are responsible for many of the crimes that you have been outlining to us today?
Hossein Abedini: The IRGC is the elite force of the Iranian regime and is not a part of the Iranian army. It is not the classic Iranian army but a private army that was created only for the survival of the regime. The IRGC is responsible for lots of repressive measures. The Iranian regime has been behind nearly 500 terrorist operations during these four decades, and at least 300 Iranian dissidents have died at the hands of the Iranian regime—many of them my colleagues.
I have a book that shows me with two former ambassadors of Iran. One of them, Professor Kazem Rajavi, then joined the Iranian resistance and became the representative of Iranian resistance in France and Switzerland. He was killed in the European centre of the United Nations in Geneva by 13 Iranian diplomats using diplomatic passports who had come from Iran. Unfortunately, they left and two of them were arrested in France, but France returned them to Iran. Another chargé d’affaires in Italy, Mohammad Hossein Naghdi, was killed near his office in Rome, again by Iranian terrorists.
The IRGC is behind all these things. That is the very important first step for the right policy towards the Iranian regime.
The Chair: We have a question now for Ms Cheung from Mr Kohler.
Peter Swallow: I did just want to hear Ms Cheung’s answer to my question.
The Chair: Perhaps we could link it with the question from Mr Kohler—I am just conscious of the time.
Q21 Paul Kohler: In addition to my colleague’s question, Ms Cheung, you and a number of your colleagues have had arrest warrants issued against you by the Hong Kong Government. How effective do you think the UK Government’s response has been to the issuing of these arrest warrants?
Chloe Cheung: I want to start by saying that the experience of being placed on the bounty list has been a nightmare. It has affected me mentally, emotionally and physically in profound ways that I never expected. When I first learned about my bounty, my immediate fear was, “What if someone actually tries to kidnap me and claim the bounty?” It was not an unfounded fear. The bounty is worth £100,000, and that is life‑changing money for a lot of people.
In October 2022, a Hong Kong protester was physically dragged into the Chinese consulate in Manchester and assaulted by Chinese consulate staff. This happened in broad daylight, in front of British police officers and within UK territory. If that can happen once, it can happen again, and with a bounty on my head I fear that I could be the next one.
The fear has now become part of my daily reality. The mental and emotional toll has been devastating. I now carry lots of self-protection devices with me. I am also extremely cautious of strangers approaching me. If someone suddenly tries to make friends with me or approaches me unexpectedly, my first thought is no longer trust but suspicion. I will ask myself, “Are they working for Chinese authorities, or are they trying to get intelligence or information about me?”
That level of paranoia is unhealthy, but it is now my new normal. The social impact has been equally heartbreaking, because since the bounty was announced many of my friends and family in Hong Kong have cut off contact with me. They are terrified that being associated with me could put them at risk of arrest, surveillance or even intimidation. Even my friends in the UK have begun distancing from me, not because they do not care but because they are afraid that association with me would jeopardise their future chance of returning to Hong Kong.
As for the UK Government response, after the bounty was announced, I reached out to the Home Office and requested a meeting to discuss our concerns and the threats that we faced. We tried to seek clarification on what protection measures would be in place for individuals such as us. However, no one from the Government or any senior officials proactively reached out to us, despite the very serious nature of the threats that we face. Indeed, it was left entirely to us to seek protection and answers for ourselves.
I have met Catherine West MP, the Foreign Minister, and David Lammy MP, the Foreign Secretary, alongside three other Hong Kong activists based in the UK who also had a bounty placed on them on Christmas Eve. During the meeting, we discussed concerns about transnational repression happening on UK soil and the growing threats that we faced. We emphasised how the UK police needed better education and training on handling cases of transnational repression.
What I found particularly frustrating was that, despite being very clear in that meeting about the real risk of physical harm, kidnap or intimidation that bountied activists such as me face, there was no clear promise from the Government on what their response would be if something happened to us.
I explicitly asked them in my follow‑up email, “What is the Government’s response plan if I was kidnapped or brought to the Chinese embassy, and what protection measures are in place to ensure that I am not followed, targeted or harmed by individuals acting on behalf of the Chinese state?”, but I have never received any formal or direct answers to these questions. What I received from Home Office Minister Dan Jarvis simply stated that the UK Government do not tolerate intimidation or threats towards any individual living in the UK. That is all the response that I have.
The Chair: That was a very good reply and thank you for being so comprehensive in the way you dealt with it.
Q22 Alex Sobel: Mr Abedini, it is good to see you again. You probably have one of the most egregious and long‑running cases of transnational repression of anybody who lives in this country. Over that period, how effectively have you felt that the UK Government have dealt with transnational repression perpetrated by the Iranian state?
Hossein Abedini: The UK Government have not been consistent in dealing with this very important issue of transnational repression against the Iranian regime, because unfortunately the Iranian regime has always considered the UK Government, among others, as a weak link in western countries. This is why it has been so brazenly attacking UK embassies in Tehran, even. There have been some on‑and‑off actions against the Iranian regime, but very robust action has to be taken against the Iranian regime if we want to stop transnational repression and especially the activities of the IRGC.
It is like an octopus stretching its arms to different parts of the western world, as well as all the Middle Eastern and Islamic countries. It is so brazenly attacking Iranian dissidents here in the UK. According to the head of MI5, at least 20 cases of assassination plots have been stopped so far by the police, but this is going to happen to Iranians who are living here. It is putting tremendous pressure on the families of these people.
There are very practical measures that the UK Government have to take, first of all by putting the entirety of the IRGC on the terrorist list and by closing down the cultural and religious centres that the Iranian regime uses as front organs for inflicting this transnational repression on the Iranians. In my opinion, they need to shut down the embassy of the regime, expel the ambassador of the regime, and expel the agents of the Iranian regime, because the regime is using Iranian and non‑Iranian agents in this country, spying on Iranian dissidents. They can travel easily to Iran; they go and come back.
I do not want to name anyone, but I personally know some agents of the regime, one of whom recently went to Iran and even took part in a court against Iranian dissidents who are living in this country, without any problem and without being detained by the British police to stop them doing so.
Alex Sobel: There has been a big uptick in state repression in Iran, particularly since the death of Mahsa Amini on 16 September 2022 and the very welcome response by many people in Iran to that. There has been an increase in arrests, torture and executions. Do you think that part of that is about sending a warning to those supporting democracy in Iran, whether they live in neighbouring countries such as Turkey, or in the UK or other countries?
Hossein Abedini: The Iranian regime, since its inception, has been based on two pillars: internal repression and external terrorism and expansionism, exporting its fundamentalism in the name of revolution to other countries throughout the world. For example, in 2024, at least 1,000 people were hanged in Iran, which even by the standards of the Iranian regime is a record figure for the past 30 years. Since the election of this new so‑called more liberal President, who is a protégé of the Supreme Leader of the regime, there have been at least 900 executions in the past six months.
The number of executions, especially of young people as well as women, clearly shows that the regime is trying to take revenge on Iranian dissidents and its opponents. It is feeling cornered after what has happened in the region. It had created this land corridor, or what it calls the Shia crescent, from Iran to Iraq, through Iraq to Syria, and then to Lebanon, to have access to the Mediterranean Sea and help Hezbollah. With the fall of Assad in Syria and the Hezbollah commander—Hezbollah has been crippled in a way—this land corridor has been divided into pieces.
What they did by using proxies in different countries is now rebounding on them and the main threat that they feel is from the Iranian regime. They know that another massive uprising is on the horizon, and this is going to happen, so they want to take revenge on Iranians inside Iran and those who expose the regime outside Iran, in this country and throughout the world. They are the targets of the regime, so that is very interrelated.
The Chair: We turn now to Baroness Kennedy to ask our final question on recommendations to the committee, but I know she may want to link that to something you have just said.
Q23 Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: I was shocked at the number you have just given to us of 900 executions in the last period. I am particularly concerned in the next few days that we are likely to face another couple of executions of women who are part of those demonstrations in the movement for greater freedoms for women. The 900 executions arising out of that uprising against the regime because of the killing of a young woman in custody is quite horrifying and shocking.
I wanted to ask you about recommendations. This relates to both of you, so I will turn to you one at a time. First, Ms Cheung, you have described the business of a bounty being put on your head. For me, I hope with the assistance of our own legal advisers, it is contrary to international law. This process is outside of normal policing authority and behaviour. The idea that you are inviting members of the public to take action on behalf of an overseas Government, that you are asking people to perform a policing activity on your behalf and to make an arrest of someone, and that they will be paid for doing so and for taking that person to an overseas embassy, contravenes international law. I am shocked that there has not been more outrage by Governments, and particularly this Government, saying, “That is unacceptable”.
We have two judges, at least, who still sit on the higher courts of Hong Kong. I am most surprised that they are not seeing this as an affront to the rule of law and to proper judicial processes, because it leads to arbitrary arrest. It encourages arbitrary arrest and extrajudicial activity. I would have thought that was something our Government would want to make statements about. Have you had no indication of the Government’s shock that bounties were being offered to the general public to act as overseas agents of the Hong Kong police?
Chloe Cheung: There are a few things the UK Government can do. They should impose stronger diplomatic consequences on states engaging in transnational repression, including China, Russia, Iran, et cetera. They have repeatedly used transnational repression to intimidate and silence political dissidents abroad. The UK Government should take a firm stance by imposing targeted, Magnitsky‑style sanctions on individuals and entities involved in transnational repression, including those responsible for issuing bounties, conducting surveillance and threatening activists on UK soil.
The UK should also regularly review diplomatic privileges granted to officials from states known to engage in TNR, ensuring that diplomatic immunity is not exploited to facilitate repression. The UK Government should also strengthen legal protections for British citizens and residents who may be targeted by foreign regimes, as you said.
A clear policy should be in place to guarantee consular assistance for individuals who are arbitrarily detained or persecuted abroad due to their activism. The failure to expel consular officials responsible for past incidents of transnational repression, such as in the case of the Hong Konger who was dragged into the Manchester consulate, has sent a wrong signal. The Government must be prepared to use diplomatic tools to hold aggressors accountable and send a strong message that UK sovereignty will be defended against foreign interference.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: Thank you. That is a very strong statement about the things that should be done. There are plenty of tools available to the British Government, and it seems to me that not to be absolutely affronted by the idea of a bounty being offered here in the United Kingdom is utterly shocking. I really want us to emphasise that in any report that comes out of the committee.
Mr Abedini, I am asking you the same question about what can be done. One issue that has been raised by our chairman is the business of proscribing the revolutionary guard. I certainly have been told that one of the reasons why there is a reluctance to do this is that the response of Iran would be to close down our embassy in Iran and that having an embassy there is important for many diplomatic negotiations and so on, which are often important to the well-being of British citizens who might be arrested there.
Have you heard any reason why? You might know. What other countries have proscribed the revolutionary guard?
Hossein Abedini: The United States has already done so, as has Canada.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: Does the United States have an embassy in Iran?
Hossein Abedini: It does not have an embassy, but the British embassy in Iran—
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: It is used as a channel. Is that not the reason why Britian is reluctant?
Hossein Abedini: It has not been able to do anything effective. If you look at the major concerns regarding Iran, there are four. First is the appalling human rights situation, which is getting worse and worse every day under this regime. Second is the terrorism of the mullahs’ regime, which is a two‑pronged terrorist campaign against Iranian dissidents and foreign nationals. We all know that the terrorism by this regime has increased. Third is weapons of mass destruction. The regime has been deceiving the international community, and everybody knows that it is now very close to acquiring a nuclear bomb. Trying to use this policy of rapprochement with the regime has only helped it to increase its activities in all the different fields. The fourth concern is that it is meddling in the affairs of other Middle Eastern countries and the Islamic world.
If you look at these four major concerns, nothing has changed during all these years of negotiations with the Iranian regime. It has only given different names to this at different junctures under different pretexts.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: Have any other countries apart from the United States sanctioned or proscribed the revolutionary guard?
Hossein Abedini: Canada has done so.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: Does Canada have an embassy inside Iran?
Hossein Abedini: I think it does. Canada had an embassy in Iran and still has a presence there. A number of parliaments in other countries have made it their policy to proscribe the IRGC. The excuse that the Iranian regime uses is that this is a part of its army, but this is absolutely untrue. The IRGC is a tool of the Supreme Leader of the regime and is an elite force created just to keep the regime in power. That is not a good justification. Giving more time to the Iranian regime will only embolden it in further transnational repression, more killing inside Iran and other aggressive methods outside Iran.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: We have already used sanctions against a number of Iranians. How extensive do you think has that been, and should targeted sanctions be used more often?
Hossein Abedini: It is a good step and is better than doing nothing, but the main thing the UK Government should do is to proscribe the IRGC. As long as they have not done so, just sanctioning a number of IRGC commanders or revolutionary guard officers is not going to anything effective.
First, proscribing the IRGC will send a very strong message to the people of Iran that they are not alone in their struggle against the Iranian regime. There have been nine major uprisings in the past six years in Iran, the last one in 2022 and before that in 2019, 2018 and 2017, and there have been regional uprisings in different parts of Iran. The Iranian people need to know that the free world is behind them and supporting them, and putting the IRGC on the terrorist list will send them this strong message.
Secondly, it will send a strong message to the Iranian regime that the free world is not going to tolerate all these horrendous things that it is doing throughout the world. It is very necessary to do that.
Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: I take it you would endorse the other recommendations that have been made by Ms Cheung.
Hossein Abedini: Of course, yes, in addition to what Ms Cheung has said. The Iranian regime is a very clear example for everyone, because even the head of MI5 has clearly said that it is a big threat. Recently, the Security Minister said that Iran is the main foreign threat to this country—both to security in this country and to Iranian human rights activists in this country.
The Chair: On that note, we have to bring the session to a close. I know I speak for the whole committee in thanking you, Mr Abedini, but also you, Ms Cheung, for the way in which you have addressed this very complex and worrying issue of transnational repression.
Your personal stories are an inspiration and an encouragement to all of us who hold the values of democracy, liberty, freedom, the rule of law and human rights close to our hearts. You serve as inspiration to us all to carry on speaking out as and when we can. We will continue with this inquiry with other witnesses, who have also been affected by other autocratic and dictatorial regimes elsewhere in the world, and we will come forward with our recommendations, some of which will be based on the evidence that you have given us today. Thank you both very much for being with us. We appreciate it greatly.
Hossein Abedini: Thank you very much, chairman, as well as the other members of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. We are very grateful for the work that you have done for such a long time. Without your help, we would not have been able to confront the threats of the Iranian regime. Thank you so much.
Chloe Cheung: Thank you so much. I am very happy to have a direct conversation with parliamentarians.
