Mr. Roger Cooper (Hansard, 18 January 1989)

§ Mr. Nicholas Baker (Dorset, North)

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise in the House the imprisonment of Roger Cooper in Iran. I shall put to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State the facts of Mr. Cooper's treatment in Iran, the conditions under which he has been detained for some three and a half years or more and the importance of securing his release now, as part of the resumption of diplomatic relations between Britain and Iran that are now under way.

I have known Roger Cooper and his family for over 35 years. He is an unusual, scholarly and detached kind of character, with a deep knowledge of Persian history, literature and culture, who, after 20 years of working in Iran, has become an expert on Iranian affairs. His somewhat academic turn of mind befits the nephew of Robert Graves the poet and a member of a highly intelligent, cultivated and independent family. He has worked in Iran in a number of capacities for more than 20 years, principally as a teacher, translator and latterly consultant on Iranian affairs. He is not a business man, or a wheeler dealer. He has a deep sympathy with Iran and Iranian people, and possesses the ability to make friends with people in all walks of life, whether they be shepherds in the Iranian mountains, his gaolers in Even prison in Tehran or members of the academic fraternity.

Roger Cooper was married to an Iranian for some years, is a excellent linguist and speaks fluent Farsi and other Iranian dialects. He is that rare individual whom the Iranian Government can be pardoned for falling to understand—an Englishman who is deeply attached to Iran but not an uncritical friend.

He was certainly criticial of the Shah's regime. In an article in the Sunday Times on 12 November 1978, he drew attention to the defects of the Shah's regime. He described the Moslem clergy as people who more altruistically realised That the wave of western-style progress was not good for the country's soul". In the same article, he described the Shah's style of government as high-handed. He pointed out that the Shah had allowed himself to be puffed-up to almost divine status", and had become so isolated from his people that he could no longer understand their aspirations or sense their dissatisfaction. He pointed out the heavy cost in terms of human rights of Iran's then internationally vaunted political stability and described the activities of SAVAK—the state security organisation which by then had grown into a reputedly ubiquitous secret police, with a network of paid voluntary informers that make frank political conversation impossible". As one who visited Iran in those days myself, I can vouch for the correctness of Roger Cooper's observations.

In the same article, he described the demand for Islamic Government and called for the return of Ayatollah Khomeini and the moving experience of the supporting demonstration in Tehran. He criticised the failure of the Shah's Government to co-ordinate relief for the victims of the earthquake that reduced the city of Tabas to rubble 459 and actually put these complaints personally direct to the Shah. That was typical of his honesty and independence, given that he was addressing an absolute monarch.

At the time of his arrest, Mr. Cooper was working as a consultant for McDermott International, the offshore oil services group, and had come to Tehran in July 1985 to help the company to secure a contract that had been put out to international tender and for which a variety of other Western companies were bidding. He entered Iran with a legally valid visa and was apparently arrested on a technicality. After the process of the tender forced him to stay on beyond the original expiry date of the visa, he had applied for a renewal and was told that he could stay in Iran while the application was being processed. Foreigners frequently overstayed the expiry date of their visas for this reason.

In wartime Tehran he was suspect because of his exceptional knowledge of the Farsi language and also because he had lived in Iran under the Shah and had done paid translation work for the Shah's Government. He was in fact one of the few westerners to criticise the Shah's regime in public for civil rights abuses, such as the torture and detention without trial of students. His respect for Iranian clergy and criticism of the Shah and the armed forces that propped up his regime are on record.

Roger Cooper was arrested on 7 December 1985 and is now in his fourth year of detention in Even prison, Tehran, where he has undergone countless interrogations. Although he has been called a spy by Iranian newspapers and some politicians, there is no evidence of this. No specific charges have been made, and while a number of apparently genuine spies have been caught and tried in Iran during the last few years, there has been no serious suggestion that Mr. Cooper could be a spy. No one who knows him regards such a suggestion with anything but derision.

Today is the 1,139th day of Roger Cooper's captivity. In a recent letter that he was allowed to write to his family —who of course are desperately anxious about his condition—he said: The worst part is not having any idea what is in store for me or having any family or personal news for almost six months. In another letter, he said: One day merges imperceptibly into the next. There is no sign of when, or even if, I will be released, and I think the uncertainty is beginning to affect me. Neither the British Government nor his family have ever been notified of the reasons for his arrest, or of any specific charges. He has not had access to a lawyer and was prevented from making written protest against procedural irregularities under the Iranian constitution. Although an appeal has been lodged to the supreme judicial council of Iran for a judicial review of his case, the court has apparently taken no steps to hear the appeal or to investigate the matter. In three years he has been allowed only six visits. He has many friends in Tehran who would have liked to visit him but who have been refused access.

Most letters to and from Roger Cooper do not reach their destination. At least 20 letters written to him by his only daughter have not been delivered. Although once allowed to telephone, he has not yet had the opportunity of speaking by telephone to his mother, who is aged 94 and who, like all his family, is increasingly concerned about his 460 position. He has received good medical attention in prison and sufficient food, but erratic opportunities for exercise. Recently he has been moved into a larger room and is in contact with other foreign prisoners, with a limited opportunity to take exercise.

In summary, the treatment of Roger Cooper accords with the provisions of neither the Iranian constitution, nor the Vienna convention nor the United Nations covenants. I urge my hon. Friend to press the Iranian Government on this. I detect some present improvement on these matters, which I welcome, but Mr. Cooper's detention is a serious bar to the improvement in relations between our two countries which we all wish to see.

The memorandum agreed between Britain and Iran in November last and signed by the two Governments provides a basis for the resumption of full diplomatic relations between the countries. I welcome that. I, like many who have visited Iran, value the long-standing relationship between the Iranian and British peoples.

I understand that the memorandum provides that relations between the countries shall be conducted on the basis of reciprocity. Both countries have an interest in the restoration of normal diplomatic relations. It is ironic in some ways that Roger Cooper—who, as I have said, must be one of the most knowledgeable Britons about Iran and its people—should be detained in this way.

In his letter from prison of June 1988 to the United Kingdom parliamentary mission to Iran, he spelled out in great detail measures necessary to improve the long-term relationship between the two countries. Despite his three and half years in prison, he is completely and passionately devoted to the cause of restoring relations between our two countries.

It is not enough for my hon. Friend in his negotiations with the Iranian Government to express the hope that improved relations will bring about the release of Roger Cooper. It must be made clear to the Iranian Government that there can be no normal relations between the countries while an innocent British subject is detained in this way. Seen from one angle, Mr. Cooper could be regarded as a hostage. I do not advocate, and I am not advocating tonight, a deal over any hostage—against which the Prime Minister has, rightly, set the face of her Government—but I suggest that a step-by-step resumption of diplomatic relations necessarily involves the release of an innocent prisoner. I urge my hon. Friend to put the position straight to the Iranian Government.

In the 10 steps involved in improving relations, which include the building up of the Iranian embassy in London, the issue of visas to Iranians to visit London and continued progress under the November memorandum, the release of Roger Cooper is an essential part of the process. It is not something which may or may not happen later. We cannot allow Mr. Cooper to be forgotten. Both countries want to develop trade between them for the benefit of the British and Iranian peoples, but I expect my hon. Friend to make it clear that this process will be frozen unless, as part of it, Roger Cooper is released.

This debate is not an attempt by —nor do I advocate such on the part of her Majesty's Government—to interfere with Iranian internal affairs. The 10th anniversary of the Iranian revolution is at hand, and this is an admirable moment for the kind of gesture of confidence in improving relations between the two countries which we have come to expect from the Iranian 461 Government. They have already released a Mr. Nicola. Now is the occasion for a further step in improving relations between our two countries.

Roger Cooper is passionately keen on an improvement in relations between Iran and Britain. It is more than ironic that his own individual liberty should have been curtailed so dramatically for the last three and a half years. It makes it even more important that his individual liberty should be restored at the earliest possible moment and that he should be released. I am sure that my hon. Friend will make every effort to that end. Both I and Roger Cooper's patient and suffering family look forward with expectation to the reply that the Minister will give tonight.

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Tim Eggar)

I listened with interest, considerable emotion and close attention to the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, North (Mr. Baker). I recall hearing, at the end of 1985 —I believe it was in fact new year's eve 1986—that, as we expected, Roger Cooper had been arrested. That for me was the beginning of what I believe is an association with Roger which has lasted for almost the whole period that I have been the Minister at the Foreign Office with responsibility for Britons abroad.

I want to begin by saying how sorry I am that there is any need for us to have this debate tonight. Roger Cooper simply should not be in gaol in Iran more than three years after his arrest. However, I welcome the initiative of my hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, North in raising Roger's case and I want to take this opportunity to set out the efforts that we have made to release Roger and restate our determination to maintain pressure on the Iranian Government.

As my hon. Friend has said, Roger Cooper, a journalist with long experience and intimate knowledge of Iran, was arrested on 7 December 1985. It does indeed appear, as my hon. Friend said, that his original entry visa to Iran had expired by 7 December but he had been given to understand that he might stay for longer. Contrary to the Vienna convention on consular relations the British interests section of the Swedish embassy was not informed of Roger's arrest. But our diplomats in Tehran had noted his absence within the British community and made inquiries of the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 11 December 1985. The Ministry was unable to give us any information on Roger's whereabouts. As I have already said, on new year's eve 1985, we learnt from the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs that Roger Cooper's future now lay with the revolutionary courts. The Foreign Ministry stated that it could no longer intervene in what it described as this judicial process.

Once Roger's detention had been confirmed we made repeated representations for consular access to him in prison. I have from time to time had to emphasise from the Dispatch Box the very real limitations on the level of assistance which our consular representatives abroad can offer British citizens in trouble. However, access for consular authorities to prisoners abroad is a fundamental right under the terms of the Vienna convention on consular relations. Iran is a signatory to that convention, as are we, but the Iranian Foreign Ministry told us only that the question of access to Roger Cooper was no longer within its gift. That attitude and approach was not and is 462 not acceptable from a country which is a signatory to the Vienna convention. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to stress the fact that Roger's detention contravenes the Vienna convention on consular relations.

Since the start of Roger's detention we have pressed repeatedly for access to him and for the Iranian authorities to fulfil the terms of their international obligations. But it was not until August 1986 that our consul was granted a sight of Roger, and then only a sight through a glass screen. Since that viewing, if that is the way to describe it, and until August last year, British officials were only permitted to visit Roger on one occasion. His brother Paul has been allowed to visit him on a number of occasions. I would like to say at this point how marvellous Roger's family have been. We have been in close and regular contact with them. They have shown great resilience, fortitude and fine judgment throughout.

Since Roger's arrest his case has been discussed at every meeting between British and Iranian officials. Only last week in Paris, my hon. Friend the Minister of State raised the matter with the Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Velayati.

A number of factors have hindered our efforts over past years. There are those in Iran who seem to believe that they have something to gain from holding Roger Cooper hostage. They have drawn spurious parallels between his case and those of Iranian prisoners in the United Kingdom. We have made it quite clear, as my hon. Friend would have expected, that there is no question of bargaining over Roger's release. In any case, we can accept no comparison between the detention of Roger Cooper in Iran without cause and the imprisonment, after due trial and conviction, of Iranian citizens in the United Kingdom.

It is also, of course, the case that Roger's detention has spanned a very difficult time in relations between the United Kingdom and Iran. These relations reached an all-time low in 1987 after a series of mutual expulsions and following the violent abduction of and unprovoked assault upon one of our senior diplomats in Tehran. That incident illustrated only too clearly the sad fact that we simply could not rely on Iran for the protection of our diplomats, despite their obligations under the Vienna convention. We thus felt forced to withdraw our diplomatic staff from Tehran.

Diplomatic relations were nonetheless maintained. We have been fortunate to have the excellent services of the Swedish embassy as our protecting power in Iran. We are grateful to the Swedish ambassador and his staff for all they did to help us during our absence from Tehran.

I am happy to say that the last few months have seen some important steps towards normalising our relations with Iran once again. We have always made it clear that if our bilateral and other difficulties could be overcome we should like to work towards better relations with Iran. Iran began in the summer of last year to show signs that she was ready to improve her own contacts with the international community; and to recognise the responsibilities that that involves.

We were heartened by Iran's acceptance of the United Nations resolution 598. The results of a series of exploratory official level contacts led us to conclude that it was right to seek a normalisation of relations. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State and the Iranian Foreign Minister therefore agreed to the restoration of full diplomatic representations when they met on 30 September last year.

463 In taking that decision, one of the main considerations was our hope and belief that by restoring our representation in Tehran we would be able to speed up the release of Roger Cooper and of Nicolas Nicola. Those British citizens were at the forefront of our minds during the discussions with the Iranians. Their cases were the first issues which our charge raised when he resumed official contacts with the authorities in Tehran.

I am sure that the House will agree that the release of Nicolas Nicola on 26 December 1988 demonstrates that we were right to take that firm approach. We welcome Nicolas Nicola's release and only regret that it has taken so long. But I can assure my hon. Friend that we will not be satisfied with just this one step forward. The Iranians must take the further step of releasing Roger Cooper. We expect them also to do all in their power to help secure the release of British hostages in the Lebanon.

Our renewed presence in Tehran means, of course, that we can keep in closer touch. The charge and consul visited Roger Cooper on 28 December. I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that they found him in generally good health and reasonable spirits. He is not in solitary confinement.

464 He has access to books, television and radio. He has been able to pursue his writing, although I cannot comment at this early stage on the article allegedly written by him which appeared in the Iranian press this week.

But, however reasonable the physical conditions under which he is detained and however often our representatives can see Roger, nothing can compensate for the fact that he continues to be held against his will and with no good cause and against Iran's constitutional and international obligations.

The Iranian authorities know that we see Roger Cooper's case as a test of their readiness to fulfil their obligations and a yardstick of how far they really wish to improve relations with the United Kingdom. We have made it very clear—I say this categorically in response to my hon. Friend—that there can be no substantial improvement in our relationship until Roger is released and until there is positive progress on the situation of the hostages in the Lebanon. We shall continue to insist on this, and we will make sure that the Iranian Government understand that the British public will not stand for less —nor will the Government.