Mai Sato Demands Withdrawal of "Countering Foreign Influence" Bill

UN Special Rapporteur Mai Sato warned that the “Countering Foreign Influence” bill could turn connections with media, universities, and international organizations into a security matter and further restrict citizens’ fundamental freedoms

Iran Human Rights Society, Friday, September 4, 2026 – Mai Sato, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, supported the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission’s request for the withdrawal of the bill titled “Countering Foreign Influence.” She warned that citizens’ engagement with the outside world must not be placed under the control and surveillance of intelligence agencies.

Mai Sato’s Warning Regarding Expansion of Legal Repression

On Thursday, September 3, 2026, Mai Sato wrote in a post on the X social network: “I join the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Iran in calling for the withdrawal of the draft law on countering foreign influence.”

This position was declared after the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission warned about the dangerous consequences of this bill for freedom of expression, access to information, activities of human rights defenders, and citizens’ communication with the international community.

The Fact-Finding Mission stated that the ambiguity and broad scope of the bill’s provisions could place contact with international media, educational institutions, universities, civil organizations, and human rights defenders under the classification of security crimes.

Securitizing Communication with the Outside World

Referencing the law on “Intensifying the Punishment for Espionage and Cooperation with the Zionist Regime and Hostile Countries,” Mai Sato noted that this legislation previously criminalized communication with foreign media, transmission of information, and the use of satellite communications equipment, assigning penalties up to the death penalty for certain cases.

According to Mai Sato, these regulations have also been used in cases related to the peaceful expression of opinion, resulting in the freezing or confiscation of assets belonging to hundreds of journalists, activists, and citizens residing abroad. The new bill could expand this exact policy into academic, cultural, artistic, and economic spheres.

Based on published provisions, participating in international courses and conferences, academic cooperation with foreign universities, artistic activities, and certain economic communications may become subject to registration, prior notice, or obtaining authorization from government and intelligence agencies. This mechanism converts citizens’ free communication from a public right into a privilege contingent upon security apparatus approval.

Continued Consideration of the Bill in Parliament

The general outlines of the 33-article bill on “Countering the Influence of Intelligence Services and Foreign Governments or Entities” were approved on August 16 with 183 votes in favor. According to reports on the parliamentary review process, the evaluation of its details has not yet concluded.

Even a number of parliament members have warned about generalities, broad criminalization, and the lack of specialized judicial review. Nevertheless, proponents claim the bill’s goal is to counter influence and create “transparency” in foreign relations.

In response to these justifications, Mai Sato emphasized: “The Iranian people’s interaction with the world must not be under the control of intelligence agencies.”

Information Box | Bill Overview at a Glance

Subject	Information
Bill Title	Countering the Influence of Intelligence Services and Foreign Governments or Entities
Scope	33 Articles
General Approval Date	August 16, 2026 (Passed with 183 votes)
Status	Detailed provisions under review in Parliament
Key International Positions	Demands for withdrawal by UN Special Rapporteur Mai Sato and UN Fact-Finding Mission
Main Concerns	Securitization of academic, cultural, media, and civil ties; broad criminalization; intelligence oversight

Legal Review of the Countering Foreign Influence Bill Based on Domestic Laws

The laws of the dictatorship ruling Iran have consistently been criticized due to conflict with fair trial standards and restricting citizens’ rights. Reviewing this bill based on domestic laws does not mean confirmation of these laws; rather, it demonstrates that its provisions conflict even with certain rights explicitly recognized in these exact regulations.

Legal Ambiguities of the Case

Article 9 of the Constitution: Explicitly prohibits taking away legitimate freedoms, even under the justification of protecting independence and territorial integrity.

Articles 23 & 24 of the Constitution: Emphasize the prohibition of investigating beliefs and guarantee freedom of the press and expression.

Article 36 of the Constitution & Article 2 of the Islamic Penal Code: Stipulate that crimes and punishments must be explicitly defined by law.

Vague Definitions: Vague definitions of “influence,” expanding the authority of intelligence agencies, criminalizing normal communications, and stipulating heavy penalties undermine the principle of legality of crime and punishment, freedom of expression, and citizens’ judicial security.

Reviewing the Case from the Perspective of Human Rights and Violation of International Standards

Mai Sato’s position demonstrates that this bill erases the boundary between espionage and legitimate communication, serving as a potential tool to suppress journalists, academics, artists, and civil activists.

Human Rights Ambiguities of the Case

Mandatory registration of foreign communications, intelligence surveillance, and threatening citizens with imprisonment or execution represent clear violations of fundamental rights and serve as tools to isolate society from the free flow of information.

Related International Documents

Articles 12 & 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Protect privacy, freedom of opinion, and the right to receive and impart information regardless of frontiers.