Golriz Ghahraman's Aversion to Truthfulness

When I first heard about Golriz Ghahraman it was from Nick announcing that she was the first refugee to enter the New Zealand Parliament. Her family had fled Iran when she was nine and resettled here.

The next I heard of her was when a scandal broke that she had willingly volunteered to serve on the defense team of those accused of atrocities in the Rwandan genocide.

Two damning photographs were also made public. One showed a grinning Ghahraman standing next to Simon Bikindi who was later convicted of inciting genocide. The other shows a still grinning Ghahraman seated next to the Rwandan defense team. (Everyone else had to good sense to let the seriousness of the matter reflect in their facial expressions.)

The scandal was noteworthy because Ghahraman was a Green party MP whose profile had extolled her virtue as a human rights advocate.

In fact, any article written on her before the information came out was suspiciously bereft of any mention of her stint with the Rwandan defense team.

The article on her in the November issue of Law Talk was one long humble brag. She went to Oxford and loved justice. Refugees, oppressed persons, unfortunates and down trodden individuals were her life, etc.

Her twitter feed features a series of photographs in which she is always the focal point. Around her are the  human props people she lives to serve.

When called out on her dishonesty she responded that anyone could learn of the defense work if they just scrolled down to the bottom of her LinkedIn profile where it was noted in an easy-to-miss location.

As for the misrepresentation on the Green's website she was happy to let everyone think that it was an oversight on the part of the party, not herself.

I volunteered for the campaign of local Labour candidate Tony Condon and I helped him write and edit his own background story. Once complete it was sent to the moderators and posted on Labour's official website.

I'm sure this wasn't the case with Ghahraman and it's only an awkward coincidence that her information wasn't corrected until after the elections when she was promoted to MP from the party's list.

Her response to the fallout has been to say that the criminally accused are entitled to a defense.

At first glance this seems like a difficult but necessary truth but it is in fact, a red herring.

Ghahraman makes it seem like she was the only person brave enough to enable the accused to have their day in court. In fact, the accused had a team of lawyers and Ghahraman volunteered to go to the dark side and help out.

With or without her, the trial would have gone on with a competent defense team.

The decision to grin from ear to ear while posing with a man accused of "inciting genocide" was also entirely voluntary and in no way necessary to the process of justice.

Recently, a blogger pointed out Ghahraman's problematic claim that she remembers the bombs falling around her during her time in Iran. The blogger noted that her hometown of Mashhad was more than 1000 miles away from Tehran and was not bombed during the war.

Her huffy response was that she never said it was but that she was often sent to visit her family in Tehran during school holidays.

So, war broke out, bombs were falling and Golriz' parents who had enough sense to flee Iran still thought was okay to repeatedly send her to the kill zone to visit family.

Seems totally legit.

As a feminist I am always happy to see women doing good things and helping others.

As a person with a low tolerance for dishonest bullshit I am always angry when people like Ghahraman try to get away with being morally repugnant.

Once, during my time with the Coast Guard I was tasked with helping a young woman who turned out to be a narcissist and compulsive liar. In retrospect I remember the way her eyes searched my face when she was speaking to me. At first I thought it was due to her sincerity of feeling. Later I realized she was scanning my face to see if I had caught on to her lies.

Even now, diligent reporters could be checking to see if Ghahraman was actually enrolled at Oxford.

I'm sure whatever they come up with will be disavowed and the responsibility of knowing will be put back on the general public.

If only we had read the fine print in some obscure document...it was right there the whole time!

*For informative and well-written stories about the political turmoil and war in Iran, I suggest reading anything by Marjane Satrapi. My favorite will always be the graphic novel "Persepolis."

World of Forkcraft

It finally happened.

I got my forklifting endorsement on my license. I am sooooo proud.

To make matters more exciting, Nick just bought himself a forklift and since I'm the only one who is certified to use it, I get to go out into our equipment yard and practice my skills.

Bro, do you even lift?

Yes I do.

Pounamu

For our fourth anniversary Nick bought me a pounamu necklace.

Pounamu is a beautiful type of nephrite found in New Zealand's south island. It belongs to Ngai Tahu and is sold under iwi approval. It comes in varying shades of green and is usually carved into some meaningful form.

Mine was in a double twist known as a pikorua. It was a gorgeous deep forest green.

Within 24 hours of receiving the necklace it lay on the floor of my room in two pieces. My son had picked it up from the nightstand and dropped it onto the carpet from a height of about two feet.

I was upset and Nick was livid.

He said he had paid $450 for something that was supposed to last a lifetime and instead had broken in a day.

Two days later he took the piece back to the jewelry store and was informed by the manager that the breakage was our fault and that it wasn't the store's policy to do refunds. He was then told that if he wanted to buy another piece they'd be happy to give him a 15% discount.

Nick told the manager he could fuck right off and that they hadn't heard the last of us because his girlfriend was a law student.

When I heard the news first I stewed and then I turned to the law.

The Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 was my weapon of choice. It lays out the responsibilities of vendors and manufacturers in relation to their products. Section 7 had two helpful parts (a) an object must be fit for its intended purpose and (e) durable. Legal remedies consisted of a refund or replacement of the object with another of equal value. If the company refused to follow the law they could be taken to the Disputes Tribunal. Letters could also be written to the Commerce Commissioner. Notices could also be given to the local press and the consumer friendly program "Fair Go" could be contacted.

I called the artist who carved the pieces to let him know what had happened and how the company selling his work had reacted. He said the pounamu had fibers and grains just like wood and while it wasn't common to have them snap, it wasn't unheard of. A few of his pieces had even done so while he was working on them. He said he would call the company and speak with them and I thanked him.

This is the second time I've had to deal with a faulty product and dodge by the company that sold it to me.

Harvey Norman tried to say it was "user error" when the laptop I bought for my daughter had a screen separate from its frame. They wasted no time in saying our actions had gone beyond reasonable wear and tear and that the warranty was voided.

When I insisted that a brand new computer sitting in an open position on a desk for six months couldn't possibly be called "wear and tear" they pouted and said they would contact the manufacturer.

They came back to us a few days later and said the manufacturer was blaming us but that they would "escalate the situation up the chain" to get a solution.

How magnanimous of them.

In the end they replaced the faulty laptop with a new one.

It boils my blood that there are laws in place to protect buyers but most don't know where to look for them.

The default position for the retailer seems to be "it's your fault and we won't fix it but feel free to spend more money with us."

As a dear friend pointed out, this is a really shitty business strategy.

The other thing that gets my goat (to use the old phrase) is that these companies deal in hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars worth of goods from the manufacturers.

The manufacturer can't afford to piss off the retailer.

What ultimately happens in most of these scenarios is that the faulty product is sent back and a credit is issued.

Neither the retailer nor the manufacturer goes hungry or becomes homeless from the process.

*****

I returned to the jewelry store two days after Nick's visit, armed with copies of the relevant law and moral outrage.

I was fully prepared to become "loud and indignant" if the situation called for it.

I met with the manager who quickly realized he had been foretold of my coming and lo! I was upon him.

He looked at the broken pieces I placed in front of him and the air between us became pregnant with an impending dodge.

"Here," I said, "Let me show you section 7 of the Consumer Guarantees Act."

I went on to explain that he had sold me a piece of jewelry with a weakness in it that would have caused it to break sooner or later. The piece was sold as a necklace which are meant to be worn regularly and the flaw meant that it was never fit for such a purpose (section a). It also certainly didn't meet the definition of "durable" (section e).

The urge to blame the user and deny responsibility played out in his facial expression.

A battle raged within him. He could continue to play the shyster but it was risky. First my partner had cursed him out and then I came at him with legalities.

I proceeded to show him the section of the Act about the remedies of either a refund or replacement. I said I preferred a replacement.

Finally he gave in.

"We don't normally do this sort of thing but since its Christmas..."

"Whatever you need to do to tell yourself to get on the same page as me," I thought.

He took me to the window display of carved pounamu and brought out more selections for my perusal.

We found common ground in our praise for greenstone and those who carved it.

I had won but there was no need to rub it in.

I picked out a beautiful manaia and finally went home a happy customer.

The Blue Cup

Recently I was co-awarded The Blue Cup for "Best First-Time Mooter."

The cup is named after a former University of Canterbury law professor who was never seen without a blue teacup in hand.

I share the award with my colleague Erin who came in second in the junior moot and bravely represented our university at the national mooting competition this year.

We've worked out a shared custody agreement where she will have the cup for Christmas and I'll take it for the New Year.