A judicial authority of Fars
province states that news coverage of judicial procedures is scant.
The Head of the Public
Court and the Islamic Revolutionary Tribunal of
Shiraz has said that despite the fact that the judiciary takes strong measures
to combat crimes and lawbreaking, the public does not appreciate the work of
this body due to sparse news coverage of the actions of the judiciary.
Hojatoleslam Mohammad Ali Fazel told an IRNA reporter
that the infrequent news coverage of judiciary proceedings may give the
impression that the judiciary is weak on crimes and that it neglects its
duties, which, he said, is not the case.
He said that the judiciary is absolutely determined to
punish crimes in Fars
Province. He added, however, that since it is
inappropriate to make daily statements to the public about executions and ghesas and to provide detailed
information regarding the cases, court officials prefer that not all of them be
reported.
The Head of the Public
Court and the Revolutionary Tribunal of Shiraz
stated: "In one case, two people were tried in Shiraz for two counts of armed robbery and in
another city for ten counts of robbery. In that city they were sentenced to
prison for the ten counts of robbery, but for robbing the Saderat Bank
in Shiraz, they
were sentenced to death. This case shows
the determination of the Fars judiciary to
punish the perpetrators.”
According to the IRNA report, Hojatoleslam Fazel said, “Just because there is no interview given
and no constant notification about executions ghesas[1] and hudud[2], this does not
mean that no sentences have been implemented and no strong action has been
taken.”
Hojatoleslam Fazel
continued, saying that desirable and lasting safety and security is the
people's right and they can legitimately expect us to provide peace and
security.
He also underlined the need for speedy implementation of
judicial decisions and said, “In one case the entire process -- the
investigation, the issuance of the verdict, and implementation of the verdict
took only 20 hours. This case
demonstrates that cases about which the public is sensitive can be dealt with
promptly and the judgment can be implemented without delay.”
[1] “Qisas
(Arabic: قصاص) is an Islamic term meaning retaliation, similar to the
biblical principle of an eye for an eye. In the case of murder, it
means the right of the heirs of a murder victim to demand execution of the
murderer. However, the Quran also prescribes that one should seek compensation
(Diyya) and not
demand retribution. As execution for murder was conceived as the retaliation of
the victim's heirs, traditionally the state could only carry out the execution
with their permission, and they were free to forgive the murderer, either as an
act of charity or in return for compensation.” See Qisas entry in Wikipedia.
[2] Hudud
(Arabic
حدود, also transliterated hadud, hudood; singular hadd,
حد, literal meaning "limit", or "restriction")
is the word often used in Islamic literature for the bounds of acceptable behavior and
the punishments for serious crimes. In Islamic law or Sharia, hudud
usually refers to the class of punishments that are fixed for certain crimes
that are considered to be "claims of God." They include theft, fornication,
and consumption of alcohol. The punishment for these crimes is prescribed in
the Quran and the judge cannot reduce the punishment. Ibid.
|