|
 About
Age — Nationality Iran Religion Presumed Muslim Civil status — Education — Occupation — Rank/Position — Affiliation —
Case Date of execution September 29, 2002 Location Tehran, Iran Mode of execution hanging Charges Rape; Robbery; Unspecified offense About this Case
Information about the execution of Mr. Farhad Aqlarian and four other individuals has been taken from the websites of Iran newspaper (Aug. 28, Sep. 28 & 30, 2002), Amnesty International (Sep. 25), the Jomhuri Eslami newspaper (Sep. 27), and the ISNA news agency (Sep. 29). According to Iran, these five men kidnapped young women and raped them; the sixth member of this gang called “Unveiled Hunters” (or “Black Vultures” in Amnesty International’s report, established in June/July 2001), not proven guilty of rape, was charged with kidnapping and consumption of alcohol and condemned to flogging and 25 years imprisonment. The judge of Tehran Judiciary stated that “according to the law, the details of the activities of this gang cannot be disclosed…” He denied the allegation that the victims of the gang were, in fact, prostitutes and added: “fading of spiritual values, the type of make-up and inappropriate appearance of some women provoke some youth and hence bring about certain difficulties… The Judiciary and the police will sternly prosecute the seditious and will not show any consideration in their prosecution” (Jomhuri Eslami).
Arrest and detention
Following the complaint of a young woman regarding the kidnapping of her sister and her friend, the members of this gang were arrested on December 30, 2001 (Iran). The details of this defendant’s arrest and detention are not known.
Trial
No information is available on the defendant’s trial other than it took place at Branch 1610 of the Tehran Judiciary (Amnesty International).
Charges
Mr. Aqlarian was charged with “rape, kidnapping, theft, and consumption of alcohol” (Iran). The newspaper wrote that the gang members, under the cover of taxi cab drivers, kidnapped women, stole their valuables, and raped them.
The validity of the criminal charges brought against this defendant cannot be ascertained in the absence of the basic guarantees of a fair trial. International human rights organizations have drawn attention to reports indicating that the Islamic Republic’s authorities have brought trumped-up charges against their political opponents and executed them for drug trafficking, sexual, and other criminal offences. The exact number of people convicted based on trumped-up charges is unknown.
Evidence of guilt
The exact number of the victims of the gang was not announced but it was mentioned that the file included ten victims (Jomhuri Eslami). The Judge stated that when the media publicized the story, many people wrote to one of the newspapers and complained about the gang. After opening a telephone hot-line for the victims of the gang, 17 tapes of phone calls were recorded, totaling 30 hours (ibid). According to the Iran newspaper, four of the victims of the gang testified against the defendants at court. The newspaper report also referred to identification of the victims by the police, and communications of many women, who did not wish to come forward for the sake of their honor. Additionally, having heard the testimony of the witnesses, the defendants expressed regret and confessed to having committed the crimes.
International human rights organizations have repeatedly condemned the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its systematic use of severe torture and solitary confinement to obtain confessions from detainees and have questioned the authenticity of confessions obtained under duress. In the case of political detainees, these confessions are, at times, televised. The National Television broadcasts confessions during which prisoners plead guilty to vague and false charges, repent and renounce their political beliefs, and/or implicate others. Human rights organizations have also pointed to the pattern of retracted confessions by those prisoners who are freed.
Defense
No information is available on Mr. Aqlarian’s defense at the court. However, three of the defendants spoke to the media before their execution. One of them, Majid Qasemi, said: “we do not deserve to be executed. The [women] who filed complaints against us did not resist our demands.” Another defendant, named Amir Karbala’i Heidar, stated that he was innocent and that the targeted women were prostitutes and he did not understand why they filed complaints against the defendants. When asked why, as a student, he committed such acts, Payam Amini, another co-defendant, responded, “I accept that I had infringed the law and am ready to be punished for that, but our crime was not such to be punishable by death…”
Judgment
The court condemned the defendants to death and Branch 32 of the Supreme Court approved the death sentence. According to ISNA, each of the individuals was flogged 154 lashes before the execution. According to Iran, after being transferred to the execution location, since the family of the defendants were not present, with the permission of the judge, they could call their families on the phone. Many police officers of a Special Unit were present at site in order to guarantee security. Mr. Farhad Aqlarian, along with co-defendant, Amir Fakhri, was hanged at Azadi Circle in Tehran at 6 a.m. on September 30, 2002 in public.
|
|
Human rights violations in this caseThe legal context
Read about the courts, the judges, and the procedure. The courts
Special courts, known as the Islamic Revolutionary Tribunals, were set up after the February 1979 revolution. Their jurisdiction encompasses a wide array of offences ranging from association with or support of the former regime, promotion of foreign influence, and enmity with the revolution to possession, use or sales of narcotic drugs, murder, and profiteering. In the 1980s, a penal court, presided over by one judge, was created to handle some of the offenses punishable by death, such as theft or adultery. These tribunals’ decisions must be confirmed by a chamber of the Supreme Judicial Council.
The judges
Prosecutors and judges are not necessarily jurists. By 1981, the judiciary was purged of judges trained in law schools. They were replaced by seminary graduates and students, as well as by political appointees (an estimated 2000 by 1989). Since by law judges are only required to have a high school diploma and must be faithful to the Islamic Republic’s tenets, new recruits often have little formal training in the law and are chosen because of their political affiliation.
The procedure
The procedures of these ecclesiastical tribunals fail to meet the minimum guarantees for fair trial as established by international human rights instruments and by sha’ria (the Islamic system of law). In addition to executions ordered by revolutionary tribunals, extra-judicial executions are carried out, targeting dissidents and opposition leaders. In some cases, both inside and outside of Iran, these executions have been traced back to Iranian officials. It is, however, not known if in these particular cases trials are held in absentia.
Sources (Among others): Amnesty International, Law and Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, February 1980; Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights, The Justice System of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1992; E/CN.4/1989/26 p.14; UNCHR, Resolution 1984/54 , Abolition of Torture - Iran - 1; 28 November 1984; Report on the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Special Representative of the Commission, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, 28 January 1987. Amnesty International, A SHOCKED WORLD WATCHES IN DISBELIEF, VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1987-1990. Memoirs of Ayatollah Khalkhali, religious judge and former head of revolutionary tribunals (2001), and Ayatollah Montazeri, dismissed successor to Ayatollah Khomeini (2001). UNCH, E/CN.4/1994/50, Final report on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/62 of 10 March 1993 and Economic and Social Council decision 1993/273. E/CN.4/1994/50, 2 February 1994.
 read...
 close... Based on the available information, some or all of the following human rights may have been violated in this case:
-
The right to liberty and security of the person. The right not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 9.1.
The right to due process
Pre-trial detention rights
-
The right to know promptly and in detail the nature and cause of the charges against one.
UDHR, Article 9(2); ICCPR, Article 9.2 and Article 14.3.a
The right to counsel of one’s own choosing or legal aid and the right to meet with one’s attorney in confidence
ICCPR, Article 14.3.d;
Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, Article 1 , Article 2, Article 5, Article 6, and Article 8. -
The right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defense case.
ICCPR, Article 14.3.b; Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, Article 8%viol_bprl_8%..
The right not to be compelled to testify against oneself or to confess to guilt.
ICCPR, Article 14.3.g. -
The right not to be subjected to torture and to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
UDHR, Article 5; ICCPR, Article 7; Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment, Article 1, and Article 2.
Trial rights
-
The right to a fair and public trial without undue delay.
ICCPR, Article 9.3, Article 14.1, Article 14.3.c.
The right to examine, or have examined the witnesses against one and to obtain the attendance and examination of defense witnesses under the same conditions as witnesses for the prosecution. ICCPR, Article 14.3.e.
The right to have the decision rendered in public.
ICCPR, Article 14.1.
Judgment rights
Capital punishment
-
The inherent right to life, of which no one shall be arbitrarily deprived.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 6.1; Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, Article 1.1, Article 1.2.
-
The right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
ICCPR, Article 7; Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment, Article 1 and Article 2.
|
