Promoting tolerance and justice through knowledge and understanding
Flogging

Public Flogging in Tabas: Two Men Received 74 Lashes Each for Alleged Robbery

Fars news agency
September 20, 2011
Report

"According to the Fars news agency in Tabas, the lash ruling against two defendants, who were condemned by Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Tabas, was carried out in public at Emam-Khomeini Square in Tabas.

Before the ruling was carried out, the legal process and the court ruling for each case was read. According to this reading, the charge of robbery against Seyedalireza R., son of Seyedabolfazl, a Tabas resident, who was born in 1990 and had a previous record for robbery, was confirmed. This was based on all existing evidence including a police report, complaints of victims, reports of the court and the public prosecutor's office, the defendant's clear confession in court, and the indictment.

The court condemned the defendant, who had eight previous convictions, to three years imprisonment, 74 lashes in public at the main square of the city, returning the stolen items to victims and three years mandatory residency in the city of Bordeskan.

The defendant appealed the ruling issued by Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Tabas. Branch Six of the Provincial Appeal Court in Yazd rejected his appeal and confirmed the ruling of Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Tabas.

With legal and religious considerations, the lash ruling against Seyedalireza R. was carried out at Emam-Khomeini Square in Tabas.

Additionally, the charge of robbery against Shahram B., son of Mandani, a Yasuj resident and married, who was born in 1977 and had no previous record of conviction, was also confirmed. This was based on all existing evidence including the police report, complaints of victims, recovery of stolen items from the defendant, the defendant's clear confession in court, and the indictment.

The court condemned the defendant to two years imprisonment and 74 lashes in public at the main square of the city. He was also condemned to paying 5 million Rials fine for driving without a license.

The defendant appealed the ruling issued by Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Tabas. Branch One of the Provincial Appeal Court in Yazd rejected his appeal and confirmed the ruling of Branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Tabas.

With legal and religious considerations, the lash ruling against Shahram B. was carried out at Emam-Khomeini Square in Tabas."

ABF Note

 

Findings of guilt in the Islamic Republic of Iran's Judicial Proceedings

The Islamic Republic of Iran's criminal justice system regularly falls short of the standards for due process necessary for impartiality, fairness, and efficacy. Suspects are often held incommunicado and not told of the reason for their detainment. Defendants are frequently prohibited from examining the evidence used against them. Defendants are sometimes prohibited from having their lawyers present in court. Additionally, confessions, made under duress or torture, are commonly admitted as proof of guilt. Because Iran's courts regularly disregard principles essential to the proper administration of justice, findings of guilt may not be evaluated with certainty.

Corporal Punishment: the Legal context in the Islamic Republic of Iran

The Islamic Republic's criminal code recognizes corporal punishment for a wide range of offenses: consumption of alcohol, theft, adultery, "flouting" of public morals, and mixing of the sexes in public. Judges have the latitude to mete out corporal punishment for those sentenced to death. In such cases, the flogging is carried out before death to maximize the suffering of defendant. Aside from flogging, the Islamic Republic also employs amputations as a punishment for theft. In such cases, the defendant is taken to a hospital and put under anesthesia as his hand or foot is amputated. In some cases the left foot and right hand are cut off, making it difficult for the condemned to walk, even with the assistance of a cane or crutches.

The Islamic Republic's Systematic Violation of its International Obligations under International Law

The use of corporal punishment is contrary to international law and is addressed in several international agreements. Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Iran has ratified, states that, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Identical language is also used in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Iran is also a party to. The strongest expression of international disapproval is contained in the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). This treaty defines torture as, "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as ... punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed." Although the Islamic Republic of Iran has yet to sign the CAT, the prohibition on torture is now considered jus cogens and, therefore, part of customary international law. Furthermore, even though the norm against corporal punishment is not yet a jus cogens, there is increasing evidence that it is illegal under international human rights law.[1] In Osbourne v. Jamaica, the Committee Against Torture (a body of experts responsible for monitoring compliance with the Convention) held that "corporal punishment constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment contrary to Article 7 of the Convention." The Islamic Republic of Iran's systematic violations of its obligations under international law have been addressed by the UN General Assembly multiple times, most recently in December 2007. In Resolution 62/168, the UN expressed deep concern with Iran's continued flouting of international human rights law, particularly, "confirmed instances of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including flogging and amputations."