Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

for Human Rights in Iran

Promoting tolerance and justice through knowledge and understanding

Flogging in Najafabad: A Reporter Received 40 Lashes for Publishing a Wrong Number

ISNA (Iranian Students News Agency) / Translation by ABC
January 8, 2017

“Hossein Movahedi, a media reporter in Najafabad, had been arrested for publishing the wrong number of motorcycles seized by the security forces. He was condemned to 40 lashes and the ruling was carried out last week [on January 5, 2017].

According to ISNA, quoting the Sharq newspaper, this reporter received 40 lashes following a complaint filed by the security forces in Najafabad. The dark irony is when media referred to the speech by the new governor of Najafabad, Sohrab Mozafar Najafi, a week earlier than this strange incident. In his meeting with reporters, he said that the free flow of information should exist in society. A week later, we witnessed the lashing of a reporter. This reporter received lashes when the reported media had published the response by the security forces….

This incident had a widespread reaction. Abolfazl Abutorabi, the representative of Najafabad in the Islamic parliament, expressed regret and stated: ‘The arrest of this reporter was accompanied with a warrant to enter his residence in the early hours of the day. However, it took about an hour to take him to the police station because agents in the vehicle carrying him were arresting other offenders in the surrounding streets. Agents had gone to his house to arrest him in early morning.’

According to this representative of the parliament, the story began on June 14, 2016 when the reporter from Najafabad published a news item indicating the seizure of 35 motorcycles belonging to students of a craft school in the city. In regards to the media laws, a response by the related institution was published in which the number of motorcycles was corrected to eight.”

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."