Kamran Mansur: One Person’s Story

Human rights violations in this case

The Islamic Republic of Iran has a long history of politically motivated violence in Iran and around the world. Since the 1979 Revolution, Islamic Republic operatives inside and outside the country have engaged in kidnapping, disappearing, and killing a large number of individuals whose activities they deemed undesirable. The actual number of the victims of extrajudicial killings inside Iran is not clear; however, these murders began in February 1979, with the murder of Parviz Sayyah Sina, an Anglican Bishop, and have continued since then, both inside and outside Iran. The Abdorrahman Boroumand Center has so far identified over 500 extrajudicial killings outside Iran attributed to the Islamic Republic of Iran.(1)

Dissidents have been assassinated by the agents of the Islamic Republic outside Iran, where one of the first assassinations, that of a Navy Officer, Shahriar Shafiq, took place in Paris in December 1979. These assassinations have taken place in countries such as the Philippines, Indonesia, Japan, India, and Pakistan in Asia; Dubai, Iraq, and Turkey in the Middle East; Cyprus, France, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Great Britain in Europe; and the United States across the Atlantic Ocean. In too many cases, states have failed to guarantee the victims’ rights to the truth, justice, and remedy; states have revealed little about the assassinations and have not issued arrest warrants. Where there have been arrests and prosecutions, available information reveals a state policy of eliminating perceived enemies.

Documentation, evidence, and traces obtained through investigations conducted by local police and judicial authorities confirm, however, the theory of state committed crimes. In certain cases, these investigations have resulted in the expulsion (The Netherlands, 2018) or arrest (Brussels, 2020; Turkey, 2021) of Iranian diplomats. In limited cases outside Iran, the perpetrators of these murders have been arrested and put on trial (Paris 1980 and 1991) and the evidence presented, revealed the defendants’ connection to Iran’s government institutions, and an arrest warrant (the Mikonos Trial in Germany) has been issued for Iran’s then-Minister of Information, Ali Fallahian and the Deputy Minister of Telecommunications, Hossein Sheikh Attar.

The manner in which these killings were organized and implemented in Iran and abroad, is indicative of a single pattern which, according to Roland Chatelin, the Swiss prosecutor, contains common parameters and detailed planning. It can be ascertained from the similarities between these murders in different countries that the Iranian government is the principal entity who ordered the implementation of these crimes. (2). In 1997, the Berlin Criminal Court, in charge of hearing the case of the shooting of Kurdish dissidents in a Berlin restaurant, officially announced that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s highest-ranking officials had issued the order to carry out the killings. According to the indictment, the decision to commit the murders was made in a committee called the “Special Operations Committee” composed of the President, the Minister of Information and Security (VAVAK), the Minister of Foreign Affairs, representatives of the various security organs and other organizations, and finally, the Leader of the Revolution.

Iranian authorities have not officially accepted responsibility for these murders and have even attributed their commission to internal strife in opposition groups. Nevertheless, since the very inception of the Islamic Republic regime, the Islamic Republic officials have justified these crimes from an ideological and legal standpoint. In the spring of 1979, Sadeq Khalkhali, the first Chief Shari’a Judge of the Islamic Revolutionary Courts, officially announced the regime’s decision to implement extrajudicial executions, and justified the decision: “ … These people have been sentenced to death; from the Iranian people’s perspective, if someone wants to assassinate these individuals abroad, in any country, no government has any right to bring the perpetrator to trial as a terrorist, because such a person is the implementing agent of the sentence issued by the Islamic Revolutionary Court. Therefore, they are Mahduroddam (“one whose blood may be spilled, whose life can be taken, without the perpetrator incurring any punishment”) and their sentence is death regardless of where they are [and where you find them].”

More than 10 years after these proclamations, in a speech about the security forces’ success, Ali Fallahian, the regime’s Minister of Information stated the following regarding the elimination of members of the opposition: “ … We have had success in inflicting damage to many of these little groups outside the country and on our borders” (Speech broadcast on the state-run Iranian Radio and Television on August 31, 1992, quoted from Asr Iran, August 17, 2006).

Extrajudicial killings have rarely been pursued legally in Iran. The few murders that were followed up on in 1998 , which came to be known as “the Serial (Chain) Murders(3),” have brought to light the involvement and responsibility of the country’s Information officials. Several Ministry of Information agents who were defendants in the Serial Murders case, confirmed the existence of a long term government policy of extrajudicial killings and emphasized that there was planning on an annual basis to carry out these executions, for which a religious decree was issued. There was a budget allocated and there were objectives set, and those who participated in the murders were commended. In a lecture given at [the city of] Hamedan’s Bu Ali University in 1996, Sa’eed Emami, Ministry of Information Deputy Minister for Security Affairs and one of the principal defendants in the Serial Murders case – who was later said by Iranian officials to have committed suicide while in detention – had stressed that the activities of Iran’s security forces were not confined to the country’s borders: “ … We have set the security perimeter within the confines of our borders. [However,] if we see threats infiltrating inside the country from abroad, we will enlarge the perimeter.”

—--------------------------------------------

1) Among the first known murders that occurred a week after the February 1979 Revolution was that of Mr. Parviz (Arastu) Sayyah Sina, the bishop of a church in the city of Shiraz. The assassination of Mr. Shahriar Shafiq, an Imperial Navy officer, in December 1979 in Paris is among the first murders committed by the Islamic Republic of Iran outside the country. These killings continued in the following years inside and outside the country and in various forms.

2) Investigations into the murder of well-known personalities in France, Germany and Switzerland have yielded evidence and documentation showing that the officials and employees of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran acted as accomplices and principals [in the killings]. In France, the Islamic Republic’s Deputy Minister of Post and Telegraph was sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment for the murder of former Prime Minister Shapur Bakhtiar and his assistant, Sorush Katibeh. In Germany (Berlin), the Islamic Republic’s security agents and agents of the Lebanese Hezbollah were sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of four Kurdish opposition leaders. In connection with the latter case, German Judicial authorities issued an international arrest warrant for Ali Fallahian, the then-Minister of Information.

3) A few days before Mr. Mokhtari’s murder, Dariush Foruhar and his wife, Parvaneh Eskandari, leaders of the People of Iran Party, had been killed in a most heinous manner in their own home. After Mr. Mokhtari’s body was found, the body of Mohammad Ja’far Puyandeh, another well-known literary figure, was discovered in a village near the city of Karaj. These four individuals’ cases was named the “Serial Murders”.

Human rights violations

Based on the available information, 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 not to be punished for any crime on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence, under national or international law, at the time it was committed.

UDHR, Article 11.2; ICCPR, Article 15, Article 6.2.

The right not to be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honor and reputation.

UDHR, Article 12, ICCPR, Article 17.1.

The right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including the right to change and manifest one’s religion or belief.

UDHR, Article 18; ICCPR, Article 18.1, ICCPR, Article 18.2; Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, Article 1 and Article 6.

In its general comment 22 (48) of 20 July 1993, the United Nation’s Human Rights Committee observed that the freedom to "have or to adopt" a religion or belief necessarily entailed the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one’s current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views, as well as the right to retain one’s religion or belief. Article 18, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief, including the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert.

The right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas.

UDHR, Article 19; ICCPR, Article 19.1 and ICCPR, Article 19.2.

The right to freedom of peaceful assembly.

UDHR, Article 20; ICCPR, Article 21.

The right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of one’s interests.

UDHR, Article 20; ICCPR, Article 22.1.

The right, as a member of a religious or ethnic minority, to enjoy one’s own culture or to profess and practice one’s own religion.

UDHR, Article 18; ICCPR, Article 27.

The right to equality before the law and the right to equal protection of the law.

UDHR, Article 7; ICCPR, Article 26.

The right to due process

The right to be presumed innocent until found guilty by a competent and impartial tribunal in accordance with law.

ICCPR, Article 14.1 and Article 14.2.

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 the right to legal aid. The right to communicate with one’s attorney in confidence

ICCPR, Article 14.3.b and 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.

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.

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 14.1, Article 14.3.c.

The right to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against one, and the right to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on one’s behalf under the same conditions as prosecution witnesses.

ICCPR, Article 14.3.d and Article 14.3.e.

The right to have the decision rendered in public.

ICCPR, Article 14.1.

Judgment rights

The right to appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction.

ICCPR, Article 14.5.

The right to seek pardon or commutation of sentence.

ICCPR, Article 6.4.

The right not to be tried or punished again for an offence for which one has already been

convicted or acquitted.

ICCPR, Article 14.7.

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.

About this Case

Correct/ Complete This Entry

Mr. Mansur believed in organized party work and had written a number of articles expounding guerilla warfare. He was a member of Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran (“Iran Communists Union”) also known as Sarbedaran, and played an integral part in its political and ideological overhaul and reconstruction after the severe repression of its members in Iran in 1981.

Information regarding the extrajudicial killing of Mr. Kamran Mansur (Kak Manuchehr Hosseini) was obtained from interviews conducted by the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party in Iraqi Kurdistan (September 21, 2021) and with a person who knew Mr. Mansur (September 18, 2021). News of this murder was also published in Haghighat Publication, news arm of Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran (“Iran Communists Union”) – Sarbedaran, special edition dedicated to the killing of Mr. Mansur (July-August, 1992), and in an Iran Documents Center report (August-September, 2008). Additional information about this killing was obtained from the Communist Party of Iran website (March 17, 2019); Fa’ezun website (January 24, 2018); Brigham Young University archives (March 12, 2013); IRNA News Agency (August 8, 2019); and Boroumand Center research.

Mr. Mansur was born in 1950-51, in a well-to-do family in Tehran. He graduated with a degree in Agriculture from Shiraz University and obtained a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from a university in England. He became concerned and sensitized about social inequalities and political issues during his time as a student at Shiraz University and became student activist. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992; the Communist Party of Iran website). When studying in England, he was a follower of the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran (“Iran Communists Union”) (also called Sarbedaran), and joined the Ehia Students Confederation, a faction that had split from the Iranian Students Confederation, National Union, that was affiliated with the Communist Revolutionary Organization. (Boroumand Center interview with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party, September 21, 2021). He went back to Iran after the 1979 Revolution, and returned to England a short while later. In the winter of 1981, he played an integral part in the establishment of the Students Revolutionary Masses Organization (SETAD), a division of the Iran Communists Union, the goal of which was to organize youth activities, and became its secretary. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992; the Communist Party of Iran website).

In February 1982, military clashes occurred between Sarbedaran members and government forces in the city of Amol [in Mazandaran Province] which led to the arrest, execution, and repression of the group inside Iran, and caused internal conflict in the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran (Communists Union). Mr. Mansur, at that time, he played an effective role in the Organization’s political and ideological overhaul and reconstruction. Mr. Mansur believed in organized party work and played an important role in establishing the students' SETAD in various countries. He would write articles expounding the perspectives of the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran, the importance of carrying on the fight, necessity of reconstruction of the organization, and the strategies and tactics of armed struggle. One of the subjects about which he wrote regularly was “surrounding and laying siege to cities by [first using] villages”. He had written: “ … We will start with villages because Erteja (“archaic and outdated”; here referring to the Islamic republic regime) is concentrated in towns and cities, and the probability of us being repressed in villages is lower, and we can rely on the village masses for a revolutionary war. We must quickly create partisan groups, free various regions, and expand our forces. Relying on armed fighting, we can and we must recruit activists and pioneers in towns near a particular region, that is, from among urban masses, especially the proletariat and those who live on the fringes, who are in contact with the farmers themselves.” (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

Between 1982 and 1984, Mr. Mansur, along with other members of the SETAD, actively participated in protest demonstrations and assemblies held against the Islamic Republic in England, including the demonstrations in support of political prisoners in the summer of 1984. He was in charge of the attack and occupation of the Islamic Republic of Iran Airline in London on November 8, 1984, protesting “the repression of Kurds and forced migration”. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992; Faezoon website). After the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran’s call for “the resumption of armed struggle in the North” in 1985, Mr. Mansur, as an official member of the party, went to Iraqi Kurdistan and to various villages and towns in Soleimanieh Province, finally settling in the town of Ranieh. He was in charge of the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran’s “Kurdistan Committee” and was director of "Seday-e Sarbedaran" Radio. According to a person who knew Mr. Mansur and worked for a time at Sarbedaran Radio as a member of the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran, the Radio had two hours of programming a day, producing and broadcasting programs against the Islamic Republic, methods of fighting, recruiting the populace, and promoting communist ideas. (Boroumand Center interview with a person who knew Mr. Mansur, September 18, 2021; Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

According to the Haghighat Publication report, news arm of Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran (“Iran Communists’ Union”), the Committee was composed of a small group of people and did not have a military force. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

According to Mr. Mansur’s fellow Party member, who was active in Iraqi Kurdistan at the time, Mr. Mansur and a number of other members of the Communists’ Union were arrested by members of the Kurdistan Social Democratic Party* (KSP) in February 1992, after the latter’s attack on the Ettehadieh headquarters and Radio, were detained in KSP buildings, and were released after protest demonstrations in the region. (Boroumand Center interview with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party in Iraqi Kurdistan, September 21, 2021). The Islamic Republic of Iran has close relations with the Kurdistan Social Democratic Party, and Islamic Republic opposition parties accuse the Party of partaking in the murder and assassination of its members. (Boroumand Center research).

In the spring and summer of 1992, at the same time the first parliamentary elections were held in the Iraqi Kurdistan Autonomous Region, the Communist’ Union intended to modify its policies in the region and halt the operations of its Radio. (Boroumand Center interview with a person who knew Mr. Mansur, September 18, 2021).

Those who had engaged in political activities with Mr. Mansur, described him as a man of action, full of energy, tireless, hopeful, an avid reader, logical, trustworthy, and possessing organizational skill and discipline. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

Ettehadieh Communist-ha

The Ettehadieh Komonist-ha (the Union of Communists of Iran) was created by exiled opponents of the Pahlavi regime who mostly belonged to the Student Confederation. They followed the teachings of Mao Tse-Tung and did not believe in guerilla warfare. The group became marked by ideological divides during the periods preceding and following the 1979 revolution which caused it to split into several factions. One of the most important rifts was triggered by the decision by a number of members to take up arms and take over a city in Iran. The uprising plan, devised in the midst of an active and violent anti-communist campaign by the revolutionary Islamic government, split the Union in two factions: one supporting the armed movement and the other opposing it.

In the winter of 1982, armed members of the Union hid in a forest in the North of Iran (Jangal in Farsi) outside the city of Amol. This group, also known as the Sarbedaran-e Jangal, was involved in several clashes with the Revolutionary guards and ultimately, on January 26, attacked the city of Amol hoping to generate a general uprising. The attempt to seize Amol failed. It is reported that a number of the group’s members, revolutionary guards, and civilians were killed during the Amol clash. Subsequently, members of the Union, including those who opposed the Amol uprising, were arrested and tried for belonging to the organization and for having participated in the Amol clash

Confederation of Iranian Students

The Confederation of Iranian Students, National Union, (Confederation) was the outcome of a 1962 merger of Iranian students’ associations formed a couple of years earlier in Europe and the United States with the aim of promoting cooperation, strengthening students groups, and informing them of their rights and obligations. The Confederation was composed mainly of members or sympathizers of the National Front and the Tudeh. During the first years of its activities, the organization’s leadership was dominated by the National Front supporters. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Confederation became a significant opposition force outside Iran, bringing media visibility to political prisoners and repression in Iran. In 1971, the Iranian government declared the Confederation illegal. The Confederation radicalized progressively and by the mid-1970s, it was dominated by pro-guerrilla student organizations. Its new Charter (1975) explicitly called for the overthrow of the Shah’s regime. After the Islamic Revolution most of its members returned to Iran.

Mr. Kamran Mansur’s Death

At around 10:30 to 11 o’clock in the morning of July 1, 1992, Mr. Mansur was shot in the back of the head and killed in a mechanic’s shop in Karizeh Voshkeh (Khoskeh) to the northwest of the city of Soleimanieh in Iraq, near the Malek Mahmud beltway. He had taken the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran’s car to the shop, and was shot by two individuals when he wanted to show the mechanic the vehicle’s exhaust pipe. (Boroumand Center interview with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party, September 21, 2021; Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

According to Mr. Mansur’s fellow Party member, the gunmen and the mechanic stole the car but abandoned it three kilometers (2 miles) further as it had run out of gasoline. The car was discovered by the Soleimanih Security Administration 24 hours later. (Boroumand Center interview with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party, September 21, 2021).

At 4 o’clock in the afternoon of July 2, 1992, a funeral procession composed of his friends and brothers in arm took Mr. Mansur’s body from Soleimanieh Central Hospital to the Karizeh Voshkeh Cemetery where he was laid to rest. Some members of leftist parties, including a number of Kurdish parties, were present at his funeral. (Haghighat publication, July-August 1992).

Members of various leftist groups and several Kurdish parties opposed to the Islamic Republic, participated in Mr. Mansur’s funeral and spoke of the role he had played in the struggle.

Officials’ Reaction

There is no information regarding the Iranian officials’ reaction to this killing.

Ettehadieh Communist-ha (“Iran Communists Union”), Sarbedaran’s Reaction

According to Mr. Mansur’s fellow Party member, the investigations conducted by the Ettehadieh Communist-haye Iran determined that one of the individuals who had shot Mr. Mansur was a member of the Kurdistan Social Democratic Party (KSP) and the other was an Iranian national, both of whom escaped to Iran after the assassination. According to this person, the fact that the Kurdistan Autonomous Region had just been established did not allow for further judicial investigation and adjudication of this case. (Boroumand Center interview with a fellow member of Mr. Mansur’s party, September 21, 2021).

Familys’ Reaction

There is no information regarding Mr. Mansur’s family’s reaction.

------------------------------------------------

* The Kurdistan Social Democratic Party (KSP): This Party, adhering to socialist ideology, was first established in the summer of 1977, bearing the name Kurdistan Socialist Movement; it changed the name and continued its activities as the Kurdistan Social Democratic Party in 1978, when a group composed of members of Hezb-e Ettehadieh Mihani Kurdistan (“the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan Party”) joined the Party. Members of the Party engaged in armed conflict with the Saddam Hussein regime, and starting in 1991, with the establishment of the Kurdistan Autonomous region, they engaged in political and election activities. At the time of the writing of this report in September 2021, they are members of the Iraqi parliament and government.

Correct/ Complete This Entry ❯

Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

for Human Rights in Iran

Kamran Mansur

About

Case