Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

for Human Rights in Iran

https://www.iranrights.org
Library
Promoting tolerance and justice through knowledge and understanding
Flogging

Public Flogging in Nahavand: An Individual Received 74 Lashes for Alleged Narcotics Crime

Young Reporters Club / ABF translation
May 8, 2015
Report

“During an interview with the reporter of Young Reporters Club, Colonel Mohsen Eqbalian, the Commander of Security Forces in Nahavand, explained the news by stating, ‘Following a widespread intelligence operation by narcotics police in identifying narcotics dealers across the town, especially certain contaminated areas, an individual named R. T.  who had a record and committed retail trade in narcotics was identified.’

This security authority continued: ‘After this information was gathered, several security and intelligence missions were called for and, ultimately, the defendant was arrested with some narcotics during distribution.’

He added, ‘After the defendant’s arrest and referring him to a judge, he was condemned to 74 lashes in public and three and a half years imprisonment by a judicial order and based on repetition of committing the crime and according to the law.’

Colonel Eqbalian clarified, ‘After the ruling was issued and the date and location of its enforcement was specified, the ruling was carried out in public and in the presence of the judge and several security agents at Pay-Qal’eh Square in Nahavand yesterday [May 7, 2015].’

The Commander of Security Forces in Nahavand stated, ‘Based on this case and the charge against the defendant and by the order of the judge, the house of this defendant was closed for two years and water, electricity, and gas for the house were shut down in the presence of representatives of the respective utilities.’”

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."