Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

Perhaps the public’s belief is that we should be thinking about tougher punishment for [drug] criminals, given the increase in illicit drug distribution in society, and the variety of these drugs. This is while the toughest punishment for drug crimes, the death penalty, is currently being used [against us] by international institutions [with a view to] accusing our country of human rights violations on that basis.

This is while the authorities in charge of the fight against illicit drugs do not believe in eliminating the death penalty. There are however, others who believe there are more practical and more effective punishments that can be substituted for the death penalty.

Recently, Mohammad Javad Larijani, Secretary of the Judiciary Branch’s Human Rights Council, had stated: “We are trying to change the Law for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs, and if we are successful in doing that in the Parliament, 80 percent of executions would then disappear.” This could be an important piece of news.

In the meantime, Tehran Province Judiciary’s Deputy for Judicial [Affairs] said: “Changing the laws related to the execution of drug traffickers will be an effective [way] of reducing death penalty statistics.”

Pointing to [the fact that] the legislative is [the authority that] has determined the punishment, he said: “Crimes for which the taking of a life has been devised as punishment, are specified in Shari’a - such as ‘Qesas’ or ‘Moharebeh’- and cannot be modified. “Hodud” and “Qesas” punishments cannot be modified unless the victim forgives [the perpetrator] (regarding Qesas of a part of the body), and the next of kin forgive [the perpetrator and consent that his life be spared] (where Qesas of life is concerned).”

As to what punishments can replace the death penalty in our country, the high-ranking judicial official added: “Where illicit drugs are concerned, there is the possibility of altering the punishment, [since] these punishments can be changed and modified.”

According to the Tehran Province Judiciary’s Deputy for Judicial [Affairs], change and modification of capital punishment for crimes [which so require] can take the form of imprisonment, prohibiting residence in a specific location, exile to a specific location, non-employment in certain fields, and prohibiting employment in certain fields.

Stating that all drug-related cases can have substitute punishments other than execution, he added: “It all depends on the legislative’s decision because that is [the body] that can change the type of punishment; [it must be noted that] for certain intentional crimes, modification and usage of substitute [alternative] punishments has become mandatory in the [new] Islamic Penal Code of 2013.”

 

Utilizing violent means does not produce results in the fight against drugs.

In the meantime, pointing to the social approach in the fight against drugs, the Deputy Commissioner for Judicial Affairs of the Eighth [term of] Islamic Consultative Assembly, “Majless” (or Parliament, used interchangeably herein) said: “One cannot solely rely on violent and highhanded means to fight illicit drugs.”

Farhad Tajari added: “In order to succeed in the fight against this threat that has targeted [our] society’s mental, economic, and cultural well-being, we must also utilize soft means [such as] educating [the public], [working with] civil [activists], the family, scientific and academic venues, and in general, [utilize] society’s public [and general] capacities.”

He emphasized: “Socializing the fight against illicit drugs [i.e., making drugs a matter of social concern and involving society in the fight] is a necessary, vital, and effective policy and strategy for all pillars of the country. Therefore, the policy that is to be devised must be comprehensive, and must utilize all of civil institutions’ and governmental organs’ capabilities in order to fight this sinister phenomenon.”

Tajari added: “As the policy-making, advisory, implemental, and strategizing body in the fight against drugs, it would be wise and judicious for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs Headquarters to expand the country’s various institutions and organs’ sphere of influence and to utilize their capabilities, as much as possible.

 

The death penalty for drug [crimes] is in need of revision.

Stating that Majless has an amenable viewpoint in revising the Law for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs, the Parliament’s Judicial and Legal Commission’s spokesman added: “Currently, pursuant to the Law, the punishment for carrying 100 grams of heroin is the death penalty; structural change must be made in this regard.”

In an interview with Khaneh Mellat, Mirhadi Qaraseyyed Rumiani pointed to the [discussions] highlighting the necessity of amending the Law in order to lower the [number of] drug-related executions, and stated: “Iran has paid a high price in recent years concerning human rights issues. These matters have, of course, constantly been used as a subterfuge by international human rights bodies. It is clear, however, that drug traffic from Iranian soil has had a destructive impact on the western and European youth.”

Pointing to a change in how society views drug addiction, the people of Tabriz, Osku, and Azarshahr’s representative in the Parliament stated: “Nowadays, people view drug addicts as [individuals] afflicted with an illness and not as criminals. Therefore, this approach affects the legislative process as well.”

Announcing that currently, the Majless’ viewpoint in revising the Law for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs is a positive one, he emphasized: “The current Law for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs was passed by the Expediency Council and is in need of change and amendment. Therefore, if the Judiciary Branch takes preemptive [measures] in this regard, this could very well become an area for legal progress and penal social justice.”

Qaraseyyed Rumiani said: “In the arena of the fight against drugs, we have two separate groups of crimes: one dealing with the [drug] mafia, the other concerning the user. Where drug users are concerned, we must educate [the users and the public] in order to decrease individuals’ tendency to use drugs. We must be severe and forceful, however, with people who engage in mafia style drug trafficking and sale.”

The Parliament’s Judicial and Legal Commission’s spokesman continued: “Currently, pursuant to the Law, the punishment for carrying 100 grams of heroin is the death penalty; structural change must be made in this regard.”

 

The pathology of the effects of the death penalty

Emphasizing the need to revise drug-related execution laws, Majless Social Commission spokesman also stated: “It seems like we must use another method. The current law providing for the execution of drug traffickers must be studied, analyzed, and revised.”

Recalling the statements made by the Judiciary Branch’s Human Rights Council Secretary providing for [the need] to make efforts to change the laws in the Parliament in order to reduce executions by 80 percent, Iraj Abdi added: “Many factors contribute to the commission of a crime, including [one’s] economic situation, social condition, and place of residence. With regard to drugs, then, we must examine the effectiveness of executions in reducing crime or drug use.”

The people of Khorramabad and Doreh’s representative in Majless continued: “We must conduct a very precise study to determine whether drug-related executions have had a deterrent effect or not. If [it is determined that] these executions do not have a deterrent effect [but they continue to be carried out], then they will undoubtedly have undesirable effects on our society, and even on our country’s international status and reputation.”

Emphasizing the necessity to revise drug-related execution laws, this member of the Ninth [term of] Majless added: “It seems we must use another method. The current law providing for the execution of drug traffickers must be studied, analyzed, and revised.”

Abdi emphasized: “The law dealing with the execution of drug traffickers is very harsh and there’s no doubt that we must see what positive and negative effects this harsh law has had, and to change [it] if it does not have the necessary deterrent effect.”

Stating that it is necessary to take preventive measures in order to reduce drug production [and use], he added: “Addressing issues such as reducing industrial derivatives production, education, as well as informing [the public] of the harm [and damage] caused by drug traffic and use, can be preventive measures that [protect society from harm].”

The Parliament’s Social Commission spokesman said: “We must, therefore, take action in reducing demand because the fact that drug trafficking exists in the country is an indication that perhaps there is [such an] increase in demand that people are willing to risk being executed but keep a presence in the supply market. Before taking any steps, therefore, we must control demand.”

 

The necessity to revise the law for drug crimes

Considering the Judiciary authoring a bill of law for the reduction of the death penalty for drug-related crimes as positive, the Parliament’s Legal and Judicial Commission spokesman also stated: “It is necessary to consider [different] types of punishment and their effectiveness in the new bill.”

In a interview with Khaneh Mellat, Allahyar Malekshahi recalled recent statements by the Judiciary Branch’s Human Rights Council Secretary providing for [the need] to eliminate the death penalty for drug-related crimes, and said: “It is necessary to revise the law for drug-related crimes.”

Considering the Judiciary authoring a bill of law for the reduction of the death penalty for drug-related crimes as positive, the people of Kuhdasht’s representative in Majless (Parliament) stated: “The Judiciary has currently not authored such a bill, but Majless certainly agrees with the writing of such a bill.”

Stating that the Law for the Fight Against Illicit Drugs and the Law for Aggravated Sentencing of Drug Criminals were passed by the Expediency Council, he explained: “The Supreme Leader has given his permission for Majless to revise and amend this law, or for the Judiciary to present a bill of law and for the Majless to replace the current law with that bill.”

The people’s representative in the Ninth Majless added: “As the head of the Parliament’s Legal and Judicial Commission, I agree one hundred percent that the Judiciary Branch immediately present to Majless a new bill of law for investigating [and adjudicating] drug crimes.”

Malekshahi said: “It is necessary to consider [different] types of punishment in the new bill and to conduct the necessary analysis in order to ascertain their effectiveness in reducing crimes.”

He continued: “Before the Judiciary Branch entered the realm of authoring a new bill for reducing the death penalty for drug crimes, Majless passed the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure in the current year, which will come into effect on June 22, 2015, in which Majless has had a positive [impact] on drug crimes, in the form of [requiring that] drug crimes be adjudicated in the same way as regular crimes.”

He continued: “Passage of the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure in Majless means that lower court decisions are no longer final and can be appealed, and if harsh sentences such as the death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment of 10 years or more have been issued, the Supreme Court can hear the case.”

Stating that implementing the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure translates into multiple judges hearing drug cases, Malekshahi said: “When this law is implemented, an individual who has been sentenced to death for a drug-related crime will be treated the same way as one who has been sentenced to Qesas for having committed other crimes.”

The people’s representative in the Ninth Majless continued: “Implementing said law means that five Court of Appeals judges will render opinions regarding the sentence of Qesas for the criminal, whereas currently, there is only one level [of adjudication], that is, a judge tries the case and issues the harshest possible sentence, a sentence that is not subject to appeal and review by the Supreme Court. Only the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the country’s Prosecutor General can consider such cases sua sponte, and the defendant does not have a right to object to [and appeal] the ruling.”

He emphasized: “The amendments to the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure can therefore be very helpful to the Human Rights Council Secretary’s [goal] of reducing the death penalty in drug-related crimes.”

The head of the Parliament’s Legal and Judicial Commission said: “Reducing the death penalty in drug-related crimes is a positive endeavor and we must assist in implementing it.”

 

The Expediency Council’s approval of the bill for reducing the punishment of drug traffickers

Stating that in the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure, Majless has considered punishments for drug crimes as appealable in the same way as punishments for other crimes, a member of the Parliament’s Legal and Judicial Commission’s Administrative Board said: “The bill for reducing the death penalty for these criminals must be approved by the Expediency Council.”

Regarding the proposed bill by the Human Rights Council to reduce the death penalty for drug criminals, Mohammad Razm stated: “This is a judicial bill, and the writing of judicial bills is among the powers of the Head of the Judiciary Branch; the bill must also be approved by the government and submitted to Majless.”

Emphasizing that opinions about the bill can be rendered after it has been received by the Parliament, the people of Kermanshah’s representative in Majless admitted: “Of course, given the ravages and the irreparable damage drug crimes have perpetrated on our country, we must reflect before we eliminate the death penalty for these criminals.”

Pointing out that “we have revised punishments for drug-related crimes in the Law for the Rules of Criminal Procedure, whether it is execution or imprisonment,” the Deputy Chairman of Majless’ Judicial and Legal Commission explained: “In this law, we have considered drug crimes to be appealable like other crimes. Furthermore, before being implemented, death sentences for drug criminals will be examined and reviewed at the Supreme Court level by experienced judges.”

Reminding that the sacred regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran does not insist on issuing death sentences for people, and that it tries until the very last minute to prevent the implementation of such sentences, Razm noted: “Given that carrying out a death sentence is [the removal] of the soul from the body, and because of the respect we have for the human soul, the Commission ratified [and decided] that regardless of what they are, sentences would be appealable just like regular crimes.”

This Ninth Majless representative emphasized: “What can be said about this bill is that eliminating the death penalty for drug criminals is not possible. Furthermore, the Law for Aggravated Sentencing of Drug Criminals was passed by the Expediency Council and therefore, any changes in the type of punishment for these criminals must also be approved by the Council.”

 

Reducing the death penalty is a well-researched undertaking

In the meantime, emphasizing that instilling a new culture [in society] through education and elimination of factors that contribute to drug addiction such as unemployment, is an effective technique in drug-related crime prevention, a member of Majless’ Social Commission said: “The bill for reducing the death penalty for drug criminals is a well-researched work undertaken by the Judiciary Branch upon studying the consequences of implementing such sentences.”

In an interview with Mizan legal reporter concerning the Human Rights Council’s proposed bill of law to reduce the punishments for drug-related crimes, Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Purfatemi stated: “Existing laws must be revised in this regard; furthermore, when considering these crimes, attention must be paid to the fact that it is difficult to get access to the leaders of the dreadful drug traffic gangs, and most often, it is the small time [dealers] who are arrested. It is therefore necessary to revise the punishments meted out to these individuals.”

Stating that a new culture must take root in society in order to combat illicit drugs, the people of Dashti and Tangestan’s representative in the Islamic Consultative Assembly admitted: “Education starting in schools is the best way to institutionalize this culture across society. Furthermore, factors that contribute to drug addiction such as unemployment and barriers to marriage must be eliminated. Other effective preventive measures also include providing information by the media, particularly the national media, and by [Friday Prayer] Imams.”

This member of Majless’ Clergy Faction explained: “The Judiciary has most definitely reached this conclusion upon conducting well-researched work, studying the consequences of implementing such sentences for drug criminals. On that basis, therefore, we can reduce the death penalty and use substitute punishments. Furthermore, this undertaking can have a positive effect on improving Iran’s human rights image in the international arena.”

 

Appropriate mechanisms before eliminating the death penalty

Opposing those statements, however, a member of Majless’ Judicial and Legal Commission viewed the proposal for a bill to reduce the death penalty for drug criminals in a positive light, but said: “We must see what mechanisms are devised for this, so that a reduction in executions also leads to a reduction in [drug] crimes.”

In an interview with Khaneh Mellat’s social repoprter, Mohammad Ali Esfenani considered the proposal for a bill to reduce the death penalty for drug criminals as a positive step and said: “Eliminating the death penalty for these types of crimes requires devising an appropriate mechanism.”

Stating “we must first see what the cases enumerated in the Human Rights Council’s proposed bill for the reduction of the death penalty for drug criminals are before we render an opinion,” the people of Fareydan, Fereydunshahr, and Chadegan’s representative in the Islamic Consultative Assembly said: “If the bill has anticipated the effects and consequences of the reduction of sentences, and if it can create a barrier to violations of the law by individuals, it could be one of the sacred regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s successes in the judicial arena.”

Emphasizing that the sacred regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran does in absolutely no way insist upon issuing death sentences, this people’s representative in the Ninth Majless added: “When a crime has been committed that has atrocious effects, and brings about undesirable consequences for society, there is no other way than to issue a death sentence for [the criminal].”

He continued: “The judge who issues a death sentence for the criminal must surely not have seen any other alternative, and has [just] had to issue such a sentence.”

Emphasizing that a judge will not consent to issuing a death sentence for the criminal unless the negative effects of the crime on society are of such magnitude [as to leave no other choice], he said: “When a judge decides to issue a death sentence, he must surely have determined the criminal’s death preferable to his staying alive, since his existence would endanger the lives of thousands of human beings through commission of criminal acts.”

He emphasized that while the idea of reducing the death sentence for drug-related crimes will most definitely receive a very warm welcome, “we must see what mechanisms are devised for this, so that a reduction in executions also leads to a reduction in [drug] crimes.”

This people’s representative in Majless emphasized: “The laws related to drug-related crimes must be revised and changed before we eliminate or reduce the death penalty for these crimes.”

Recalling the passage of the Law on the Rules of Criminal Procedure in Majless’ Judicial Commission, he said: “Passage of this Law filled many of the existing voids in adjudicating crimes, since, in the past, a single judge made the decision to issue a death sentence at the revolutionary courts, but now (with the passage of said Law), issuing a death sentence requires a ruling by three judges, and it is prohibited to [rely on] a single judge’s opinion in order to implement the sentence.”

Esfenani continued: “There is one [main] concern regarding eliminating the death penalty for drug-related crimes, and that is, it is possible that [such an action] can lead to an increase in crime rates. Therefore, when we must make decisions with a view to reducing [the death penalty] we must do so by having a [specific] mechanism[(s)] in mind.”

This member of the Islamic Consultative Assembly’s Judicial and Legal Commission noted: “In the fight against drug-related crimes, one must pay close attention to the underlying causes that give rise to these crimes, because, even now we can substitute incarceration for execution; however, this punishment has not been devised for certain crimes due to a lack of sufficient effectiveness.”

 

Sanctions in dealing with drug traffickers

In the meantime, stating that sanctions against drug traffickers must be more severe, the Justice Minister’s Deputy for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs said: “Certain crimes require more severe action because of the negative and destructive effects they have on society.”

Abdolali Mirkuhi stated: “Punishment must be proportional to the crime. The justice system’s policy of substitute punishments for incarceration - that were provided for in the Islamic Penal Code and passed and implemented in the [Rules of Criminal] Procedure - was a very positive and appropriate one.”

He said: “Normally, punishments provided for by law for various crimes, must be in line with penal/criminal policies, social issues, and various circumstances, and in certain cases, a harsher sentence is required. Also, in many cases, social punishments must be more effective, for instance in cases of drug trafficking, organized crime, and special financial and economic crimes.”

Stating that laws related to prevention must be strengthened, the Justice Minister’s Deputy for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs continued: “The causes for the commission of crime must be eliminated or reduced. Furthermore, borders must be controlled and traffickers must be dealt with severely, so that members of society are not duped by them.”

According to Mirkuhi, the Justice Minister’s Deputy for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, amending and changing laws, particularly penal laws, must be done with the requisite attention and subtlety, and all the various social aspects must be taken into consideration in this regard.

He said: “Preventive measures are very important in the law; punishments must have positive results and consequences, as much as possible. Punishment and sanction [must be severe] and the person who commits a crime must pay a high price.”

 

Execution of drug traffickers has a deterrent effect

Yazd Province’s Head of the Judiciary believes, however, that “executing drug traffickers has a deterrent effect and serves as a lesson to others criminals in the field.”

Stating that executions are deterrents, Mohammad Reza Habibi said: “There are two types of death sentences: those provided for by Islam’s Holy Shari’a and are mandatory, one of which is Qesas, and those passed by [the government] based on social conditions, and are governmental decrees.”

He added: “There is a certain perspective that is very critical of executing drug traffickers. These people should know that in the absence of these decisive ways and executions, drugs will be easily distributed across the country and will destroy our young people.”

Stating that no sentence can be a substitute for the death penalty, Habibi said: “Decisive ways and executions are the reasons for the reduction of illicit drugs and their strict control in the country. Individuals who transfer [and distribute] these destructive products in society must most certainly be severely punished.”

In closing, noting that Persian Gulf states also engage in legal and judicial activities in fighting illicit drugs, Yazd Province’s Head of the Judiciary said: “In addition to legal and decisive measures in the fight against drugs, cultural [and instructional] activities must also be undertaken.”

 

We oppose the elimination of the death penalty

In the meantime, the most candid and blunt person is the Acting Secretary General of the Fight Against Illicit Drugs Headquarters, who announces the Headquarters opposition to the elimination of the death penalty for drug-related crimes.

Alireza Jazini announced the total number of drug addicts to be 1,325,000 and added: “10 percent of these people are women. We do not, however, have statistics regarding newborns and children because the age of 15 is the base line for our statistics.”

Regarding supply of drugs by the government and the plan that is being studied in Majless, the Acting Secretary General of the Fight Against Illicit Drugs Headquarters said: “Our friends said to give drugs to persons over 65 years of age; but these are not our target population, so we could not come to an agreement with them.”

Jazini pointed to the production of 7 thousand tons of drugs in Afganistan and 19 of that country’s provinces in 2014 and said: “Although European ambassadors who traveled to Iran to visit the Iran-Afghanistan border considered our actions appropriate, we are still under sanctions for the purchase of equipment, and we are not happy with international organizations’ cooperation in this respect.”

In response to a question by a reporter he emphasized: “Contrary to what certain international institutions say, we continue to oppose the elimination of the death penalty for drug-related [crimes].”