Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

for Human Rights in Iran

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

Flogging Before Execution, Ali Khalajzadeh, Tehran, Kayhan Newspaper, July 4, 1979

Kayhan
July 4, 1979
Newspaper article

Kayhan Newspaper

July 4, 1979

Page 1

Last night, according to the verdict of the Islamic Revolutionary Court:

A man who raped two married women was shot

He was the leader of a group of thugs and he caused the deaths of two workers

Yesterday evening, Branch 1 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Tehran adjudicated the case of Ali Khalajzadeh in camera. According to the Revolutionary Prosecutor's indictment, Ali Khalajzadeh, known as Amir, was accused of:

1. Committing adultery with two married women.

2. Aborting a one-month old child via a doctor's certificate. 

3. Committing ordinary adultery, according to testimonies and documentary evidence.

4. Collapse of the wall of his garage during the time of Taghut (Shah) on two of the workers who were working there, killing them, and the case was decided in his favor at the time because of the influence he had.

5. Having a card from the Army's G-2 Office (Intelligence).

6. Gathering a group of ruffians to support the despised Pahlavi regime and suppress the freedom-loving people.

7. Gathering women and girls for a meeting on 4 Aban (October 26, Shah's birthday)

8. Harrasing people because of his affiliation with the dirty and infamous Pahlavi regime, and for all these crimes the Islamic Court of Justice recognized him as a Corrupter on Earth and considered the most serious punishment for him.

The Court, after hearing the accusations against the accused and his defense, issued its verdict at 9:30P.M. and recognized the accused as a Corruptor on Earth and sentenced him first to 100 lashes and then to death, and the sentence was implemented an hour later. 

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."