|
PREFACE
The Islamic Republic of Iran was established in 1979, and has been at war with Iraq since 1980. In the eight years that have passed since the February 1979 revolution the country has experienced dramatic and wide-ranging changes affecting all aspects of life. Amnesty International believes that in exceptional circumstances such as these it is all the more important to safeguard fundamental human rights, and that, whatever their nature, such circumstances can never justify the abuse of such rights.
Amnesty International regrets that domestic organizations and associations formed in the late 1970s to monitor and intervene in human rights issues were all forcibly closed down in the early 1980s, as was the Bar Association and its committee on human rights. It also regrets that many of those who worked to uphold and defend the rights of others were themselves imprisoned, executed or forced into exile.
The United Nations (UN) General Assembly has repeatedly drawn attention in resolutions to violations of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the UN Commission on Human Rights has appointed a Special Representative to investigate the human rights situation. He, however, has been denied access to the country. Access has also been denied to Amnesty International despite repeated requests.
Amnesty International has continued to work for the victims of human rights violations in Iran as it did before the creation of the Islamic Republic. This publication is part of the movement’s continuing efforts to secure an improvement in the respect for human rights. It comprises three sections: two are the edited texts of memoranda sent by Amnesty International to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran; the third is testimony given to Amnesty International representatives by former prisoners of conscience and political prisoners.
The first memorandum, Memorandum from Amnesty International regarding its concerns in the Islamic Republic of Iran, was sent to the government in November 1986. It does not claim to give an up-to-date record of human rights violations in Iran, but rather represents a pattern of such violations documented by Amnesty International over several years. It covers the range of Amnesty International’s statutory concerns: the imprisonment of prisoners of conscience, their arbitrary arrest and detention, unfair trials in political cases, the use of torture and ill-treatment to extract information, and the use of judicial punishments such as the death penalty and the amputation of fingers which Amnesty International considers constitute forms of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment1. The memorandum acknowledges that improvements have taken place, but concludes with a series of recommendations which Amnesty International believes are the minimum guarantees needed to protect the basic human rights of Iranian citizens.
The second memorandum, Memorandum from Amnesty International to the Islamic Republic of Iran concerning the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, was sent to the government in August 1986. The Islamic Penal Code of Iran was adopted for an initial trial period of five years. Amnesty International’s memorandum is an attempt to make a positive contribution to discussions or revisions of the penal code before its provisions become final. Amnesty International’s analysis of the penal code is based on international human rights and humanitarian law. The organization respects the right of states to formulate legislation in accordance with their own social, cultural, religious or other traditions. However, where such legislation falls short of internationally agreed standards for the protection of human rights, Amnesty International is constrained to point this out, and to propose changes aimed at bringing legislation into line with international standards. Iran is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), ratified by countries with widely varying legal systems.
The final section of this publication consists of first-hand testimonies from former prisoners of conscience and political prisoners. Amnesty International cannot vouch for the authenticity of every detail in these accounts, but presents them as examples of individuals suffering because of their political beliefs or activities. They are representative of many more such testimonies in Amnesty International’s possession. Names, precise dates and other details which could identify the individual victims have been omitted or amended because they fear reprisals against relatives still living in Iran.
Amnesty International addressed its memoranda to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and other appropriate authorities in August and November 1986. It explained that while it had made every effort to ensure the accuracy of its documents, it would welcome clarification of any points where it was felt that this had not been achieved. In addition the organization expressed the hope that the documents could form the basis for discussions with the authorities, and reaffirmed its readiness to send a delegation to Tehran for this purpose. It asked the authorities to respond to this proposal or send written comments on the memoranda by the end of December 1986. Amnesty International received no response by that date, and its subsequent approaches to Iranian officials have satisfied the organization that no such response would be received later. Amnesty International regrets the apparent decision of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran not to communicate with it and fears that the denial of access to the country cannot but increase its concern that human rights violations there continue unabated.
1 While Amnesty International has received allegations of ill-treatment — particularly psychological — of Iraqi prisoners of war in Iranian territory, this subject is not addressed in this publication because of the lack of detailed and verifiable information.
Memorandum from Amnesty
International regarding its concerns in the
Islamic Republic of Iran
(20 November 1986)
1. Introduction
This memorandum was compiled on the basis of documented reports of human rights violations within Amnesty International’s mandate in the Islamic Republic of Iran during recent years. Amnesty International works for the unconditional release of men and women imprisoned because of their political, religious or other conscientiously held beliefs or because of their ethnic origin, sex, colour or language, provided that they have neither used nor advocated violence (prisoners of conscience). It works for fair and prompt trials for all political prisoners, and opposes the imposition and infliction of the death penalty, and torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of prisoners. The document focuses on the procedures for arresting and detaining opposition political activists or suspects and others imprisoned for their beliefs and/or activities, their treatment during incarceration and their trials. It also examines the range of offences for which the death penalty and other punishments of concern to Amnesty International are provided. The organization’s conclusions on these issues and its related recommendations are set out in Section 7 of this memorandum. While every effort has been made to present accurately the matters outlined above, Amnesty International would welcome clarification and comment from the authorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran to whom this memorandum is addressed, and trusts that it may form the basis for future discussions. This memorandum makes several references to an earlier communication sent to the Islamic Republic of Iran entitled Memorandum from Amnesty International to the Islamic Republic of Iran concerning the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, dated 8 August 1986.
Amnesty International’s efforts to combat human rights violations in Iran have continued for nearly 20 years, during which time its concerns, while varying in scale, have remained the same: the incarceration of prisoners of conscience, unfair trials of political prisoners, torture and ill-treatment, and executions.
Amnesty International has noted with regret that some former prisoners of conscience held during-ther 1970s when the late Shah was in power, for whose unconditional release it then worked, now figure among those with responsibility for the incarceration of prisoners of conscience and for other human rights violations in Iran. Others who were imprisoned in the 1970s for the non-violent expression of their conscientiously held beliefs are once more in prison, and many have been executed.
Amnesty International recognizes that countries which have experienced a revolution are often in exceptional circumstances and face exceptional difficulties. However, the organization believes that in such situations it is all the more important to safeguard those basic human rights which it strives to protect, and to make every effort not to repeat whatever human rights abuses were suffered during the period previous to the revolution.
Among the main factors conducive to human rights abuses in post-revolution Iran has been the apparent lack of a centralized authority able to ensure the correct treatment of prisoners and the apparent non-uniform application of the law. Individual judges would appear to have had unbridled powers, local officials have used their position to achieve personal gain or to conduct vendettas, and law enforcement authorities have abused their authority by, for instance, inflicting torture on prisoners in their custody. The lack of centralized authority has been conducive to widespread arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and executions, while at the same time denying victims of human rights violations recourse to impartial tribunals whereby they could challenge their detention and present a defence in the course of a fair and public trial. All too often, following summary trials, death sentences have been imposed and swiftly carried out.
The frequently arbitrary nature of the administration of justice in the Islamic Republic of Iran has permitted, among other things, the summary execution of prisoners previously sentenced to imprisonment without the chance of having further judicial hearings, and has resulted in vastly disparate sentences being handed down in different parts of the country for identical offences.
A number of measures have been introduced by the authorities in attempts to counter these practices, including the establishment of a more centralized authority for judicial affairs and the setting up of a ministry with responsibility for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Other measures include attempts to standardize the parameters of penalties permitted for certain offences. However, years had elapsed before the introduction of such measures, and …
|
