UNITED NATIONS
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
E/CN.4/1991/35
13 February 1991
ENGLISH
Original: ENGLISH/FRENCH/SPANISH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Forty—seventh session
Agenda item 12
QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS IN ANY PART OF THE WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL AND OTHER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES
Report on the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights . . Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohi. pursuant to Commission resolution 1990/79
GE. 91—1O587/2898B
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page ii
CONTENTS
Chapter
INTRODUCTION . .
I. COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE SINCE THE INTERIM REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY . . . . . . . . . . . .
A. Written communications of a general nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B. Written communications concerning allegations received by the Special Representative and transmitted to the Government
C. Conversations with representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran
II. INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE .
A. Right to life
B. Enforced or involuntary disappearances
C. Right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment .
D. Administrationofjustice . .
E. Freedom of opinion, expression, press and association and right to peaceful assembly ...
F. Freedom of movement; right to leave one's countryandtoreturn .
C. Allegations of intimidation or reprisal
H. Situation of women .
I. Situation regarding the rights of children ...
J. Testimonies concerning acts of violence against the civilian population .....
K. Freedom of religion
L. Situation of the Baha'i community
Paragraphs Page
1— 5 1
6— 28 2
6— 9 2
10— 22 3
23— 28 7
29—327 11
30— 72 11
73 22
74—141 22
142 — 185 30
186 — 204
205
209
217
222
225
250
265
36
41
42
43
44
44
48
52
— 208
— 216
— 221
— 224
— 249
— 264
— 327
EICN.41199 1135
page iii
CONTENTS ( continued)
Chapter Paragraphs
III. REPORT ON THE SECOND VISIT TO THE ISLANIC REPUBLIC
OF IRAN 328 —460 61
A. Introduction ...... 328 — 333 61
B. Meeting with representatives of the executive and judicial branches of Government 334 — 416 62
C. Hearing of prisoners at Evin prison ......... 417 — 429 75
D. Trial proceedings at Evin prison 430 — 433 79
E. Information received by the Special Representative from non—governmental sources 434 — 444 80
F. Information received from private persons .... 445 — 455 82
G. Meeting with members of the Baha'i coznim.znity 456 — 457 84
H. Meeting with the Armenian community .......... 458 85
I. Comments and observations received from the Government on the report on the second visit .... 459 — 460 85
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . ......... 461 —494 90
Annexes
I. Names and particulars of persons allegedly executed in the Islamic Republic of Iran, supplementary to the lists contained in previous reports of the Special Representative
II. Names and particulars of persons allegedly executed in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Governmental replies to the list contained in the interim report to the General Assembly
(A/45/697, appendix I)
III. Government replies to the list of prisoners handed to the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs on 9 October 1990
El CN. 4/1991/35
page 1
INTRODUCTION
1. At its forty—sixth session, the Commission on Human Rights decided, by
its resolution 1990/79 of 7 March 1990, to extend the mandate of the
Special Representative, as contained in Commission resolution 1984/54
of 14 March 1984 for a further year arid, requested the Special Representative
to submit an interim report to the General Assembly at its forty—fifth session
tn the human rsghts -ratios. tne Islamic s eublit iran. .: uding she
situation of minority grcs.ps1.rh -as th S.IIa is, and. final retort to the
Commission at its F z rtv— erth session. By it decision 1990/243
of 25 May 1990, the Economic and Social Council endorsed that reSOtutiOn.
2. Previously, the Genera. iscembly had, decided. by tIc resolutton /l63
of 15 December 1989 to continue its examination of the situation of human
rights in the Islamic Rept hlis -ti Iran during its forty—fifth session in the
light of additional eles enss trovided by the Commission for Human Rights and
the Economic and Social CounciL
3. In response to General Assembly resolution 44/163 and. Commission on Human
Rights resolutson 1990/19, the Special Representative presented his snterim
report (A/451697) to the forty—fifth session of the General Assembly. By its
resolution 45/173, the General Assembly took note with appreciation of the
reports by the Special Representative presented in 1990, including the
observations contained therein noted with concern the allegations of
violations of human rights contained in these reports, and further noted that
the Commission on Human Rights would consider the situation of human rights in
the Islamic Republic of Iran at its forty—seventh session and would: refer the
question, as appropriate, to the General Assembly at its forty—sixth session.
4. In compliance with paragraph 14 of Commission resolution 1990/79, she
Special Representative submits herewith his final report to the Commission.
This report updates the situation as reflected in the interim report on the
basis of information that the Special Representative continued to receive from
October 1990 to January 1991. Such information includes replies received from
the Iranian Government to allegations transmitted to it by the Special
Representative during the entire year; it was, therefore necessary to
reproduce at least in s mmery form the contents of these ellegations so that
the answers of the Government can be properly assessed. The account on the
second visit, which the Special Representative made to the Islamic Republic of
Iran from 9 to 15 October 1990 (A/45/697, chapter IV) and the observations of
the Government on that visit, are also reproduced as chapter III of the
present report. However, due to the length of the present report, the
appendices III and IV of the interim report have not been reproduced and may
be consulted in document A/45/697.
5. The structure of this report follows previous patterns and is accordingly
divided into four chapters, plus an introduction: I. Communications between
the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Special Representative
since the interim report to the General Assembly; II. Information received by
the Special Representative; III. Report on the second visit to the Islamic
Republic of Iran; IV. Conclusions and recommendations. As in previous
reports, various annexes are attached containing information on events and
allegations referred to in the main body of the report.
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page 2
I. COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERM4ENT OF THE ISLAMIC
REPUBLIC OF IRAN AND THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
SINCE THE INTERIM REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
A. Written communications of a general nature
6. By letter dated 16 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva informed the
Special Representative that, on 31 December 1990, the Iranian Parliament had
approved new legal provisions concerning the right to legal counsel in all
courts (for the text see para. 148).
7. On 5 February 1991, the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic
of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed the following letter
to the Special Representative:
“We wish, through this formal letter, to raise with you a basic and
important issue which has been the subject of discussion between us in a
number of formal as well as informal meetings and on which, most
regrettably, we have not been able to arrive at a conclusion or
understanding as of yet.
“It is our hope that this letter, which we request to be included in
the conclusion of your report, shall encourage you to look into this
essential tatter with more attention and provide us with an answer that
is clear and unambiguous. We also hope that the Special Representative
will avoid the casual replies which he has so far presented and which
only leaves things more obscure.
“The issue at hand is but a simple, straightforward question:
“What:. is the basis and criteria for the Special Representative's
conclusions whether or not monitoring the situation of human rights
should continue?
“OEe 3pecial Representative has, at different times so far, provided
the fcllow ng replies which we shall make an effort to reproduce:
‘l. The Special Representative makes that conclusion on the basis
of the report.
“2. :ran should become (the Special Representative wishes to make
Iran) a model country for human rights.
“3, In the Special Representative's view monitoring is a procedure
that should be applied to most countries of the world in a non—selective
manner indefinitely and on the basis of co—operation with States
concerned.
“4. Response by Iran to the recommendations and replies to the
allegations, is the basis for such conclusion.
“The first reply is indeed vague and extremely general as the report
is a compilation of communications and information which cannot by
themselves yield a particular conclusion. The conclusion is made by the
E/CN.41l991/35
page 3
Special Representative and, in order to avoid personal judgement, he must
have available to him a criterion which shall serve as the basis for
making a suggestion on whether or not monitoring of a State's human
rights situation is ‘useful and appropriate'.
“The second reply presents the Special Representative's personal
desire and is evident that it cannot serve as the criterion to suggest
continued monitoring. To ‘change' Iran and ‘make it a model', however
good may be intended, is far beyond the mandate; monitoring on this basis
cannot be described as ‘appropriate'.
“OEe third reply is what may constitute a criterion for monitoring.
But this does not correspond to the present situation as ‘most countries
of the world' are not monitored. As long as this criterion is not
adopted and applied by the Commission it is not appropriate, nor is it
just, to continue to apply it to Iran.
“So far as the recommendations are concerned they have been accepted
and practical steps have been taken for their implementation. Replies to
the so—called allegations have also been provided.
“On the basis of the above, there remains no doubt that the
suggestions by the Special Representative on continuation of monitoring
stem from a personal judgement and indeed the criteria that he uses as
the basis (3 and 4 above) yield to the conclusion that monitoring Iran
should stop.”
8. By letters dated 6 February 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Oeneva transmitted in
written form information he bad presented to the Special Representative during
a meeting on 30 January 1991 and requested that it be included in the report
and that he be informed of the observations and reconunendations as well as the
course of action the Special Representative intended to take on these
matters. The information has been reproduced in paragraph 28 (b) to (d).
9. By a further letter dated 6 February 1 91, the Permanent Representative
referred to another matter raised during the above—mentioned conversation.
The content of that letter is reproduced in paragraph 28 (a) below.
B. Written communications concerning allegations received
by the Special Representative and transmitted to the
Government
10. On 8 November 1990 the Special Representative sent the following letter
to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran:
“... I should, indeed, be most grateful if you could kindly intercede in
a case which, for purely humanitarian reasons, I felt I should bring to
your personal attention. According to information available to me,
Mr. Badiullah Sobhani, a former official of the Ministry of Education,
adhering to the Baha'i faith, is being held at Evin prison for the sole
reason of not being able to repay his retirement pension received during
the past 14 years. To my knowledge he has not been charged with any
offence punishable under Iranian law. In view of these circumstances and
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 4
given the advanced age of Mr. Sobhani, I am taking the liberty of
requesting your intervention with the competent authorities with a view
to obtaining his release.”
11. By letter dated 22 November 1990, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at G ieva communicated
to the Special Representative that Mr. Badiullah Sobhani was set free
on 15 November 1990.
12. On 17 December 1990 the Special Representative wrote the following letter
to the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the
United Nations Office at Geneva:
“... I recall with appreciation that, during my recent visit to Tehran,
the Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr. M. Mottaki, expressed your Government's
willingness to reply to the allegations which I transmitted to it in the
past. As you know, I noted in my interim report to the General Assembly
the fact that your Government has started providing such replies and
cannot but emphasize again the importance I attach to its comments and
observations on the various allegations.
“Since I intend to finalize my report by mid—January 1991, I would
be most grateful if any further replies your Government might wish to
submit could be communicated to the Centre for Human Rights not later
than 10 January 1991, so that they may be included in my report and be
taken into consideration in the conclusions and recommendations I intend
to place before the Commission.”
13. By letter dated 28 December 1990, the Special Representative transmitted
to the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the
United Nations Office at Geneva, the latest allegations received subsequent to
his interim report to the forty—fifth session of the enera1 Assembly,
reiterating his request for comments or observations.
14. On 10 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic
of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed to the Special.
Representative the following letter:
.. [ I] would like to draw your attention to the fact that the deadline
for submission of replies set forth for 10 January 1991 is absolutely
impractical to meet as investigations of this nature are time consuming.
The time, therefore, needs to be extended to a reasonable date.
“Moreover, as we have always mentioned in the past, the nature of
your work requires continuous or at least frequent direct contacts with
you before preparation of any report in order to accomplish the most from
our full co—operation, We, therefore, request that you propose a number
of dates that we can meet together from now until the time of the
preparation of the report and its subsequent presentation to the
forty—seventh session of the Commission on Human Rights.
“We are aware, of course, that because of your other preoccupations
it may not be possible for you to come to Geneva as frequently as this
sensitive, complicated and extensive task requires. Therefore, we would
E/CN. 41199 1/35
. page5
like to inform you that we are prepared to meet with you at agreed places
and times which may be convenient to you. I must add that the
possibility of direct telephone contacts are also most desirable.”
15. By letter dated 11 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva transmitted
replies to the letters dated 27 June and 9 July 1990 addressed to him by the
Special Representative, as follows:
“..• I have the pleasure to inform you that since 10 December 1990,
the following persons have been released: Reza Sadr, Ezatollah Sahabi,
Farhad Behbahani, Abbas Ghaem Al—Sabahi, Mabmoud Naimpoor,
Nour Au Tabandeh and Hossein Shah—Hosseini. .
“With regard to the other detainees, as soon as the judicial
proceedings are concluded, you will be informed of the final results.”
16. By letter dated 14 January 1991, the Special Representative replied to
the letter of the Permanent Representative dated 10 January 1991 as follows:
‘‘
“While I appreciate the difficulty of investigating fully the most
recent allegations transmitted by letter dated 28 December 1990, I have
to remind you that the majority of the allegations received in 1990 were
communicated to you by letters dated 20 August and 8 October 1990 and for
certain individual cases even earlier. In addition, replies are still
outstanding for allegations sent to you in previous years. I also wish
to recall that during my last visit to Tehran in October 1990, the Deputy
Foreign Minister, Mr. M. Mottaki, informed me that investigations on the
allegations transmitted so far were already under way and replies would
be made available to me shortly.
“In an effort to meet your concerns as well as your wish for further
consultations with me, I have decided to delay the submission of my
report for two weeks in order to allow us to meet before its
finalization. Such a meeting could take place at Geneva on 28 or
29 January 1991. Any written material your Government might wish to
present for inclusion in the report would, however, have to reach the
Centre for Human Rights in one of the working languages of the
Organization on 22 January at the latest.
“In view of the fact that the forty—seventh session of the
Commission is scheduled to begin its work on 28 January 1991 and that by
delaying my report I am already placing a considerable burden on the
translation services of the United Nations, I hope that I can count on
your understanding with regard to the dates indicated.”
17. By letter dated 15 January 1991, the Special Representative transmitted
to the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the
United Nations Office at Geneva, the following letter:
“... In the framework of the co—operation which your Government accords
to my mandate I should like to bring to your attention that I have
EICN. 4/1991/35
page 6
received reports concerning Mrs. Betty Akbarnia and her six—year—old son
Amir, both residents of Overland Park, Kansas, United States of America.
According to the information provided, Mrs. Akbarnia has resided in the
United States for 16 years and holds a permanent ininigrant visa. Both
persons are said to have recently been arrested at Tehran airport upon
returning to the United States from a family visit. It was reported that
Mrs. Akbarnia has been charged with denouncing the Muslim faith and that
she is scheduled to stand trial on 19 January 1991.
“I would be most grateful if you could provide me with full
information on this case and in particular advise me of the precise
charges brought against Mrs. Akbarnia. I would further appreciate
receiving assurances that the above—mentioned persons receive humane
treatment while in detention and can benefit of all procedural safeguards
provided for in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
including access to legal assistance.”
18. On 21 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic
of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva addressed the following letter
to the Special Representative:
“I wish to refer to your letter of 14 January 1991 and indicate that
my Government shall make every effort to prepare the replies as soon as
possible. But this process is time consuming and more time would be
needed than your new suggested deadline. We understand the burden on the
Human Rights Centre but we believe for matters of importance such as this
the United Nations should be prepared to provide facilities in a manner
that will not limit, by any means, the possibilities for receiving as
much information as possible by the Special Representative from the
Government, even if it comes at the eleventh hour. With regard to the
necessity for direct contact, the dates proposed would, based on your
timetable, follow your preparation of this report. We have requested
direct contact both prior and following the finalization of the report.
As we mentioned earlier, the sensitive and complicated nature of this
task requires constant contact, consultation and discussion so that our
full co—operation can be properly utilized. A report drafted merely on
the basis of some formal correspondance cannot be as objective and
reliable as the task calls for. Since the monitoring is done on a
continuous basis, consultations and contacts should also be possible at
any time, at least on many occasions and not just one.
“We wish to reiterate our readiness, in the spirit and pursuance of
our full co—operation, to meet you at any time and place prior to, during
and following the preparation of the report. We are aware of your other
preoccupation which limits the time you may allow for our task and your
possibility to travel. We therefore state that we are ready to shoulder
the extra burden to travel to the place desirable for you, including your
current place of residence. We also await to receive your telephone
number so as to enable us to contact you by phone.” ,
19. By letter dated 22 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva strongly
protested against the contents of paragraphs 44 and 45 of the interim report
(A/45/697) and demanded immediate rectification (for the substantive content
of this letter see para. 50).
EICN.411991/35
page 7
20. By letter dated 22 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva transmitted
replies of the Iranian Government to allegations contained in the interim
report (A/45/697). For the substance of the replies see chapters II and III
below. By the same letter the Permanent Representative also provided answers
concerning the fate and/or whereabouts of 157 prisoners whose names were
included in a list of 202 which the Special Representative handed to the
Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs during hi8 second visit to Tehran. The
list of the Special Representative is reproduced in appendix II of the interim
report (A/45/697) and the replies thereto are reflected in annex III of the
present report.
21. By note verbale dated 22 January 1991, the Permanent Mission of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva made available
to the Special Representative the text of a communication which the Conseil
Apostolique des Arm niens de T h ran had addressed to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (for the text of this communication see para. 458).
22. By letter dated 1 February 1991 the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva again referred
to the death of Mr. Kazem Rajavi. OEe text of the letter is reproduced in
paragraph 52.
C. Conversations with representativea of the
Islamic Republic of Iran
23. Before orally introducing his interim report before the General Assembly,
the Special Representative had a long, detailed conversation in New York with
the deputy Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the
United Nations, Ambassador Javad Zarif. OEe discussion concentrated on the
items in the interim report which the Government of the Islamic Republic of
Iran found objectionable for various reasons, notably the prominence given to
criticism originating from sources which in its view were partial and given to
spreading disinformation, but also because the report, in its opinion, ignored
positive aspects of the situation, and its lack of balance put the Iranian
Government in a bad light.
24. In Geneva, the Special Representative had two conversations with
Ambassador Syrons Nasseri who also brought up the subject of the interim
report — both its tenor, which he described as negative, and various specific
features which he considered to be lacking in balance. He paid especial
attention to the questions of freedom to voice one's opinions and the
authorization of new political parties. As regards freedom of expression, the
Ambassador stated that the report made no mention of the complete freedom of
expression enjoyed in the Iranian Parliament, which was unmatched in any other
country in the region. OEe Special Representative pointed out that, whatever
took place in Parliament, where divergent views were expressed and the
Government was on occasion fiercely criticized, during his second visit to the
country, he had received information from press sources which led him to
believe that freedom of expression was subject to restrictions and steps
should thus be taken to enable journalists to do their job of reporting and
analysing the news, and allow newspapers to publish their articles in complete
safety. He added that he could see no reason for the delay in authorizing new
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page 8
political parties, which had now lasted several years; while some had indeed
been authorized, others were de facto being denied legalization through simple
foot—dragging, and there had been no official ruling on the subject.
25. The Ambassador stated that, to his mind, all allegations were
incorporated into the reports without first being evaluated for their degree
of credibility, and it was that that gave the appearance that human rights
violations were taking place in Iran. His view was that the sources and
credibility of allegations should be considered before they were included in
reports. OEe Special Representative did not share that view and referred to
the report he had submitted to the Commission on Human Rights at its
forty—fourth session (E/CN.4/l988/24), paragraphs 61 to 65 of which explained
in detail the method followed in handling allegations received.
26. The Ambassador raised the subject of the criteria for the continuation or
suspension of international monitoring and it was agreed that he would submit
a note because, on such an important matter, it was preferable for the
Commission on Human Rights to know exactly what the Government's thinking
was. OEe note was received on 5 February 1991 and has been incorporated into
chapter I.
27. OEe Ambassador questioned the inclusion in the interim report of
references to the killing of Mr. Kazem Rajavi and the Rushdie affair. OEe
Special Representative replied that he was unable to omit the information he
had received on those two matters. As regards the Rajavi case, the
Sub—Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities,
in resolution 1990/8 of 30 August 1990, had expressly invited him to include
in his report “information available to him on this investigation”. In
reference to the Rushdie affair, the Ambassador added that the report ought to
have mentioned the hundreds of persons in different countries, chiefly
Pakistan and India, who had died as a result of Rushdie's book.
28. OEe Ambassador asked for the final report to mention a number of matters
which he felt had a bearing on human rights. He later submitted his
suggestions in writing, as follows:
(a) “I would like to draw your attention to a humanitarian and
complicated issue linked with the destiny of more than 3 million Afghan
and 65,000 Iraqi Kurd refugees residing in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“Your attention is drawn to the fact that on the basis of
humanitarian principles, the responsibilities for refugees is an
international one and should not be left burdened on the host country
alone.
“OEe Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has provided all the
facilities and accommodated the needs for all refugees to the best of its
potentialities. Nevertheless, they cannot fully enjoy their rights
stipulated in the provisions of the international covenants, as the
result of others not sharing this international responsibility.
“OEis issue is becoming more complicated and worse after the
occurrence of the recent crisis in the Persian Gulf. On the basis of the
United Nations information, there might be more influxes of refugees of
different nationalities pouring into Iran in days to come.
E /CN .4/1991/35
page 9
“Therefore, the Special Representative should pay special attention
to the issue of refugees in Iran from the standpoint of their human
rights, in order to improve their situation pending the final resolution
of the issue. We request that this matter be fully investigated by the
Special Representative and to report his findings and observations to the
Commission on Human Rights. t '
(b) “We have received numerous letters from many individuals who have
stated that they or members of their families have been displaced from
their cities of residence as a result of the occupation and destruction
of their cities. This had led to their deprivation of many basic rights
enshrined in the [ Universal Declaration] of Human Rights and the two
Covenants. Their situation has still not been returned to normal. They
also state that there are millions of individuals or families with the
same grievances.
“Given the magnitude of the problem, they request that the Special
Representative look into this matter noting the fact that such
deprivation of human rights have been the result, above all, of the
persistent military assistance provided by some western countries to
enable the military occupation and destruction of their cities.”
(c) “A number of persons have written to us to inform us of their
grievances and requested that the Special Representative examine the
situation and report on it accordingly.
“They have informed us that they represent tens of thousands of
individuals or the families of those who have lost their lives or have
otherwise been severely impaired as the result of indiscriminate bombing
of civilian population centres in the course of the war. OEey have
reminded us that these bombings, which have resulted in the extensive
violations of the human rights and particularly the right to life of
many, have been made possible due to sustained and open—handed assistance
and provision of weapons or the sophisticated means to deliver weapons
against the population by a number of western countries. OEey have also
noted that at the time the United Nations reports had established the
fact that weapons provided by their countries were being used against
civilian population against the norms of international humanitarian law.”
(d) “A number of individuals have requested us in writing to convey to
you that they represent tens of thousands of people in Iran who
themselves, or members of their family, have lost their lives or have
been seriously injured, in many occasions for life, as the result of
chemical bombardments against military and civilian personnel. The said
representative individuals have demanded immediate investigation by the
Special Representative into this matter and to present his observations
and recommendations on the issue on the basis of the following:
“1. Use of chemical weapons against both military and civilian
populations is prohibited by international law and international ,
humanitarian law;
E/CN.4/199 1/35
page 10
“2. OEe chemical weapons and the technology to sustain its
manufacture have been provided by a number of western countries;
“3. Such material was provided with full knowledge that they had
been and would continue to be used. against human beings;
“4. As thousands have been deprived of their right to life and
other most fundamental human rights, the matter should be dealt with by
the Special Representative with the priority and attention that
violations to such catastrophic human rights consequences require.”
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page :i i
II. INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
29. The following paragraphs contain allegations of human rights violations
received by the Special Representative and transmitted to the Government of
the Islamic Republic of Iran by memoranda dated 20 August, 8 October,
28 December 1990 and 29 January 1991. Replies received from the Government
with regard to the alleged incidents and cases have also been reflected in
this section. It should be understood that as regards the allegations
transmitted on 28 December 1990 and 29 January 1991, the Government did not
have sufficient time to examine them in detail and submit its observations.
A. Right to life
30. According to a report by the daily Abrar , a man condemned for fornication
was publicly executed in Masbad in early 1990. Agenee France Presse reported
on 16 January that a 31—year—old woman convicted of prostitution had been
stoned to death in Bandar Anzali. On 31 January Jomhouri Islami published a
declaration of the Komiteh Commander of the Province of West Azerbaijan,
according to which five persons engaged in prostitution and corruption had
been stoned to death. According to a report by Ressalat on 15 February 1990,
Cholani Reza Masouri was hanged in Arak for pederasty.
31. Jomhouri Islami reported on li February 1990 that Bolouch Ismalel Zehi
had been executed for drug—trafficking. On 10 January Radio Tehran announced
that 31 persons convicted of drug—trafficking had been executed, 23 of them in
Tehran, 3 at Shiraz, 3 at Sabzevar and 2 at Saveh. According to Ressalat of
Il February, a married couple accused of drug—trafficking was sentenced to
death in Saveh.
32. Dailies from various countries published the statement of
Mitra Moazez (21), claiming that she had been forced to witness the death by
burning of a 37—year—old woman and two 18—year—old men in an Iranian prison.
According to these reports she had been imprisoned from 1981 to 1984. When
she was freed, she visited the family of one of the young men, named Asghar
Chorbani Maleki, who told her that prison guards had brought them a box
containing Asghar's ashes and that, as a consequence of the shock this had
caused, the young man's father had committed suicide.
33. Abbas Raissi, a navy officer stationed at Chah Bahar, was said to have
been arrested around September 1989 in Chah Bahar on unknown charges. OEe
source of the informati6n presumed that his arrest, as well as the arrest of a
group of other persons, related to an incident in which a Government opponent,
of whom Mr. Raissi was a close friend and distant relative, was smuggled out
of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The group arrested at the same time included
two of the opponent's nephews as well as his brother, Mohammed Karim Naroui,
who was the Head Postmaster at Chah Bahar, and was executed at Zahedan on
28 January 1990 (8 Babman 1368), reportedly having been sentenced to death at
a trial the previous day. Mr. Raissi, who was detained at either Chah Bahar
or Zahedan prison, was said to be at risk of imminent execution; the charges
brought against him were not known and no information was available as to
whether he had been tried. . By a letter dated 12 March 1990, the Special
Representative requested information about the charges brought against
Mr. Raissi, whether he had been tried and, if so, asked that all relevant
details concerning his trial and sentence be provided to him. OEe Special
Representative also appealed to the Government, in case Mr. Raissi had been
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 12
sentenced to death, to consider granting clemency or at least to ensure that
all safeguards stipulated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, particularly in its article 14, had been fully respected in the
preceding trial.
34. By a letter dated 26 April 1990, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva replied that
Mr. Raissi had been tried on spying charges for collaborating with Iraq during
the war and had been condemned to death. The death sentence was carried out
after due judicial process and all solemn rites were performed. OEe Permanent
Representative added that the relevant judicial file would be made available
upon request.
35. By a letter dated 7 May 1990, the Special Representative thanked the
Government for its reply and requested the relevant judicial file concerning
this case. He reiterated his interest in examining the files in the meeting
with the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. M. Mottaki, held at Tehran
on 9 October 1990.
36. On 28 April 1990, the newspaper Kayhan published a report by the Islamic
Republic News Agency to the effect that the Prosecutor General of the Tehran
Revolutionary Court had announced that 10 persons accused of espionage would
be executed in the next few days. Other sources reported directly to the
Special Representative that Mr. Jamshead Amiry Bigvand, former Director of the
Marodasht Shiraz Petrochemical Laboratory, and 13 other persons had allegedly
been convicted on the charge of espionage for the United States of America, an
offence for which capital punishment might be applied. Reportedly these
persons had been held for months in solitary confinement at Evin prison, and
had not been allowed to avail themselves of legal assistance of their own
choosing. It was further alleged that confessions had been extracted under
torture and that some of them had been compelled to make extrajudicial
confessions which were broadcast by Iranian television. OEe Special
Representative requested the Government, by a letter dated 8 May 1990, to
enable all 14 persons to benefit from all the procedural safeguards provided
for in articles 6 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and also safeguards 5 and 6 of the annex to Economic and Social Council
resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984, entitled “Implementation of safeguards
guaranteeing the rights of those facing the death penalty”. OEe Special
Representative further requested information on the precise charges brought
against these persons and all relevant details of their trials. Finally, the
Special Representative appealed to the Government that, in the event that all
legal remedies had been fully exhausted, every possible consideration be given
to the granting of clemency to those persons.
37. On 11 May 1990, the Special Representative, pursuant to his letter
dated 8 May 1990 and reiterating the requests expressed therein, communicated
to the Permanent Representative 10 more names of persons allegedly belonging
to the above—mentioned group of 14, as follows: Dr. Bahman Agahy, Legal
Advisor of thee Iranian Foreign Ministry; Hooshang Amjadi Bigvand; General
Ardeshear Ashraf; Manochehr Azar, Attorney; Masoud Deadehvar, Planning Advisor
for the Iranian Oil Company; Navy Captain Kyanoosh Hakeamy; Colonel Bahram
Ikany; Heshmatolah Magsoody, Clergyman/Attorney; Captain Gahraman Malekzadeh
and Colonel Masoud Payaby.
E / CN .4 / 1991 / 35
page 13
38. By a letter dated 5 June 1990, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva forwarded to
the Special Representative the following response of the judicial authorities
of the Islamic Republic of Iran:
“According to the article 37 of the Constitution of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, and as contained in the second paragraph of article 14
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, no person
shall be considered guilty by law unless the accusation against him is
proved by a competent court and the courts are naturally obliged to act
accordingly;
“In the light of information received by the Islamic Revolutionary
Court, those people were arrested and tried in accordance with the law.
In addition, they were entitled to appoint a legal counsel and they duly
and freely defended themselves during the trial;
“With regard to the right of the accused to resort to higher court,
it should be mentioned that the sentences issued in accordance with law
could be reviewed in the Supreme Court. Consequently, after the issuance
of the verdicts all the accused requested a review by the court of
appeal. Investigation, therefore, was conducted at their request and the
verdicts of the two of the accused were referred to another court for
re—examination.”
39. On 19 February Radio Tehran announced that 31 persons had been executed
for drug—trafficking and organizing prostitution in the cities of Tehran,
Sabzevar, Karaj, Arak, Kerman, Boushehr, Sari, Qom, Bakhtaran and Rashat.
Radio Tehran supplied the names of those executed in each of those cities.
Other sources stated that the charges were formation of and participation in
international drug—trafficking bands, importing, transporting, purchase and
sale of opium, heroin and hashish; corruption and establishment of
prostitution centres, perverting girls and married women and corrupting the
younger generation.
40. It has also been reported that 18 prisoners were executed on 17
and 27 April 1990 in the City of Sanandaj. It was asserted that they were
militants who attended May Day celebrations in Sanandaj last year. OEe names
of 14 persons belonging to this group were given as follows:
Mehdis Bolur—Forush, Jamal Cheragh—Disi, Nader Fat'hi, Seid Saleh Hossieni,
Naser Jalali, Ahinad Mohamadi, Ali Ashraf Moradi, Mohsen Othman Pour,
Abmad Parvizi, Mohamad Rozaii, Naser Sobhani, Anvar Shariati, Roya, Bakhtiari.
41. By a letter dated 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran stated that:
“(a) Mr. Jamal Cherag—Vasi, because of terrorist activities and
participation in several murderous operations and abduction in the
Kurdistan region, was executed under the verdict of the court;
(b) Mr. Anvar Shariati, because of participation in many military
operations against ordinary people, causing death and injury to more than
50 people, was executed under the verdict of the court; (c) no judicial
record was found on Mr. Mehdi Bolorforosh and Mrs. Roya Bakhtiyari.
OEere were also no evidence of their executions because of non—political
offences in Iran; (d) Mr. Naser Sobhani and Mr. Moheen Osman—pour were
E/CN.4/l991/35
page 14
executed under the verdict of the court for their act of espionage in a
military region and providing top secret military information to aliens;
(e) Mr. Mohammad Rezal, Mr. Abmad Parvizi and Mr. Seyed Saleh Hosseini
are all alive and going about their nomal duties; (f) Mr. Nasser Djalali
and Mr. Nader Fathi, during the years 1985 to 1988, were involved in
rebellious activities in the western part of the country, killing tens of
innocent people, demolishing public premises such as bridges, roads
connecting villages to cities, kidnapping wives and children of people
and blackmailing their families. He was arrested in 1988 and executed
in 1989 under the verdict of the court; (g) Mr. Abmad Mohammadi was
killed in armed clashes with military forces along the western borders of
the country. He was involved in smuggling foodstuffs across the
Iran—Iraq borders; (h) Mr. Au Ashraf Moradi was executed under the
verdict of the court for the act of murder committed by him
intentionally. One can therefore note that none of the above persons
were executed for first of May celebrations, as was alleged.”
42. It has further been reported that on 14 February 1990 a judicial panel
sent to Hamadan on behalf of the Head of the Judiciary issued the following
sentences:
(a) Gholamhossein Golzar, 27 years old, discharged employee of the
Agricultural Bank of Hainadan: 74 lashes for committing robbery; 92 lashes for
participation in a forbidden act, and decapitation by the just sword of the
Imain All;
(b) Gholamhassan Golzar, aged 28, discharged employee of the Hamadan
Municipality: 74 lashes for committing robbery; 74 lashes for participation
in a forbidden act, and decapitation by the just sword of the Imain All;
(c) Reza Khanian, 23 years old, fruit and vegetable centre clerk:
74 lashes for committing robbery; 50 lashes for participation in a forbidden
act; amputation of hand for committing assault and battery and hanging by
scaffold.
43. The newspaper yh announced on 3 January 1990 that Khodakaram Zamani,
given a retributory death sentence for the murder of Morad—Ali Rezai, was
executed in the main square of Khorrainabad.
44. The newspaper Ettelapt announced the following executions:
Gholam Zanbgian and Rashid Noor—Mohammadi, in Bakhtaran, on 6 January 1990,
for murder; Abmad Souri, for murder, on 9 January; two persons whose names
were not announced, in Mashad on 1 January 1990, for murder; and the murderer
of a 13—year—old girl, hanged in Ahwaz.
45. On 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran
stated, with regard to the three preceding paragraphs, that “it is necessary
to realize that all verdicts issued from the courts are based on Islamic
Shariat.”
46. The Special Representative referred to the assassination of
Mr. Kazem Rajavi in his interim report to the General Assembly (A/45/697,
paras. 43 and 44). On 30 August 1990, the Sub—Commission on Prevention of
Discrimination and Protection of Minorities adopted resolution 1990/8, in
E / CN. 4 / 1991/35
. page 15
which it: “expresses the sincere wish that all facts and circumstances will
be fully investigated and revealed with respect to this serious crime;” and,
in its paragraph 4, “Also expresses the wish that the Special Representative
on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
Mr. Galindo Pohl, will include information available to him on this
investigation in his next report”. The Special Representative therefore
requested the Government of Switzerland to provide him with any information it
would be able to make available to him with regard to the investigation of the
case.
47. By a letter dated 31 January 1991, the Permanent Observer of Switzerland
to the United Nations Office at Geneva replied as follows:
“On instructions from my Government, I have the honour to
communicate the following in response to your letter dated
19 September 1990 about the killing of Mr. Kazem Rajavi, the contents of
which were disclosed to me by the Centre for Human Rights.
Mr. Kazem Rajavi was assassinated on 24 April 1990, on the open
street in the village of Tannay, near Coppet. The criminal investigation
of this matter is being handled by the examining magistrate of the Canton
of Vaud. Mr. R. Chatelain has issued warrants for the arrest of
13 Iranians who appear to be implicated in this appalling crime and has
transmitted a list of questions to the Iranian authorities through the
judicial assistance system. .
The outcome of these inquiries must be kept secret while the
investigation proceeds. The examining magistrate of the Canton of Vaud,
who is in charge of the investigation, is the only person authorized to
disclose the information obtained.
The Swiss Federal Council is nevertheless extremely concerned that
all aspects of this attack should be brought to light. As stated in the
press communiqu issued on 22 June 1990 (copy attached), the Federal
Department of Foreign Affairs notified the Embassy of the Islamic
Republic of Iran in Switzerland in June 1990 that the Federal Council
would draw the appropriate conclusions if it should transpire that
Iranian diplomats accredited to Switzerland or Iranian officials working
in Switzerland were implicated in this affair.”
“Press communiqu issued by the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs:
Ambassador Pierre—Yves Simonin, the Head of the Second Political
Division at the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, this afternoon,
Friday 22 June 1990., summoned Mr. Babman Agharazi Darmani, the Secretary
of the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Bern, in the absence of
the Head of Mission, Ambassador Seyyed Mohanunad Hossein Malack, to convey
to him Switzerland's extreme concern following the publication of the
press release issued by the examining magistrate of the Canton of Vaud
leading the investigation into the killing of Mr.. Kazem Rajavi.
E/CN.4 / 1991 / 35
page 16
Ambassador Simonin gave the Iranian diplomat to understand that the
Federal Council will consider the accusations levelled at some official
Iranian services and will, where appropriate, take the steps which such
cases require.
Ambassador Simonin further informed Mr. Darmani that the Federal
Council would not hesitate to draw the appropriate conclusions should it
transpire that accredited diplomats and/or Iranian officials stationed in
Switzerland were implicated in this affair.”
48. The examining magistrate of the Canton of Vaud, Mr. N. Chatelain, to whom
the Permament Observer refers in his letter, previously had issued a press
release, dated 22 June 1990, stating, inter pUp , the following:
. As of now, although the investigation has not been completed,
it appears that several people are closely implicated in this affair. It
was established early on that the individuals Yadollah Samadi and
Mohammad Said Rezvani were possibly associated with this killing, but
research has shown 13 people to be implicated.
The 13 implicated all justified their presence in Switzerland by
means of Iranian official passports bearing the words “on official
business”. Some of these documents had been issued on the same days as
each other in Tehran. Most of these individuals entered Switzerland
together on direct Iran Air flights from Tehran to Geneva, and possessed
airline tickets bearing consecutive serial numbers. OEey all stayed in
hotels in or on the outskirts of Geneva. It has been established that
sundry persons had made three trips to Switzerland, but that they were
accompanied by different accomplices on each occasion.
The police officers conducting the investigation have now assembled
a number of clues which make it possible to state that one or more
official Iranian services are directly involved in the killing of
Mr. Kazem Rajavi.
The Federal authorities have been informed of this development and
the outcome of these inquiries. The inquiries are not yet complete,
however, and the Vaud Security Police is continuing its investigation.”
49. The assassination of Mr. Rajavi generated fear in persons visiting the
Palais des Nations to give information about human rights in the Islamic
Republic of Iran. They took extraordinary precautions so as not to draw
attention to their lives and their beliefs and asked for special police
protection, in some cases notifying the competent authorities in advance of
their movements in Geneva or requesting interviews outside the Palais des
Nations.
50. By letter dated 22 January 1991, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran strongly protested against the reference to the
assassination of Mr. Kazem Rajavi included in the interim report to the
General Assembly (A/45/697, paras. 43 and 44). He stated:
E / CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 17
“In paragraph 44 you have referred to assassination of
Mr. Kazem Rajavi in a manner that tends to allege involvement of the
Iranian Government. In doing so, you may have been misguided by some
slanderous reporting reflected in some media. I wish to remind you that
criminal charges have been pressed against those reporters on the basis
of the Swiss Law. It is inappropriate for the Special Representative,
however, to repeat such serious slanders on the basis of unfounded
information.
“Moreover, the Special Representative should pay greater attention
and reflect as thoroughly on thousands of cases of assassinations
committed by the group that the deceased represented; bloody and cruel
assassination that has included men and women, old or young. Total
sympathy should also be presented to the families of those assassinated
by the notorious group the deceased represented. Such attention and
sympathy is, unfortunately and suspiciously, absent despite the fact that
the Special Representative has, at his disposal, much information about
the terrorist activities and assassination of this group and despite his
own condemnation of such terrorist activities in the past.
“My Government, for its share, condemns all acts of terrorism and
assassinations and believes that, like other murders committed by this
notorious terrorist group against their own members, the killing of
Mr. Kazem Rajavi is also the result of infighting within the group
orchestrated by their headquarters in Iraq. ...“
51. With regard to paragraph 49 above, the Government of the Islamic Republic
added that “there have not been any threats of non—co--operation with the
Special Representative on the part of the authorities of the Islamic Republic
of Iran. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran has taken measures
to have the different NGOs meet the Special Representative and during his two
trips has taken necessary precautionary measures for the convenience of those
who wish to see the Special Representative”.
52. By letter dated 1 February 1991, the Permanent Representative added the
following:
“Following the protest in my letter dated 22 January 1991, in
connection to the death of Mr. Kazem Rajavi and your comments presented
orally in a formal meeting on 30 January 1991, citing a Sub—Commission
resolution as the reason for such reference, I wish to state that your
explanation is not justified, and hereby reiterate our protest and demand
for full rectification of the matter. In this connection, while
referring you once again to the text of our previous letter, I would add
the following:
“1. Your mandate for examining the human rights is decided not by
the Sub—Commission but by the Commission on Human Rights and, as such,
you are by no means legally bound to pursue any matter on behalf of the
Sub—Commission unless you simply choose to do so.
“2. The resolution at the Sub—Commission was the result of a letter
dated 4 May 1990 which, in breach of most basic norms of the
United Nations, was issued and signed by the Under—Secretary—General for
Human Rights. The United Nations Secretary—General did, later, issue to
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 18
us a etter of apology and regret. The damage, however, had already been
done, as the Sub—Commission drafted its resol xtion on the basis of the
!et -er by the Under—Secretary—General. copies of which were provided
throuzh the members of the MKO terrorist group.
3 . OEus 4 it is all too clear that one wrong act has led to
others. OEis rnus come to an immediate halt.”
53. It has also been widely reported that the Iranian Government has endorsed
the !eath sentence against tne British author Salman Rushdie. On 5 June 1990,
the Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran reportedly stated that the fatwa
reii ious verdict) of tne late Imain Khomeini concerning the author was based
on divine rulings and remained irrevocable. On 26 December 1990 the Leader of
the Islamic Republic of Iran reiterated that the fatwa cannot be revised or
reoealed by anyone at any time,
54. By a letter of 22 January 1?91, the Permanent Representative of the
Islamic Republic of Iran also referred to the Rushdie case, as follows:
“ ... It should be pointed out that as a result of the criminal act of
Mr. Rushdie which was a direct insult to the most sacred values of
Muslims, tens of people lost their lives in different parts of the
world. It is very suprising to note that the Special Representative
addressed this political issue under the humanitarian mandate without
making any reference whatsoever to those whose blood was spilled in
protest to this criminal act. The Special Representative is expected to
show as much sensitivity to the right to life of those Muslims who lost
their lives as that which he extends to the culprit.”
55. It has further been reported that on 22 October 1990
Professor Cyrus Elahi, a member of the Flag of Freedom Organization of Iran,
was found dead with numerous bullet wounds at his Paris home. It was alleged
that the assassination was carried out by agents of the Iranian Government.
By a letter dated 11 January 1991, the Special Representative requested the
Charg d'Affaires of the Permanent Mission of France to the United Nations
Office at Geneva that he be provided with any information that her Government
would be able to make available to him on the results of the investigation
into this case.
56. The Charg d'Affaires of the Permanent Mission of France to the
United Nations Office at Geneva replied, in a letter dated 29 January 1991,
that “... the investigation has not yet been completed. Accordingly we cannot
at present provide any information on the case, which is still sub judice .
I undertake to keep you informed of any developments.”
57. In many communications the Special Representative has received, it has
been asserted that the families had never been officially notified that their
relatives had been executed. In addition, those that were notified were often
not told where their relatives had been buried.
58. By a letter dated 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran has answered this allegation, stating that, “as the Special
Representative was informed previously, there are special procedures for the
implementation of the verdicts. According to these procedures the accused and
his or her parents or family are informed of the contents of the verdict”.
El CN .4/1991/35
page 19
59. It has been reporced that as of January 1990 persons have been executed
in the Islamic RepubNc of Iran for their homosexual or lesbian tendency.
60. In its reply of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran stated that “according to the Islamic Shariat, homosexuals who confess
to their acts and insist on that are condemned to death”.
61. Other individual cases were reported as follows.
62. Mr. Bizhan Abmadian reportedly was shot in a street in Babol and that the
authorities refused to return his body to the family. Subsequently, his
parents and some other members of his family were allegedly arrested.
63. In its reply of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran stated that “Mr. Bizhan Ahmadian fought along with others, armed with
hand grenades and light weapons, in an attack on a shop belonging to a
citizen; he clashed with officers of the law and order and consequently was
killed. It is worth mentioning that in this street clash, two security agents
were also wounded and killed. Two others who were arrested said that they
have launched their operation on the order of the so called Peoples Mojahedin
Khalq Organization of Iran”.
64. Mr. Mohammad Fadaii was reportedly sentenced to five years' imprisonment.
At the end of his prison term, which was spent in Meshed prison, he was
released. In 1988, allegedly without any reason, he was again arrested,
subjected to several kinds of torture, and executed.
65. In the same reply of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran stated that “Mr. Mohammad Fadaii had been arrested because of
co-operation with terrorists and was released after serving his prison term.
He is now with his family”.
66. Mr. Aniir Taavoni—Ganji, his wife and daughter left Iran in 1987 out of
fear for their safety and liberty. When he returned for a short visit in 1988,
he was immediately arrested and taken to Evin prison. In November 1989, the
prison authorities asked his family to collect his clothes and other
belongings, as he had been executed.
67. In its reply of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran stated that “no judicial report or arrest document is available on
Mr. Amir Taavoni Ganji”.
68. Mr. Mobammad Amin Danesh was reportedly executed on 12 January 1986 in
Iranshahr and that his body was burned by the Guardians of the Islamic
Revolution.
69. In its reply of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran declared that “Mr. Mohainmad Amin Danesh was kidnapped in 1986 by the
armed bandits who demanded a ransom for his release. Since these bandits were
in operation on Afghan soil, it was not possible to pursue them and he has
apparently been killed because of failure to pay the ransom. The allegation
in this respect, therefore, is denied.”
E/CN.411991/35
page 20
70. Mr. :Davoud Mohainmadi, a former veterina: ian working in the Vete:d nary
Office of Arak city, was reportedly executed in October 1989 on charges of
drug—trafficking, but that the real reason for his execution war to bc fou d.
in his political activities opposing the Government.
71. In its reply of 22 January 1991, the Gcvernmen . of the Isl.emic Republic
of Iran stated that Mr, Davoud Mohanunadi as arrested under charges f
possessing and distributing opium and othei illicit dr igs and based upon the
verdict of the court, was sentenced to death He ha no security record”.
72. Subsequent to his interim report to the General AssenIIly the Special
Representative has received the following further a.legations concerning tbc
right to life:
(a) It has been reported that two members of the “Flag of Freedom
Organization of Iran” were executed at Evin prison: Mr. Hamid Amir Ansari,
around 18 January 1990 and Colonel Mojtaba Shaf ii Khazaneh around
February 1990. No information was available as to whether they had been
presented to a court before execution. It was also reported that the fate of
11 other members of the Organization was unknown and fear was expressed that
they might also have been executed. The names were given as follows:
Davoud Mir Rahimi, Mrs. Zaman, Jafapour, Abmad Roudaki, Khalil Ghiassi,
Farokhi, Davoud Mozaf far, Mohanunad Amin Alreaya, Nader Afshari, Dr. Assadi,
Manouchehr Motaheri. All aforementioned persons were said to be political
opponents of the Government but had not engaged in any violent activities;
(b) Davood Nasseri, a supposed political prisoner, reportedly was
executed in April 1990 in Tehran;
(c) In September 1990, a hundred people convicted of drug—trafficking
were said to have been executed within two weeks;
(d) On 3 October 1990, Mahmoud Khan—Darabi reportedly was executed in
Kermanshah;
(e) On 10 October 1990, 37 persons were reported to have been executed
in Torbat—E—Jaam;
(f) In October 1990, Massoud Keshavarz and Davood Salahsbour, allegedly
political prisoners, were said to have been executed in Karaj's Qezel—Hessar
prison and Tehran, respectively;
(g) In October 1990, Javad Rahmanian reportedly was executed in Jahroin
(Fars province), allegedly after having been severely tortured;
(h) Seyyed Mohammad Au Shahbukhari, reportedly processed under charges
of being a member of an espionage networks affiliated with a foreign
intelligence agency and sentenced to death in a military tribunal, was
executed on 12 November 1990;
U) On 13 November 1990, Mr. Saber Esmail—Zadeh and Mr. Panahi, two
supposed political prisoners, were said to have been executed in Tehran.
Reportedly they had been arrested several years ago and were serving prison
sentences;
E / CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 21
(j) In the first two weeks of November 1990, nine persons were said to
have been executed on non—political charges in Tehran, Ardebil, Bushehr,
Karaj, Khorramabad and Zahedan;
(k) On 19 November 1990, Mr. Moussa Taqavi—Yeganeh, Mr. Khademi,
Mr. Mohanunad Heydari, Mr. Ahinad Reza'i, Mr. Mohannuad Reza'i and
Ms. Barazandeh, all of them alleged political prisoners, reportedly were
executed in Gachsaran;
(1) On 23 November 1990, eight persons were said to have been executed
in Haniedan, one person in Ahwaz and one in Zahedan, on various charges,
including drug—trafficking;
(m) Two drug traffickers reportedly were hanged in Zahedan on
28 November 1990, after being sentenced to death by the Islamic Revolutionary
Court of the city. The two were said to have been found guilty of possessing
4.5 kg. of heroin;
(n) On 3 December 1990, four persons were said to have been executed in
Karaj and another person in Khalkhal;
(o) On 4 December 1990, 27 persons were said to have been hanged in
flizelabad prison in Bakhtaran. OEey allegedly had been involved in buying and
selling narcotics in Bakhtaran and Zahedan;
(p) It has been reported that Mr. Manocher Afghani Dazeky was executed
in the city of Kermanshar, subsequent to his arrest by the Guards of the
Islamic Revolution. It was added that at the time of delivering his corpse,
the Islamic Guards told his relatives not to mourn and not to wear black
dresses;
(q) It was reported that Mr. Mohanimad—Mehdi Saleiman—Nejad, born in 1969
and bearer of identification card No. 4025, was arrested on 4 August 1988 in
Zahedan and put at the disposition of the Islamic Revolution's Court of the
city. Reportedly on 17 August 1988, only 13 days after his arrest, he was
executed and his grave was shown to his parents; his belongings were given to
them but in spite of repeated requests, the authorities have not disclosed the
reason for the execution;
(r) It was reported that Reverend Hossein Soodmand, aged 55, a Muslim
convert to Christianity and minister of the church of the Assembly of God in
Gorgan, was arrested in October 1990 in Mashad, his home town, on charges of
apostasy from Islam, propagating Christianity, distributing Christian
literature and setting up an illegal church in Mashad. On 3 December 1990 he
was hanged in Mashad. His family was allegedly not informed of his situation
until after the execution had taken place. It is not known whether he was
tried, Rev. Soodmand converted to Christianity from Islam more than 20 years
ago, but was ordained ‘ ‘ Before then he worked
for the Bible Society and in a hospital for the blind, where he met his wife,
who is blind. He leaves her with four children. Pastors who visited his
grave have reportedly said that it is not in a cemetery but in a location
which cannot be considered a respectable place for burials.
E/CN.4/199 1/35
page 22
(a) OEe Iranian press reportedly published articles on a total of
93 public executions during the period 1 to 29 January 1991. It was said that
the executed persons have been sentenced on charges of common crime, in
particular, related to drug—trafficking. Details were given as follows:
18 executions in Bakhtaran; 2 more Bandar Abbas; 24 including 2 women in
Mashad; 7 in Torbat Jam; 5 in Neisbabour; 4 in Qouchan; 20 in Hammadan; 1 in
Oroumieh; 1 in Andimeshk; 8 in Khorasan; and 3 in Chah Bahar.
B. Enforced or involuntary disanpearances
73. The Special Representative wishes to refer to the report of the Working
Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (E/CN.4/1991/20), which has
transmitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran 451 cases of
missing persons, 7 of which were reported to have occurred in 1990. So far
only one case has been clarified by information received from non—governmental
sources.
C. Right to freedom from torture or cruel. inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment
74. Reports on torture and ill—treatment during imprisonment have continued
to be received since the first visit of the Special Representative to the
Islamic Republic of Iran. It was also alleged that mutilations and corporal
punishment are being applied. In this context, it is pertinent to note an
Agence France Presse report that, according to Kayhan , a person convicted of
robbery suffered the amputation of four fingers on his right hand in Ghasr
prison at Tehran. On 20 January 1990, the same news agency reported that two
persons condemned for robbery had suffered the amputation of four fingers on
their right hands. The sentence was reportedly executed in front of a large
crowd that had assembled for Friday prayers.
75. In the letter of 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic Republic
of Iran stated that “any physical abuse or torture under any name is denied in
the prisons and they are totally baseless. But in regard to amputations, it
is worth mentioning that the divine religion of Islam permits certain
punishments for certain crimes and in the field of Qesas which entails
amputations”.
76. By a letter dated 23 May 1990, the Special Representative inquired about
the situation of Dr. Alireza Nasiri, reportedly being detained on unknown
charges at a prison situated at 21, Mohsangi/Asadi Street in Mashad and
suffering from an acute eye disease, resulting from diabetes, which urgently
required surgery. According to the information received by the Special
Representative, Dr. Nasiri was arrested by the Pasdaran in Mashad in 1989.
The Special Representative asked to be informed of the charges brought against
Dr. Nasiri, as well as of the relevant details of his trial proceedings. He
also requested the Government to ensure that Dr. Nasiri receives every medical
treatment required for his condition.
77. On 22 January 1991, the Government reported that “Mr. Alireza Nas ri has
been arrested with court verdict on charges of propagation of corruption and
his case is under judicial study, The allegation is groundless, since the
location cited is not a prison and he is now enjoying good health”.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 23
78. By a letter dated 15 June 1990, the Special Representative inquired about
the situation of Mr. Noureddine Kianouri, former First Secretary of the Tudeh
Party, whom ) e met at Evin prison during his first visit to the Islamic
Republic of Iran. According to the allegations received, Mr. Kianouri had
been placed tn solitary confinement shortly after the departure of the Special
Representative from Tehran and had no longer been allowed to receive visits.
79. OEe Special Representative has also been informed that Mr. Kianouri's
wife, Mrs. Meriain Feirou , was placed in solitary confinement, despite her
advanced age and poor health.
80. During his second visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Special
Representative met with Mr. Kianouri and Mrs. Feirouz. Both denied
allegations of solitary confinement, maltreatment and suspension of visits in
recent months (see para. 424).
81. With respect to these allegations, the Government, by letter
of 22 January 1991, informed the following: “(a) None of those who met with
the Special Representative has been subjected to intimidation or maltreatment
by the agents affiliated to the Islamic Republic of Iran; (b) Mr. Kianouri and
his wife Meriam Firouz have preferred to live in a separate location from the
public prison, and, in this regard, a suitable place has been arranged for
them. This was the case, even during the first visit of the Special
Representative to the Evin prison in which he was separated from the others;
(c) Due to efforts rendered by the National Prisons Organization, special
suites have been provided in the prisons for the married inmates. OEese
suites are put at the disposal of those who do not have the possibility of
having two or three days' leave outside the prison. OEese individuals stay
with their families for one or two days in these suites without the presence
of any guard. Mr. Kianouri and Mrs. Meriam Firouz also used these public
facilities; (d) OEe two inmates, due to their old age, are under special
supervision by the health authorities of the prison. OEey are constantly
checked by the specialized doctors who come to see them for this purpose;
(e) Any allegations are categorically denied.
82. In this connection, the Government also stated the following: “What the
Special Representative mentions in para. 291 [ erroneous reference) of his
interim report that he has found in meeting with Mr. Kianouri and
Mrs. Meriam Feirouz are contradictory to paras. 53 and 54 of his report”.
83. In addition, the Special Representative received the following
allegations.
84. Jamshid Amiri—Bigvand, 52 years old, former Director of Marodasht Shiraz
Petrochemical Laboratory, was arrested on 18 September 1988 in front of the
above—mentioned laboratory. Mr. Amiri was placed in solitary confinement in
Evin prison and was allegedly tortured.
85. Houshang Amjadi Bigvand, 51 years old, self—employed, was arrested in
November 1988 at his residence in the city of West Kots. His children and his
wife were also arrested at the same time. He was placed in solitary
confinement in Evin prison where he was allegedly tortured. Although his
general condition of health was reportedly poor, owing to a bleeding stomach
ulcer, Mr. Amjadi had reportedly not been permitted to receive medication from
outside the prison.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 24
86. On 13 October 1990, during his visit to Evin prison, the Special
Representative spoke with Mr. Jainshid Amiri Bigvand and Mr. Houshang Amjadi
Bigvand (see para. 426).
87. In connection with these allegations, on 22 January 1991, the Government
stated in his letter that “Mr. Jamshid Amiri Bigvand and Houshang Amjadi
Bigvand, who were arrested on charges of espionage for disclosing sensitive
military information, are now awaiting the verdict of the court of appeal.
They have not been subjected to any maltreatment and the allegation of their
torture is denied”.
88. Parvin Amiri Bigvand, 51 years old, wife of Houshang Amjadi Bigvand, was
arrested in November 1988 at her residence in the city of West Kots with her
husband and her children. She was placed in solitary confinement for eight
months and then released. She was allegedly tortured during her stay in
solitary confinement.
89. With regard to this allegation, the Government has stated that
“Mrs. Parvin Amiri Bigvand, who was arrested briefly for having links with the
United States spy network activity in Iran, was later released on bail. She
has not been subjected to any maltreatment during her imprisonment. Any
allegation, therefore, of her having been tortured is denied”.
90. Reza Arbabi, 38 years old, was reportedly arrested in 1983 and kept in
Mashad prison. On 22 June 1984, he was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment by
the Mashad court. Later he was transferred to Gohardasht prison, allegedly in
a serious condition. Since 1988, his family have had no news about him.
91. The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran replied by letter of
22 January 1991 that “Mr. Reza Arbadi had been sentenced to 25 years'
imprisonment for his involvement in terrorist activities, but later on was
pardoned since the prison authorities were pleased with his exemplary
conduct. He was consequently released in 1988”.
92. Mr. Yagoub Bahramy was reportedly subjected to repeated beatings in
Ghasr prison.
93. Mr. Asdollah Bayat reportedly was repeatedly beaten with cables in
Ghasr prison, resulting in mental problems.
94. In connection with these two allegations, the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran stated, on 22 January 1991 that “there is no judicial record
or conviction verdict available on Mr. Yagoub Bahramy and Mr. Asdollah Bayat
and no document showing their imprisonment in the Qaser Prison”.
95. Mr. Ardeshir Bonyani reportedly was arrested in December 1989 for
refusing military service. He was reportedly beaten up and his jaw broken.
96. Mr. Kainram onyani reportedly had distributed pictures of the late Shah
and displayed the former Iranian flag in Valiahd Square and Pole—Seyyed
Khandan. Reportedly, he had been arrested by the revolutionary guards at the
house of a certain Mr. Misaghieh at Shemiran and taken to the Komiteh in
Jamaran district, where he was allegedly tortured; as a result, his jaw and
teeth were broken.
E /CN. 4 / 1991/35
page 25
97. On the two preceding cases, on 22 January 1991 the Government stated the
following: “According to the police department in Tehran, Mr. Ardeshir and
Kainran Bonyani molested the wife of one of the inhabitants of Vali—Asr Avenue
and on her complaint, they were arrested. These two individuals have previous
records of theft and molestation of women. They were later released by
acquiring contention of the lady and providing commitment not to repeat their
misbehaviour.”
98. Mr. Asian Fadavy reportedly suffered severe beatings at Evin prison.
99. On 22 January 1991, the Government stated that “Mr. Asian Fadavy, who was
imprisoned in Gohar—Dasht, had been released in 1988. He was arrested in 1983
on terrorist activities and had been sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment. But
due to his good conduct, he was pardoned before his term of prison was due”.
100. Mr. Masood Farjad, an engineer, reportedly was tortured by security
officers who allegedly used burning cigarette butts to inscribe on his back
“death to opponents of Velayate Faghih” (religious guide).
101. With regard to this allegation, on 22 January 1991, the Government stated
that “there is no judicial record available on Mr. Masood Farjad. It is worth
mentioning that based upon documents, the so—called People's Fadaeyan
Organization of Iran, in a bid to provoke public opinion would have burnt the
bodies of some of their members by cigarette butts and later published their
pictures in their own newspaper. In this regard one of the members of this
organization who confessed to have burnt himself with cigarette butts revealed
the tricks of the organization through the mass media.”
102. Mr. Navab—Ali Ghaem—Maghami reportedly was subjected to various forms of
sexual abuse and psychological torture in Ghom prison. He was allegedly
forced to watch other prisoners being tortured. Several times, his clothes
were reportedly soiled with the urine and excrement of other prisoners.
103. By letter dated 22 January 1991, the Government stated that
“Mr. Navab—Ali Ghaem—Maghami has no judicial or conviction record. OEe
governmental records show that no person of such name has been born in Qom.
In addition, the municipality of this city has announced that no person of
such name has lived in Qom.”
104. Mrs. Tahere Hadadian—Zanjani, aged 53, reportedly spent more than
five years in prison, partly in solitary confinement. As a result of being
flogged on the soles of her feet with cables, and other kinds of alleged
torture, she had to undergo surgical operations.
105. On 22 January 1991 the Government stated the following:
“Tahere }Iadadian Zanjani, who had been sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment for
collaborating with and hiding terrorists, enjoyed clemency and is now free.”
106. Ms. Soraya Haghshenas was reportedly ordered arrested by the procurator
of Tabriz prison when she refused his sexual advances. In prison she was
allegedly flogged and forced to witness other prisoners being tortured.
107. Mr. Abmad Khanzamapour reportedly was imprisoned from 1981 to 1986 in
Evin, Gohardasht and Ghezel—Hesar prisons. Despite the fact that he has
epilepsy, he was allegedly subjected to different kinds of torture. In
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 26
particular, it was reported that he was beaten with cables, that his genital
organs were connected to electric wires and that he was forced to witness
other prisoners being tortured. Allegedly, the prison guards confiscated the
drugs he needed to treat his epilepsy, and when he had epileptic fits, medical
care was not provided except in the most critical situations.
108. With regard to these two allegations, on 22 January 1991 the Government
of the Islamic Republic of Iran declared that ‘ there is no judicial record on
Ms. Soraya Haghshenas and Mr. Ahmad Khan Zamapoor.”
109. Mr. Habib Maffi reportedly had his teeth broken by prison guards in
Tabriz and suffers from severe mental problems as a result of torture.
110. In the same letter of 22 January 1991, the Government stated that
“Mr. Habib Maffi, who had been sentenced to six months' imprisonment for
unintentional homicide while driving, collided into one of his inmates and
broke his teeth; he also got injured on the face. He was later treated and
was released after serving his term.”
ill. Mr. Ebrahim Mozroii was allegedly unlawfully imprisoned and tortured. He
reportedly filed a complaint with the authorities, but to no avail.
112. Mr. Afrasiab Pakzadegan reportedly, on two occasions at Ghom prison, was
tied to a chair while dogs were incited to attack him.
113. Mr. Rahim Rahseparian was allegedly forced to perform various sexual acts
in Tabriz prison.
114. Mr. Mostafa Salehyar was reportedly sexually abused by four prison guards
and was beaten on his genitals.
115. Mohammad Reza Sedaghat, former manager at one of the Government offices,
was reportedly in prison without any charge or trial, and reportedly suffered
from torture many times, resulting in serious damage to his feet.
116. On the five preceding cases, on 22 January 1991, the Government replied
as follows: “There is no judicial records on Mr. Ebrahim Mozroii,
Mr. Afrasiab Pakzadegan, Mr. Rahim Rahseparian, Moustafa Salehyar and
Mohammad Reza Sedaghat.”
117. John Pattis, citizen of the United States of America, has reportedly been
held in Evin prison for four years. The prison doctors have allegedly stated
that he is suffering from severe anaemia due to malnutrition, from weight
loss, loss of hair and that his skin has a green hue.
118. With regard to this case, the Government stated in its letter
of 22 January 1991 that “Mr. John Pattis who was arrested on charges of spying
served his prison terms like other inmates in a satisfactory condition. Loss
of weight and hair are attributed by doctors to psychological stress resulting
from failure in carrying out his espionage activities and his intolerance of
his life imprisonment. His anaemia case due to malnutrition does not have any
basis.”
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 27
119. Abmad Rashed—Morandi, 32 years old, was arrested in 1981 in Tehran and
sent to Evin prison, where he allegedly was under constant torture. In 1983,
he was sent to Ghasr prison at Tehran. Since 1989, the prison guards have not
allowed any meetings with him. Since then there has been no news of
Mr. Rashed—Morandi.
120. On 22 January 1991, the Government stated that “there is no judicial
record on Mr. Ahmad Rashed—Morandi.”
121. Ms. Fatemeh Taati Asil was reportedly arrested in 1981 on the accusation
of being a Mojahedin sympathizer. While in prison, she was allegedly
subjected to torture, resulting in serious mental disorder. She was released
in 1988, after six years' imprisonment.
122. On this case, the Government indicated on 22 January 1991 that
“Mrs. Fatemeh Taati Asil was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1981 for
terrorist activities, involvement in plundering the wealth of the people,
intimidating the people and indirect involvement in the assassination of four
people. She was, however, released in 1988 due to her good conduct.”
123. Jamshid Torabi, 37 years old, was arrested in 1982 and taken to
Evin prison. There he was given a brief trial, reportedly without the
presence of a lawyer for his defence. He was sentenced to an undefined
period, from 15 to 17 years. Later he was transferred to Gohardasht prison
where he was held until the spring of 1989, when he was transferred back to
Evin prison. Allegedly, he has been severely tortured several times during
his years of imprisonment.
124. On this matter, the Government stated on 22 January 1991 that
“Jamshid Torabi during the time of his imprisonment was never subjected to
torture or harassment. He, however, declined to accept a defence lawyer,
saying that since his crime was axiomatic, which he confessed, there was no
need for a lawyer. He is now free and lives normally.”
125. Ms. Mehrangiz Yeganeh was reportedly arrested in 1981 and charged with
being a Mojahedin sympathizer. She was imprisoned for 2 1/2 years in
Tabriz prison. It was asserted that in prison she was subjected to different
kinds of torture and rape. Allegedly as a result of having been raped
repeatedly, her intestines were damaged and she had to undergo a surgical
operation. She was hospitalized for 18 months, first in the hospital of
Tabriz prison and then in an ordinary hospital. It is alleged that she has
not yet fully recovered.
126. On 22 January 1991, the Government informed the Special Representative
that “Mrs. Mehrangize Yeganeh who was active in supporting efforts of
terrorist groups was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment. She had been
suffering from an ulcer before her arrest and underwent medical treatment
during the time of her imprisonment. She is now free.”
127. Since the publication of the interim report it has been reported that
different types of torture, mainly flogging with whips or cables, suspension
by the wrist, sleep deprivation and psychological torture including mock
executions were being commonly applied in many prisons. Such methods of
E/CN.4/199l/35
page 28
torture were reportedly used in order to force detainees to confess to
suspected of fences or to reveal information, in particular about the names of
supporters of opposition political groups or the whereabouts of individuals
wanted by the authorities.
128. It was reported that in recent years no member of the security forces or
no prison official has been brought to justice for torturing or ill—treating
prisoners.
129. A former prisoner reported to the Special Representative that he had
personally witnessed that a fellow prisoner had died as a result of an
enforced blood transfusion; that he also saw prison officers pouring hot water
on the face of another prisoner; and that he had witnessed the rape of young
women by prison investigators. OEe witness requested that his name should not
be revealed.
130. Another former prisoner informed the Special Representative that she was
tortured during her captivity at Evin prison between 1982 and 1987 and that
torture marks still remained on the sole of her right foot. She also reported
having witnessed the torture of Mariam Saghari and Ghodsi Hava—Keshian, two
women who were allegedly executed in the second half of 1988. She also
alleged that another fellow prisoner, Ms. Rafat Kholdi, had committed suicide
after having been tortured by prison guards. OEe witness requested that her
name should not be revealed.
131. It has been reported that Mr. Kiomars Shahi was arrested in 1982 and
imprisoned in Evin prison in Tehran. He was reported to have been severely
tortured before his execution in May 1987.
132. It has also been reported that Mr. Bahzad Naziri, aged 26, a former
translater for AFP news agency, was said to have suffered flogging with flex
over the soles of his feet for days at a time, while he was in prison in
Tehran in June 1985.
133. It was said that Dr. Abmed Danesh, a surgeon imprisoned since 1983
because of his support for the Tudeh Party, was tortured and reportedly had
witnessed others being tortured, before his execution in 1988 in Evin prison.
134. It has been reported that Javad Rahmanian, a supposed political prisoner,
was said to have been. severely tortured in October 1990 and denied visitation
rights before his execution in Jalirom (Fars province).
135. It has also been reported that Mr. Mohainmad Heydari was subjected to
severe torture, including the flaying of parts of his arms and legs and
burning of his fingers, before his execution on 19 November 1990 in Gachsaran.
136. It was said that Mr. Mehdi Dibaj, who converted to Christianity
some 25 years ago, reportedly has been in prison and systematically tortured
since 1983 in Tehran, in attempts to force him to renounce Christianity and
reconvert to Islam.
137. It was also said that Mrs. Malek Taj Hakimi was said to have been
tortured in prison. Her daughter, Soodabeh Sharifi, was 13 years old when she
allegedly was forced to witness the torture of her mother.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 29
138. It has been reported that Mr. Hassan Mojarrabi—Tabrizi was arrested
eight years ago in relation to his activities in the Tudeh Party. Since then
he has allegedly been subjected to physical and psychological tortures in
Tabriz prison with negative consequences to his health. He is said to be held
in section 9 of Tabriz prison.
139. A number of allegations were also received concerning sentences of
physical punishment which constitute forms of torture or cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment, prohibited under article 7 of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights. In this connection, reference was made to
article 115 of the Penal Code prescribing that “... a man, while standing and
his body naked except for a cover of his private parts, is whipped all over
the body except on his head, face and private parts. A woman, however, is
whipped while sitting with her dress tied to her body”.
140. The attention of the Special Representative was also drawn to the law of
Hodoud and Qesas . OEat law prescribes flogging for the following offences:
adultery (articles 100-404), taking alcohol (articles 123—136), sodomy
(article 152), lesbianism (articles 159, 164), pimping (article 168),
Qazf (malicious accusation) (articles 176, 178, 187), fornication by a man or
a woman who is not qualified as married (article 102) and drinking liquor,
whether by a man or woman (article 131). Article 178 prescribes flogging for
a discerning minor who maliciously accuses someone. It was further stressed
that the Ta'Azirat provisions of the Islamic Penal Code contain more than
50 articles prescribing lashing of up to 74 strokes.
141. Reference was also made to the provisions of the law of Hodoud and Qesas
calling for amputation of limbs and mutilation of other parts of the body
(article Z18). In this connection, specific cases were alleged as follows:
(a) On 6 February 1985, Mahmoud Karimi suffered the amputation of his
fingers in Quasr prison;
(b) On 7 February 1985, Naser Hosseinpour, Abdullah Hashemi and
Bahram Ali Eftekhazi suffered the amputation of fingers in Quasr prison;
(c) On 27 February 1986, four convicted thieves had the four fingers of
their right hand cut off in Shiraz;
(d) For the year 1989, nine cases of amputation for theft were
reported. OEe number of cases of amputation reported for 1990 amounts to 12;
(e) On 16 January 1990, Kayhan reported that in Ghasr prison in Tehran,
four fingers were amputed from the right hand of a man convicted of theft;
(f) On 18 January 1990, a convicted thief had four fingers of his right
hand amputated in Tehran, after being sentenced by a court in Shahroud;
(g) On 20 January 1990, the Iranian press reported that the four fingers
on the right hands of two Iranians convicted of theft were amputated in
Bakhtaran. The sentences were reportedly carried out in front of a crowd
after the Friday prayer service;
(h) Jomhouri—Islami newspaper reported on 9 May 1990 that three persons
accused of theft had their fingers amputated in Ahwaz.
E/CN.4/199l/35
page 30
D. Administration of justice
142. It has been reported that, although the Administrative Regulations
Governing the Revolutionary Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices stipulate
that an Islamic revolutionary court should be presided over by a religious
judge and that it should be composed of as many as five members, in practice,
such courts have consisted of only one judge discharging his duties in a
sununary fashion. Allegedly, hearings before such courts have in many
instances been a matter of minutes only.
143. It has also been reported that trials before Islamic revolutionary courts
have usually taken place in secret, sometimes inside prisons, that defendants
have not enjoyed the right to be represented by a lawyer, and often have not
even been made aware that the proceedings were in fact a trial and not an
interrogation session.
144. It has been reported that prisoners may be held in indefinite pre—trial
detention. OEe principle of presumption of innocence is allegedly not
respected, particularly when the subject is accused of being a member of an
armed opposition group. It was said that lawyers generally do not accept
cases of such a nature in order not to be suspected of being armed opposition
sympathizers themselves. OEe absence of lawyers in political trials has been
considered as one major shortcoming in the procedures of revolutionary
courts. Others were said to consist in the denial of the right of the accused
to call witnesses in their own defence, and in the absence of the right of
appeal against verdict and sentence. In this connection, it may be recalled
that, during his first visit, the Special Representative was informed by the
President of the Supreme Court of Justice that the right of appeal is
recognized and that no exception is made in cases under the jurisdiction of
the revolutionary courts. However, article 11/2 of the Administrative
Regulations Governing the Revolutionary Courts and Public Prosecutor's Offices
precludes the possibility of any revision being made to the judgements of
Islamic revolutionary courts. (For the explanations received from the
authorities in this regard, see para. 401).
145. It was also said that, in the proceedings of revolutionary courts, the
requirement for adequate time and facilities for the preparation of a defence
is generally not met. Reportedly, during the period of investigation, persons
to be tried before revolutionary courts have frequently been held in solitary
confinement and incommunicado and have not been informed sufficiently in
advance of the date of their trial. It was further alleged that in practice
the Islamic revolutionary courts give greater priority to handing out
exemplary punishments than to ensuring that the accused receive a fair trial.
146. Other reports alleged disregard of court sentences by arbitrary extension
of the terms of imprisonment, execution of iflmates sentenced to life or
imprisonment of various durations or rearrest of persons who already completed
their prison terms.
E/CN.4/ IP / .MO/
page 31 E s aq
147. By le teb JIIi xiy ali 9 T p tL i eia*etb ffitbi l I c rJ b2i d
III t tEd a i l I tj sx o si rio fi f tixi I t1s
“are i d zi9V. ok sj ii n. di. w
Bnia a WS1 W$II 3 O 9 O OiIII flt $3(LE ebL SUUflO 3 99iZLhflffO 13191T90
!1W.ft%I,tri r Q n rib
6h t l II ieW 1 a
3 C f he t 'l Cd p p t va
IIe :evidII
like s tei tr td t l35tt e . tit II s
law, r ight to get a9 aLd f1n t th i
i OEe defendaiit h sthe right t ae
the verdict and call for appeal, in which case the file will be sent to
. oiiIi9 j$ Ar cles 2 and ij ha g1 ee ab ogited tw re rs go
Wd ourtbased upon 166 of 3t e: on titu tiot'
. thre .Trepresentatives f the m dia eIIow $i
93n9 U:is nI O
9Vki3'5 4 of arrest .. u S . stipu1ated . .in:at i:icle a37
aa e!LJtt aw, . the criterion . i s.bIIe zi II ceziee c f t ivno
i t ter% e. proved; none of
sensitive sec ity nforma t3.oti, .: t h
i n—w ll be limited to some .OE rdef i
after receiving the verdict of the court and accepting the decision will
4inprisonment in one ofthe r s ns.
3 f are authori e i 1 I i'de t J S)
those respecting the rules of the prison (obeying
conduct) so that on special occasions, they may enjoy the clemency of the
Sit& i1 4r f ttt I mi .Republic of Iran.
Ozt $31T9i11e i bxL . ,:. .
ei i o ett Sf Jtj i ii officjals or judicial authorjt:Les has . th i ht
8Q1 ntk I 8tl We 4 f :the court. OEey cann t increase .: t decreaS . othe
*h emse1ves.” . : . .1- :;
9(bom a'iIernA o..
d dL 1& J nuary 1991, the Government informed the
the following provisions regarding the rights to
legal counsel in all courts had been adopted by the Iranian Parliament:-
cd ‘t3i g A'xLti te — The parties to a lawsuit have the right to appoint
1 I:iZ:tcc xise]. and all the courts including the Legal, Penal, .
Revolutionary, Military, the Special Courts for the clergy and others are
ldL liged to receive counsel in all stages of interrogation and court
proces; .
•2f tt i le 1 — Failure to comply with the provisions of IIe b dmun
article for the first time shall be punishable acco-rdiiig to th b 1 T
degree of disciplinary punishment and for the second time, the dismissal
post. If a court denies the right of a partyto a bi*i Ja
presence of the latter issues its verd ct I h bl
ei d?i a in ul1 and void; br :: iioi w b1e I
a as 13.LLdLrq b9II 3 S . . .. ; iS edi
av - .E1 g i .:counse1 in its po o defe -g
1c t jc rs tall .th it ur ahd privileges which re:acc rded . rd qa
: v i j al authOrit s z'!., - ., bI9rI 1sJ i
E/CN.4/ /4.MO/
page 32 IE e sq
diA b ozt I tad itI ad1 qL Q t.is ck 1g 9.t a . 41
o1 a 1 III or e i oth iew 11a ei1 1 t1 , ib i y
with instructions given by 9 xs '
General Committees Command, since the entry into force of a new law against
dri*1 IIn o r W ri i q 4d ts dia xJ rii 1 l* ltVg
f J % s di %Se2 2 3 5 IIIIi %
Acc *ii1g vj4 , 1 a o l ai n O r 99Q 6 j J a
;wr e iof $n e
JioZ4 n a r El t d* 33 Jx e I I
aiid pij st e izs M jy 3Iee i arrested dii iJ fl ti l r 5 wsI
all had been s o ifii i&k W zi1ities.
o2 2ns so so brrs 23.rbisV ed2
o D et ck i % w report , the Sp i . R g eJ1 t f ej js ent ion
t b senc of judicial or o Y twiI r IM
detetn gz j ess . ::ws sa:id that members of tJ e
the police, the gendarmerie, the Islamic Revolutionary Guar4 c ifis 2
Islamic Revolution Committees and agents of the Ministry of Intelligence
ar 4:detain persons, often only jux li4 'ctive
convict s spi orks a d in cases of
the arrested j1jg1 efore
a dfi ci l 0 ty shortly after arrest and
ca JJa e not been informed of the offence for whic eIb res ted.
jfl IV 9O9 92 Z
Representative has been
cas ged irregul%rities in the admi$gt ra $ f were
follows. nii eq s saoiIi
o is 2 oa (ioubnoo
152. Ms. Mitra Ameli, aged 36, widow, medical doctQr and
Aghdas, was reportedly arrested on 9 October 1984 and sentenced to
: irearsY imprisQument. Her husband, of the
e 4 4:qf the Organization of Iranian Peopi 1983
and executed in 1988. Her daughter, Khatereh,i lti 4 goitcpi risj
30 March 1984. On 28 April 1984, the child was given to Mitra Anieli's mother
for care outside the prison. It was reported that s Aa j s b s 4 fin
i 9Q, had been made contingent upon her publicly
her late husband. i llO3 us rr. Isaiwoo 1a 91
153. On this allegation, the Government of the Islamic Rej by
letter dated 22 January 1991, stated that “Mrs. Mitra Ame11 ,d ge ot1 i1
terrorist activities, and collaborating with her husband, :
Mr. Anoshiravan Lotfi, in armed operations to create intimidatioi a 1zpublic
terror was imprisoned. She was released in 1990 before her term o q
imprisonment was due. Her husband was sentenced to death because he led a
numb : a ed operations and was involved in antunber of as:aaa tj is.
Th i d$ct was carried out.' 1
o s sb
l ' cM Roger Cooper, British, aged 55, businessman, was re i tedlyic rested
I & c mher 1985, apparently for overstaying his visa e1wa Ia egeL1ly
held without charges and was refused any consular visi tib. A i 986.
During the early months of his detention he was described publicly as a
Bri II po-rhr*yed in a television int iew-aa e nfe a g,att vague
spying rge$.T However, no charges have ever be ir.anuo un ced and pi lic
trial held Consular access has allegedly been inadequate. He has 4eived
E / CN .4 / 1991 / 35
page 33
only six consular visits from members of the British Interests Section and
four from members of his family since his detention. His right to send and
receive mail has reportedly been seriously limited, although this is said to
have improved in recent months. Rumours were reported according to which he
had been sentenced to two terms of imprisonment on spying charges, with the
result that he would not be eligible for release until about 2003.
155. On this case, the Government stated on 22 January 1991 the following:
“Based upon undisputable evidence, and his own confession, Mr. Roger Cooper
during his stay in Iran before and after the Islamic Revolution, was involved
in espionage activities. His case is under study in the court. OEe reason
for prolongation of this process can be attributed to the fact that he had
committed other crimes in addition to espionage. All the requests made by the
Embassy or the interest section of the United Kingdom in Iran with respect to
visits by the counsel or his family has been agreed upon. Based on his legal
right he has so far written quite a few letters to the members of his family
and his friends and in addition he has written articles in the Iranian press.”
156. Jamshid Fadec was reportedly executed in the city of Masjed Solaiman
after four months of imprisonment and without a trial. During his time in
prison his family was not permitted to visit him.
157. Mehrdad Fadec was reportedly executed in the city of Masjed Solaiman
after four months of imprisonment and without a trial. During his detention
his family was not permitted to visit him.
158. On these two allegations, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran
replied, on 22 January 1991, that “no judicial record is available on
Mr. Jamshid and Mehrdad Fadec. According to the police department of the city
of Masjed Solymanan an individual named Jamshid Fadakpoor who attempted with
two others an armed robbery of one of that city's banks was killed by security
forces.”
159. Mr. Saeed Firooz, accountant in the Office of the Justice Ministry in
Tonekabon. It was reported that on 3 December 1989, 10 Guardians of the
Islamic Revolution went to his house, took away some of his private documents
and intimidated his wife and children. Later in the day, two Guardians of the
Islamic Revolution came to his office and took him to Nashtaroud prison,
blindfolded and handcuffed. The Guardians told him that his arrest warrant
had been issued by Mr. Ramazanipour, Public Prosecutor of the
Islamic Revolution in Tonekabon. In prison, Mr. Flrooz was asked to sign some
prepared texts incriminating certain officials of the Justice Ministry and
secular judges in Tonekabon who had sentenced some Guardians of the
Islamic Revolution to death for having carried out assassinations. Mr. Firooz
refused to sign the papers and as a consequence was allegedly tortured. His
wife reported the matter to the Office of the Inspectorate General at Tehran.
Two inspectors came from Tehran and reportedly confirmed that the prison
authorities had tortured Mr. Firooz and other prisoners. However, later the
inspectors returned to Tehran as a result of pressure exercised by higher
religious authorities without concluding their investigation. When
Mrs. Firooz tried to pursue the matter in Tehran with the Office of the
Inspectorate General, Guardians attacked and confiscated her car. Mr. Firooz
subsequently managed to escape from prison.
E/CN.4/l99l/35
page 34
160. On this matter the Government stated on 22 January 1991 that “no judicial
record is available on the arrest of Mr. Saeed Firooz. It has been also
clarified that any record of such a person has not existed in the justice
department of the city of Tonekabon”.
161. Ms. Hura Fuladpour, aged 38, married, teacher, daughter of Ghasem and
Sedigheh, was reportedly arrested in February 1983 in Tehran and sent to
Evin prison. She has allegedly not been informed of the reasons and duration
of her imprisonment.
162. On 22 January 1991, the Government informed that “Mrs. Hura Fuladpour was
arrested on charges of operating terrorist activities and was consequently
sentenced to imprisonment. She has served her term and is now free”.
163. Ms. Zohreh Gaeni, aged about 35, widow, high school teacher and editor of
a young women's newspaper of the Youth Organization of the Tudeh Party,
Azarakhsb , was reportedly detained as she was going to a meeting at the
Party's offices in Tehran in early 1983. Her husband, Mr. Kiumars Zarshenas,
and another 50 people were arrested on the same day. For about six months
after Zohreh Gaeni's arrest, there was no news of her whereabouts and no one
was able to see her. Subsequent to televised confessions by several
Tudeh Party leaders, she was able to telephone her family. Two or three
months later, the authorities at Evin prison notified her family that they
would be permitted to visit her once every two weeks. She was allegedly not
tried until about 3 1/2 years after her arrest. Her trial reportedly
consisted of her being brought before a mullah who sentenced her to
eight years' imprisonment. This sentence was to run from the date of trial
and did not take into account the period of pre—trial detention. OEe precise
charge against her is allegedly still not known. Reportedly, she was told by
the prison authorities that she must divorce her husband, as he was a
communist and an atheist. She refused to comply and her husband was executed
in autumn 1988. During the time of the Government of the Shah, Ms. Ghaeni
spent 1 1/2 years in prison as a result of her political activities.
164. On this allegation, by letter of 22 January 1991 the Government stated
that “Mrs. Zohreh Gaeni was arrested on espionage charges along with her
husband and was imprisoned. She is now free.”
165. Ms. Fatemeh Izadi, aged approximately 40, widow, medical doctor, was
reportedly a political prisoner under the Shah's r gime and was again arrested
in February 1983, at the same time as her husband, Mr. Fariborz Salehi, for
activities in support of the Organization of Iranian People's Fedeyan. Her
husband was executed in 1988. She was sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment
after a summary trial. While in prison, she allegedly contracted tuberculosis.
166. Ms. Manijeh Riazi, aged 36, married, student, daughter of Jaber, was
reportedly arrested in June 1981, sent to Evin prison and sentenced to
two years' imprisonment. At the end of the two years, she was again
questioned but not released. She has allegedly not been told why and how long
she must remain in prison. ,
El CN .4/1991/35
page 35
167. Ms. Malekeh Mohammadi, aged about 65, widow, journalist and editor of the
Tudeh Party newspapers Mardom and Donyp , was arrested in April 1983, along
with Meriain Firouz, and sentenced to death, but the sentence was later
commuted. The charges on which she was convicted are unknown. She was
married to Mohammed Pour—Hormozan, a leading Tudeh Party figure, who was
executed in the autumn of 1988.
168. Ms. Faezeh Sabetjahromi, aged 33, married, student, daughter of Fathali
and Ehterain, was reportedly arrested in 1983 in Hesarak, Karaj, with her
six—month—old son. The child was in prison up to school age.
Ms. Sabetjahromi was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment. She is the wife of
Mr. Ebrahim Avakh, leader of the Organization of Revolutionary Workers of Iran.
169. Ms. Fatemeh (Zobreh) Sedigh Tonekaboni, widow, teacher, reportedly spent
over five years in prison during the Shah's Government and had been released
at the time of the revolution. She was rearrested in 1983. It is not known
whether she has been tried or sentenced since then.
170. Ms. Fatemeh Hosseinzadeb Tussi Moghadam, also known as Giti Azareng, aged
about 40, widow, employee of an insurance company, was reportedly arrested in
April 1983 with her two—year--old son, who was imprisoned with her but later
released and handed over to relatives. She was sentenced to 13 years'
imprisonment, apparently for having links with the Tudeh Party. Her husband,
Saeed Azarang, was executed in the latter part of 1988.
171. On the six allegations described above the Government informed the
Special Representative on 22 January 1991 that “Mrs. Fatemeh Izadi,
Manijeh Riazi, Faezeh Sabet Jahromi, Fatemeh Sedigh Tonekaboni, Malekeh
Mohammadi, Fatemeh Nosseinzadeh Toosi Moghadam, have all served their prison
terms and are now free.”-
172. Mahmoud Hassani was reportedly sentenced to seven years' imprisonment and
executed shortly before completion of his prison term.
173. Mahin Jahangiri, 26 years old, was reportedly imprisoned in 1981 in
Semiron. After approximately 35 days in prison, she was allegedly executed
without trial. :
174. Mohammed Gholi Jahangiri, 24 years old, was imprisoned in 1981 in
Semiron, and allegedly without any trial, was executed after 35 days in prison.
175. Mr. Andr Houshang Kamrani was reportedly arrested in 1984. In 1986 he
was sentenced to 30 years' imprisonment. Since 1988 he has not been allowed
to receive visits. His present whereabouts are unknown.
176. Mr. Mohammad—Taghi Rahimpour, assistant lieutenant in the army, was
reportedly arrested in 1981, allegedly because the Guardians of the
Islamic Revolution were unable to arrest his wife, Ms. Zahra Noun, accused of
being a Mojahedin sympathizer. In 1982, he was sentenced to life imprisonment
in a summary trial which reportedly lasted five minutes. ,
177. Mohaminad Reza Sedaghat is reportedly being held in prison without any
charge or trial.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 36
178. On these six allegations, the Government stated on 22 January 1991 that
“No judicial record is available on Mahmoud Hassani, Mahin and Mohainmaed Choli
Jahangiri, Amir Hooshang Kamrani, Mohammad—Taghi Rahim—pour and
Mohanunad Reza Sedaghat.”
179. Seyed Mehdi Nasry, 64 years old, has reportedly been detained
since 24 April 1988 without any charge or trial, allegedly because his son was
a Mojahedin supporter.
180. Mehdi Vosooghian was reportedly arrested in 1985 and sentenced to
four years' imprisonment. After the first year he was tried again and
convicted for 12 years. In June 1988, he was reportedly executed.
181. On the two preceding cases the Government replied on 22 January 1991 that
“Seyed Mehdi Nasry and Mehdi Vosooghian, whose names had been in the previous
list of the Special Representative as having been executed, have no judicial
record”.
182. Au Reza Rajai, born in 1957, was reportedly executed in 1989 after
six years' detention in Evin, Gohardasht and Ghezel—Hesar prisons.
Reportedly, be had been sentenced to only five years.
183. On 22 January 1991, the Government stated that “Au Reeza Rajai is now
free.”
184. Sussan Hosseinzadeh—Arabi, born in 1962 in Rasht, was reportedly detained
on 15 September 1981 and executed in the city of Rasht on 14 September 1989,
allegedly without any trial.
185. Subsequent to the interim report the Special Representative has received
communications regarding the following persons who were said to have been
detained at some point and whose situation was unclear. He therefore
requested the Government to inform him about their fate and/or whereabouts:
Ms. Betty Akbarnia, Mr. Davoud Mir Rahimi, Mrs. Zainani, Mr. Jafarpour,
Mr. Ahmad Roudaki, Mr. Khalil Ghiassi, Mr. Davoud Mozafar,
Mr. Mohammad Aminalreaya, Mr. Nader Afahari, Dr. Assadi,
Mr. Manouchehr Motahari, Mr. Norouz Naghizadeh, and Mr. Ahmad Bastan.
E. Freedom of opinion. expression . press and association and
right to peaceful assembly
186. It has been reported that the Government continuously intervenes in the
free flow of information in the form of letters, telegrams, telexes and
telephone conversations. In this connection it was alleged that a large
number of disabled veterans have been hired and placed in the communications
offices throughout the country to monitor telephone conversations between
citizens. Letters coming in and going out of the country are allegedly
routinely opened.
187. On 22 January 1991, the Government stated that: .
“as stipulated in article 25, of the constitution of the Islamic Republic
of Iran, the following actions are prohibited: Opening or failure to
deliver letters; taping or disclosing personal conversations; disclosing
telex or telegraph; censorship and eavesdropping; no organ affiliated
E /CN. 4 / 1991/35
page 37
to :he :saniic Republic of Iran has the right to resort to the
bcve—m&ntioned acts and the violator will be pursued judicially. As a
:esul there 5 s no foundation in this allegation. As there is no need
Tor physical capability for jobs as operator in telecormnunication company
or :elephc.ne centres of organizations and government offices, the
(overonent—affiiiated organs have been encouraged to employ disabled
Lndividuals as operators on a humanitarian basis.”
1 8. :t has also been reported that printing house are required to obtain the
prior formal permission of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance for
all publications and that printing paper is attributed by the Ministry only to
those publishing houses whose publications have been approved.
189. On this matter, the Government stated, on 22 January 1991, the following:
“As indicated in articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution, inquisition
is illegal. OEe press accordingly are also free to publish unless what
they print prejudices the Islamic tenents or public rights;
“The Ministry of Islamic Culture and Guidance has, therefore,
invited printing houses to consult with this Ministry prior to their
publication in order to prevent the appearance of such articles. OEe
allegation should thereby be rectified.
“In relation to provision and distribution of printing papers in the
country, some points need further elaboration:
“(a) As the result of the imposed war and the current process of
reconstruction of the country, the Government is not financially in a
position to provide all the hard currency needed to import papers. It
has therefore been obliged to allocate limited foreign exchange for
governmental and co—operative sectors;
“(b) OEe foreign exchange has three rates in the country: official,
export rate and free rate. OEe official rate is determined by the
Government. The. export rate is set on the basis of export of goods and
the free rate is determined by the market;
“(c) The merchants are free to import printing papers by foreign
currency at the export or free rate and the problem has been reduced a
great deal in the past two years;
“(d) A limited amount of printing paper is provided by the
Government to all newspapers publishing legally and the rest should be
provided by the papers themselves. The writers and publishers can
request paper and they will receive it when their turnn is due. OEe
allegation should be rectified accordingly.”
190. On 27 June 1990, 9 July 1990 and 8 October 1990, the Special
Representative sent letters to the Permanent Representative of the Islamic
Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva expressing concern
about reports received according to which a number of co—signatories of an
open letter which Mr. Mehdi Bazargan, Prime Minister of the first provisional
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, together with 89 other persons,
,CN . llU9L 35
page 38
cent r ia ressed co t ie ? es dent of the epubiic, ad oeen a sted. The
names of ;he oletained co—signatories of IIe open letter were given as
follows . Abdol Aft Bazargan ‘ son of Mehdi. 3azargan), zatollah Sahabi (former
Director of L'lanning and udget) , aeza Sadr former Minister of Trade),
Russein Bani Assadi (former T .ce—?r.me Minister), Shams hahshahan . former
?rosecutor of Tehran), Nour Aia. Tabandeh awyer and former 1iL e--?1inister of
Justice), Yadoilah Chamse Ariallaa, Aft Ardalan, Rochan rialan..
Farhad Behbahani, IIbas OEaem abahL OEossro Mansourian. lashem abaghian .
zatollak :Iamede 3ahabi , ok tam*Aad TavassoiL. ? kbar Zarrinehbaf, M . aabib
Davaran. Mr. Naim Pour, Mr. . mir Tavakoi. Ebrahimi, Mr. !iosse!n 3hali—aosseini ,
Mr. Nezamedine Movahed, Mr Mabmoud Maleki, Mr. Hormoz Momayezi, Mr. Said
Sadr, Mr. Hamid Sadr, Mr. OEo5row Parsa, Mr. Abmad Shayegan, Mr. Mabmoud
Habibi, Mr. Shahin Parsa, Mrs zar Sadr Mr. Abedi .Rahim,
Mr. Ghaemossabahi—Abbas. Mr ckta qabib,, Mr. orgi Ui nd Mr. haravi
Asghar. Particular concern as expressed over a televised ‘confession” by
Mr 0 Farhad Behbahani. a member of the dissolved Association for the Defence of
Freedom and Sovereignty of the Iranian Nation, in which he reportedly admitted
connections between the association and foreign Governments. In this
connection, the Special RepL 2sentative wishes to emphasize that such
extrajudicial confessions are contrary to internationally recognized standards
of lue process. The Special Representative requested the Permanent
Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to provide him with information
about the arrest of these persons, the charges brought against them and about
the Association for the Defence of Freedom and Sovereignty of the Iranian
Nation, which had allegedly been dissolved as a consequence of the open
letter. The Special Representative requested assurances that any persons
arrested in the above context would receive humane treatment while in
detention and benefit from all procedural safeguards provided for in the
International covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
191. By letters dated 11 and 22 January 1991, the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran replied that Reza Sadr, Ezatollah Sahabi. Farhad Behbahani,
Abbas Ghaem al—Sabahi, Mahmoud Naimpour, Nour Ali Tabandeh and
Hossein Shah—Hosseini were released on 10 December 1990. It added, with
regard to the other detainees, that the Special Representative would be
informed of the outcome of the judicial proceedings. The Government further
stated the following:
‘Mr. Rochan Ardalan, Yadolah Chamse Ardalan, Mahmoud Beigy,
Khosrow Parsa, Abmad Shayegan, Mabmoud Habibi, Saeid, Hainid Sadr,
Mrs. Shakizn Chaloosa, Mrs. Azar Sadr, are not among those arrested [ as]
indicated in above paragraphs” ... “ [ a] few members of the ‘Freedom
Movement of Iran' and the ‘Society for the Defence of Freedom and
Sovereignty of Iran', due to the seriousness of their charges compared to
others, were arrested by the court order. They are under interrogation
and the court will be held in the near future. A number of these
individuals were freed after completion of their interrogation. Any
allegation with regard to maltreatment, torture etc. of the inmates,
especially on the aforementioned ones, are vehemently denied. On the
personal request of Mr. Farhad Behbahani, and according to the rules and
regulations of the voice and vision of the Islamic Republic of Iran an
E /CN .411991/35
page 39
interview was set by Mr. Behbahani to inform people of the miachieves and
wrongdoing of the above—named groups. Since these two groups requested
that their members participate in a television interview and respond to
issues raised by Mr. Behbahani, the voice and vision of the
Islamic Republic of Iran expressed its readiness to co—operate through
public notice”.
192. Upon completion of the present report, it was further alleged that
Mr. Abdolali Bazargan and Mr. Mohaminad Tavassoli Hojati are currently being
subjected to considerable pressure and possibly torture in order to give
televised confessions. Mr. Bazargan was said to have received only one visit
from his family since June 1990 and Mr. Tavassoli has reportedly not been
allowed to receive any visits since his arrest. The Special Representative
wishes to recall that he had asked to meet these two prisoners during his
second visit to Tehran but his request was not granted.
193. With regard to the persons recently set free it was reported that their
release was granted conditional on the payment of bail. Friends and relatives
of the released reportedly had to pledge their business licencea or
real estate valued at between 1 and 3 million Tomans for one bail. OEe
released allegedly also had to promise verbally or in writing not to divulge
information about their detention and the treatment in prison. On
8 January 1991 some of the released persons were reportedly summoned by
attorneys of the revolutionary court at Evin prison for further interrogation.
194. The Special Representative has received no information about the current
situation of Mr. Shams Shahshahani, Mr. Au Ardalan, Mr. Khossro Mansourian,
Mr. Hashem Sabaghian, Mr. Akbar Zarrinehbaf, Mr. Habib Davaran,
Mr. Nezamedine Mov hed, Mr. Mahmoud Maleki, Mr. Hormoz Momayesi,
Mr. Said Sadr, Mrs. Shahin Parsa, Mr. Ghaemossabahi—Abbas, Mr. Yekta Habib,
Mr. Gorgi Au and Mr. Gharavi Asghar, who were said to remain in detention.
On the other hand, unofficial reports were received that Mr. Hussein Bani
Assadi, Mr. Abedi Rahixn and Mr. .Aniir Tavakol Ebrahimi were released on
4 January 1991. Dr. Bani Assadi was reportedly also summoned to appear before
a revolutionary attorney on 8 January 1991.
195. Additional names of persons from three provinces allegedly arrested as a
consequence of the open letter were reported as follows: Dr. Gharawi, from
Isfahan, Mr. Au Gorij, from Mashad and Mr. Yekta, from Tabriz.
196. On 1Z July 1990, the Special Representative heard the testimony of
Mr. Aboulfaz Khorassani Nejad, who said he was a political science graduate
and a reporter for an evening newspaper. lIe said that his journalistic
activities had caused him serious problems; on the one hand, his articles were
often censored or not printed and he was not entirely free to practise his
profession. On the other hand, because of his articles, he received many
letters containing threats from the Mojahedin, which considered him a
collaborator of the Government without realizing that his articles were often
rewritten. In 1981, he and his wife were assaulted by two individuals armed
with revolvers who shot at them. As a result of that attack, his wife died.
197. Many press reports, publications of opposition groups abroad and reports
from Iranian sources told of clashes between demonstrators and Pasdaran on the
outskirts of Shiroudi Stadium in Tehran. The incidents were apparently set
E / CN .4/1991 / 35
page 40
off by the cancellation of soccer gaines and the fans protests turned into
political protests. The people demonstrating shouted their opposition to the
Government and hurled stones at cars and buildings. Official sources
acknowledged the arrest of some 30 demonstrators and added that they were
released after interrogation. ilowever, information from other sources accused
the Revolutionary Guards f 3hcoting into the crowd indiscriminately in
addit or . to arresting nany demonstrators and added that 10 person; died in
those incidents and were secretly buried in unmarked graves in Behesht—Zhara
Cemetery.
198. On this incident , the overnment of the Islamic Republic of Iran state
on 22 January 1991 the following:
In early i 9G, some clashes occurred among the fans of sos socc .
:eams in Shahid Shiroodi and zadi ;tadiuit in ehran. Calm rne:I
alter the agents o 1 aw and crcer interfered. In this regard- e
points ;houl oe s ent on d
aa natural oheno enon tnat in almost eve ry count:::
claszu s take pia off ana on aoiorL tne fans of soccer teams;
:) OEese ciashes coincided with tae release of the report o t
first visit padd dy tIIe ecial Representative of the C cc.
1uman Rights, As a resnit, the groups hostile to the I;lam c ublic
sought to overexaggerate those incidents in order to divert p tlic
opinion froia the 1t of such visit. At that tir e tw grcup , nanel;
Deraf she Kaviani and Mojahedin Khalq Organization, claimed that those
groups are totally against one another and this clearly sk ows tde
had no political motivation;
(c) As the r su1t of IIe clashes mentioned above, scc e people hat.
minor injuries [ inflicted by ‘eapcns other than fireari s ;
The security force; p: nt .1 x ansicc of t]i olash r : and a
result nobody was ki1l d
199. On 17 April 1990, the of London printed a ccb fro Tehran say
that the police had arrested 55 p o le in th northe quarter of Tahoan
because they were shouting political slogans and disturbing public order. Td
same dispatch told of the arrest of a group of alleged hooligans attending tr
funeral of Arefz Valizadeh , who had been killed by the police on Monday,
16 April, when they tried to arrest him.
200. With regard to these facts, on 22 January 1991, the Government stated
that “Arefz Valizadeh was a merchant of illicit drugs and was involved in
blackmailing people in the south of Tehran. The security forces on the
verdict of the court tried to arrest him but he was killed in armed
confrontation. An officer was also injured. Some of his friends sought
revenge, by intimidating the public. They were arrested and after providing
undertakings were re1eased '.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 41
201. The National Resistance Movement of Iran announced that
Mr. ShaDcur Bakhtiar had called for peaceful marches along the main avenues of
all Iranian cities on Friday, 18 May, from 10 a.m. to noon to demand that the
Government hold free elections under United Nations supervision. On
19 May 1990, Mr. Shapour Bakhtiar informed the Under—Secretary—General for
Human Rights that peaceful demonstrators who had responded to his call to
march for free elections had been attacked and beaten by groups supporting the
Iranian r gime although they had not shouted slogans of any kind.
202. In reply to this information, on 22 January 1991, the Government stated
that “the so—called National Resistance Movement of Iran, has claimed that
people had gathered around Tehran University demanding free elections. It
should be noted that on that day, which was Friday, people converged at
Tehran University for congregational Friday prayers as usual, and therefore
nothing unusual took place to warrant any arrest. The allegation embodied in
the above paragraph has no foundation whatsoever”.
203. On 19 February 1990, Kayhan International published a report that the
Ministry of the Interior had authorized three political parties and
associations to function: Hedayet—e—Islaxui (Islamic Guidance), headed by
Darius Zargari Marandi; the Islamic Association of Graduates of the
India—Pakistan Subcontinent, whose president's name was not given; and the
Society of Zoroastrian Priests, headed by Ardeshir Azarghoshasb.
204. In several Iranian newspapers extensive reference was made to the
elections held on 8 October 1990 for the second term (eight years) of the
Assembly of Experts, the highest constitutional body in the Islamic Republic
of Iran. The Assembly of Experts is a group of 83 religious scholars of
standing whose constitutional duty is to choose the leader of the State or
dismiss him as provided for in the constitution. On the same day, elections
to the Majlis, (the Parliament) were held in Tehran, Kordkoy (Mazadaran
Province) and Fouinan (Gilan Province).
F. Freedom of movement: right to leave one's country and to return
205. It has been reported that the Government is maintaining a computerized
list of nearly 35,000 names of Iranian citizens who are forbidden to travel
abroad. OEose Iranians allowed to travel abroad have to pay heavy exit duties
and passport fees in addition to airport tax. The reported amounts are as
follows: exit duties, $t.rs 625; passport fees, $US 275; airport tax,
$US 2,500. A person leaving for a second time during a calendar year is
reportedly obliged to pay double the amount of exit fees. Travel agencies,
when issuing tickets, are reportedly required to register the travellers' name
and address, their destination and place of sojourn, and to report it to the
security authorities.
206. On this matter, the Government stated, by letter dated 22 January 1991,
that “according to article 41 of the constitution, the courts can only prevent
citizens to leave the country. This is done merely on the basis of complaints
filed by legal or private persons. This procedure of course requires certain
complicated regulations. While denying the allegations in the above paragraph
it should be said here that the Government does not prevent any of her
E/CN.4/l991 1 1 5
page 42
citizeus to leave the country since it is the natural right of everyone.
Thousands of people daily leave or enter the country; of course, the
Government has levied exit taxes for everyone but the fees indicated in the
above paragraph are not correct's.
207. The Special Representative has received the following complaints of an
individual character:
(a) Bah.ieh Shahidi, 75 years old, housewife, In August 1988. while
departing Mehr Abad for the United States of America, she was reportedly
prevented from boarding the aeroplane. Her passport was confiscated under the
charge of being a Baha'i, irrespective of the fact that in her passport
application he had declared l erself as Moslem. She was allegedly told by the
authorities that she would be permitted to leave the country if she was
willing to sign a statement that she.was not a Baha'i. She signed such a
statement, but the confiscated passport was never returned to her an she was
not permitted to leave the country. All her children are living in the
United States of America;
(b) Reza Hadipanah, Iranian resident in the United States of America,
sent his passport for renewal to the Iranian Interest Section at the
Algerian Embassy in Washington, D.C. in November 1984. lIe received a letter
from the Interest Section stating that his passport had been confiscated
because he had participated in anti—government protests.
208. By letter of 22 January 1991, the Government stated that
Mrs Bahieh Shahidi and Mr. Reza }ladi—Panah, according to passport department
of the national police of the Islamic Republic of Iran, have no impediment to
leave the country. The allegation of the above paragraph is therefore
baseless t '.
C. Allegations of intimidation or reprisal
209. In its resolution 1990/76, adopted on 7 March 1990, the Commission on
Hwnan Rights condemns all acts of intimidation or reprisal, in whatever form,
against private individuals and groups who seek to co—operate with the
United Nations and representatives of its human rights bodies, or who have
sought to avail themselves of procedures established under United Nations
auspices for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. It
further requests all representatives of United Nations human rights bodies
reporting on violations of human rights to the Commission or to the
Sub—Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities,
in the exercise of their respective mandates, to take urgent steps, in
conformity with their mandates,, to help prevent the occurrence of intimidation
or reprisal, and to devote special attention to the question in their
respective reports to the Commission or the Sub Commission.
210. The Special Representative has received the following complaints about
cases of intimidation or reprisal. .
211, Achea Abinadi. It is reported that the family of this person, who was
executed in mid—1988, was warned by the prison authorities of the consequences
they would face in case news of the execution was made public.
E / CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 43
212. In reply to this allegation, the Government stated, on 22 January 1991,
that “there is no judicial record available on Mrs. Achea Ahniadi as indicated
in above paragraph”.
213. It was also alleged that, during the Special Representative's first
visit, several persons who had tried to contact him at the tJNDP Office at
Tehran had been prevented from doing so by Government agents who took them for
questioning to various Komiteh installations. In particular, it was reported
that a husband and wife (names provided to the Special Representative) had
been taken in this manner to a Komiteh at Mottahari Avenue in central Tehran,
where they were questioned, intimidated and asked, to sign a written commitment
not to contact the Special Representative or any member of his team.
According to the report, these persons subsequently received several death
threats over the telephone and were repeatedly summoned by the Komiteh. It
was also said that a great number of potential complainants (former political
prisoners or relatives of executed persons) were also threatened over the
telephone or summoned to Komiteh installations or the revolutionary
prosecutor's office and ordered, under threats of imprisonment or execution,
to keep away from the Special Representative.
214. In a letter dated 23 March 1990, Mr. Bazargan, former Prime Minister of
the first provisional Government, told the Special Representative that in
letters dated 15 and 16 February 1990 to the Prosecutor General of Tehran and
the Minister of the Interior respectively, Mr. Tavassoli had reported that he
and his family had received threats and abusive telephone calls in the days
following his conversation with the Special Representative. He had attached
copies of the letters.
215. On 13 July 1990, the Special Representative had an interview with a
witness who requested that his name be kept confidential. The witness stated
that after the Special Representative had left Tebran, family members and
relatives of witnesses who had testified before the Special Representative had
received threats or been arrested. He stated further that some prisoners who
had appeared before the Special Representative had been tortured and received
death threats. At the request of the Special Representative, the witness
undertook to provide specific and detailed information about the acts he had
denounced.
216. Reference is also made to the allegations reflected in paragraphs 46
to 50 and 52.
H. Situation of women
217. According to reports received by the Special Representative, women in the
Islamic Republic of Iran have suffered from various acts of discrimination.
Unequal treatment meted out to women has been alleged in the following
particular areas.
218. In the family context it has been reported, inter alia , that a husband,
father or brother may kill his wife, daughter or sister when she commit's an
immoral or unchaste act. Further, in case of dissolution of marriage, a
mother's right of custody over her children was said to be limited to the son
under two years of age and the daughter under seven years, even when the
father has died.
E/CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 44
219. In the area of equal opportunities for women, it was alleged that women
have no access to certain fields of study, e.g. graphics, visual
communications and cinematography. Promotional opportunities for women were
said to be few, with practically no women in managerial or supervisory
positions.
220. With regard to the administration of justice, it was reported that a
woman's testimony in court was considered to be worth half that of a man's.
Thus, it would take two women witnesses to offset a single male's testimony.
It has also been alleged that a virgin woman condemned to death goes through
forced matrimony and is def lowered before the death sentence is carried out.
In this connection, the Special Representative wishes to emphasize that the
Commission's Special Rapporteur on the question of torture considers rape as a
form of torture.
221. With regard to the allegations concerning the situation of women, the
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran stated, on 22 January 1991, that
“according to the introduction to constitutional law and articles 20 and 21,
men and women are equal before the law. Women enjoy all human, political,
cultural, social and economic rights, of course within the Islamic context.
On the other hand, the Government has the undertaking to provide suitable
grounds for exaltation of the personality of women and guarantee their
spiritual and material rights. Therefore any claim or allegation on
discriminatory behaviour with respect to women is categorically denied. Thus
the allegations embodied in the above paragraphs have no bases.”
I. Situation regarding the rights of children
222. It has been reported that, according to clause 1 of article 1210 of the
civil law, the age of puberty for girls has been determined to be nine lunar
years (equivalent to eight years and nine months). At that age, the father or
the paternal grandfather reportedly has the right to marry off his young
daughter to anyone he considers suitable, in exchange for a sum of money, the
so—called Shir Baha .
223. On 22 January 1991, the Government stated that this allegation has no
basis.
224. It has also been reported that, according to article 32 of the law
dealing with Islamic punishment, physical punishment of children is permitted
to the limit of maiming them.
J. Testimonies concerning acts of violence against
the civilian population
225. On 23 February 1990, six witnesses members of the Organization for
Defending Victims of Violence, an organization established in the Islamic
Republic of Iran, requested to be heard by the Special Representative in
Geneva. They asked that their names be kept confidential. ,
226. One witness stated that he used to be a teacher of English and had never
engaged in political activities. Since he was bearded, the Mojahedin
suspected him of being a fundamentalist and Government agent and made an
attempt on his life which resulted in the death of his wife. They advertised
the incident as “having executed a Government agent”. The witness stated that
E / CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 45
he had not been in his wife's company when the killing took place. He
promised to send a list with the names of 12. people who, according to him,
were also killed by the Mojahedin.
227. Another witness stated that he was an ex—member of the Mojahedin. He had
joined the movement after the Revolution, as he had been attracted by its
propaganda. For two years he was trained in political activities, such as
organizing of public demonstrations and social upheava::L Afterwaris he went
through a military training period. In the year following his military
training he was arrested by the Government and taken to Evin prison, He
stated that he had never participated directly in military activities. He was
condemned to 10 years in gaol but was released during the general amnesty in
1986 after serving four years 0 He had knowledge of at least three
assassinations perpetrated by Mojahedin agents; the victims were a grocer, a
taxi driver and a watchmaker,
228. Another witness stated that he was a medical doctor by prof 11 and an
ex—member of the Democratic urdistan Party. He had belcrged to that Party
two years before and one : ear after the revolution. He alleged that the
Democratic Kurdistan Party had received money from the Government of Iraq
before the war. In fact, each family involved in this Party had recei 9d
5,000 dinars from the Iraqi Government. The Iranian ageri for the
distribution of money was a man called Abdullah and was presently very
influential with the Party. Although he was in exile now, he continued his
activities from abroad. OEe witness expressed the view that the present
Government has been lenient and has accepted many facts of Kurdish life, such
as publications in their own languages. He further stated that frequently he
had received death threats and that many of the people who had a relaticnship
with the central Government had been assassinated. He stated that he knew of
the assassination of a woman who was five months pregnant when she was killed
on suspicion of co—operating with the Government.
229. Another witness stated that she had joined the Mojahedin for a period of
three years through her husband who was a Mojahedin leade::, 3oth had received
military training and she had served as a deputy to her lusband hey were
arrested together and her husband was executed. As his deputy
initially been condemned to prison for life, but her sentence later
reduced to 10 years. She was released in 1989, after ha ring served six
years. The witness further stated that, as an ex—member rf the Mojahedin, she
could testify to the fact that they were a terrorist group, She had been told
by the Mojahedin that certain people were considered as essential to the
Government and that if they were killed the Government would collapse. Now
she realized that this system of struggle was not rationa:., One terrorist she
had known personally was Mr. Radjavi, who had served in the group of her
husband. In 1982 Mr. Radjavi had killed a grocer at Dj'an Houri whose name
was Hossein Mehrabanian. Mr. Radjavi had also received the order to kill a
wood carver, called Davood Nazeur Baka, who had left the Mojahedin
organization. Two other members of her husband's group, who were later
caught, had killed a seller of textiles by the name of Haji at Narmak.
Another killer belonging to the group was Au Soleamani who lived at Djavadeeh
and had assassinated a housewife. Another terrorist she knew had killed two
people, one of whom owned an electricity shop in Jajreesh Street and the
other, by the name of Mahmoud, had lived in Tajreesh Street. The witness
stated that it was not easy for a member of the Mojahedin to leave the
organization and asked the Special Representative's help in this regard. OEe
E/CN.4/l991/35
page 46
witness also stated that, while in prison, she had met a girl by the name of
Mozgan Momayouxn Far who was a member of the Mojahedin. Her foot had been
amputated as a result of an accident she suffered while carrying out a
Mojahedin mission; after the accident, the driver had left her without
organizing help. Later the Mojahedin publicized the case, alleging that she
had lost her foot during her stay in prison.
230. Another witness stated that she had been arrested in September 1971, as
she had held responsibility for the protection of one of the private hiding
places of the Mojahedin Five or six persons were living there; one was
called Mohammed and was the perpetrator of several assassinations. In 1981 a
fruit seller was killed by Mohammed because he supported the Government.
Other members of the organization, called Ali—Reza Madani and Reza Ostad
Hossein had killed two college students by the names of Reza Darrsh Vand and
Naserh Sa1em The entire group was arrested in September 1981. The witness
stated that she bad first been condemned to a life sentence hut that she had
been released after sin and a half years
231.. notheo witrsss a : aoployee with Iranian television., stated that when
wife s l eer Ji che had contacts with the Mc ahedin organi za'icn
tr a:stoon at z s re est W s' :‘ e'i
a :e-s f opi s abeam a& hec to
to Ic. 1932. a o 'onan who ci to be a fni of his
ife , acococcrc L i c'cnt :: the-jr bon e cr2 “iclently attacked his
ife. who a conseg rca ticair child a as born
lisaibled ciLia. ac sob nrobiems
232 in aich.tLLoc, : : 1990 the Special Representative heard the
tetimonyic Lsneva ci ocher persons who had requested hearings and who gave
testimony c: toiLs qca' Some of them asked that their names be kept
oonfideritia
23 . Mr. oar Far ar!oc aam that his tsther was kitled in 1981 by terrorist
roups despit the fact. that he was not politically involved. Thus his family
oecame one c;: one mann camlies vmctims of terrorasm
234. Anothec carson stated that he had worked with the Mojahedin
organizaticar As a result of his political activities he had served four
years in prisor frcso 1981 to 1985. He is now working in his father's
business., but he intends to resume the medical studies he was forced to
interrupt to serve ioi prison term. His applications for readinission to the
university have beer rarected. He added that many people, including children,
were being held prisoner by the Mojahedin.
235, Another person stated that he had been a member of the Mojahedin
organization since 1979 the year when he was recruited. At the beginning, he
was assigned simple tasks such as distributing propaganda leaflets. Later, he
was given more important political tasks, but never military tasks. He stated
that in 1981, the organization decided to step up its terrorist activities
with the aim of eliminating those it considered to be key people, mainly
off icers of the army and the security forces. The chief of his cell was
Mohammed Moghaddain, who did take part in terrorist activities. The witness
says he had to go into hiding and live in a house with his weapons at the
ready. In 1983, his house was razed by the security forces and he received a
gunshot wound. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison. He appealed the
El CN.411991 / 35
page 47
sentence and the term was reduced to 15 years. In 1987, after four years and
three months in prison, he was released under the amnesty decreed that year.
236. Another person stated that his son was killed nine years ago after
receiving a number of threats from members of the Mojahedin organization.
237. Another person, a university atudent, stated that his younger brother had
been killed by members of the Moja edin despite the fac : that he was not
politically involved, He added IIa; many members of the families of victims
of terrorism had not been able to oc the Special Representative at that time.
238. Subsequent to the interi i rep t the Special Represantati e received the
following informatic :
239. It has been reported that Mr Shah Kouchaki was wounded in an attempt
against his life carried out by mchbexs of the Mojahedir organization on
10 January 1986 in Ahwaz. Acccrdirg to the source, tw motorcyclists who bad
their faces c verea sb- . at hrm sma- 'a guns ull t lit his left
shoulder ut a friend ca cc a: c a :.ren of Bat aoesh ‘ .as trlied.
240. It has also been re o tcd that Mr. Mcztcza Gholami-Nejad a metal
technician, was shot dead in Teheran by me (rs of the cjahedin n his way to
the German Embassy in Teheran. A communiqud issued by the Mojahedin
organization reportedly stated that ho had been executed because he was an
agent of the Government.
21i1. It was also reported that Mr. Nohan ad-Aii Faale-Nejad was assassinated
on 29 August 1985 by members of the Mojahedin organization. Reportedly the
assassination took place in presence of his re nant w f a and his mother.
242. On 29 and 30 January l99l soveral w aases req sted to be heard by
the Special Representative at the Jnited a ; rr.c Off ic at Geneva. On
29 January l 9i tte S :;ial Repres cntativc :eceived M OEers.dmand
Mr. Seyed Ahinad Bazaz Zadah and rea para n :‘;ho asked that :heir
names be kept confidential,
243. Ms Rheradmard ;ted that :: had h Er me be. of the Mc aheiin.
organization at cl :: of her er: e t Lc ccl.are thet she was' released
after six years of imprisonment ani that he had realized how wrong the
objectives of the Mcjahedin were. She denoun ad jr articular IIe
assassination by the Mojahedin of Mr. Aft iah ash.
244, Mr. Bazaz Zadeh stated that he was a rember of the Pasdaran. Be said
that, for that reason, three brothers of his had been killed by the Mojahedin.
245. Another witness stated that she was a member of the Mojahedin and that
she was arrested two times. She declared that the Mojahedin deliberately
misled people about prison conditions.
246. The fourth witness declared that he had been a member of the Mojahedin
organization and that he was arrested in 1984. He was sentenced to 20 years'
imprisonment but had been conditionally released. He added that despite the
fact that he had been involved in subversive activities, he was allowed to see
his sick mother and to continue his university studies.
E/CN .4 / 1991 / 35
page 48
247. The fifth witness reported crimes allegedly committed by armed groups of
the Kurdish Democratic Party and the Komola Communist Party in Kurdistan. He
added that according to article 15 of the constitution he had obtained
permission for the publication of a magazine in Kurdish.
248. On 30 January 1991 the Special Representative received two members of the
Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, who requested that their names
not be revealed. The first witness stated that he had joined the Mojahedin
in 1980 and continued to belong to the military branch of the organization
until 1983. He was sent to foreign countries to receive training in
subversive and terrorist activities. He stated that he provided the foreign
authorities with information about military targets in Iran and co operated
in the recruitment of new members of the Mojahedin. In 989 he began to
realize that he had committed reprehensible . cts against innocent peopla and
gave information to the authorities. e was tried and sentenced to death, in
1990 he was released as he had repented. He added that the Mojahedin while
killing people in terrorist operations deliberately preteadod that the righto
of the Iranian people were being vio ted by ove al authorities
or .i i ness St aha s.s detained n.
lie t:Ei i at rtbs : :e e ' t : 1.,i cs :r -:
: :yn1.e ' f.” :. oe:
Ps:: lanent tbat ncst r s t:: ::.:
h is —::s ::: i :n - : .:t b :c their
with f: : : rs. O hen: :::, :hs act: h. ties : : : . 1af : :
i - .hich aoz:rii.::. :: ‘:h.s info ation :..: ::c ated to
cod —rstsi with the : : ‘L:! en: Servic ,
- -rr 4 ‘
250. t has been reported tha the : a ian Bible Soodety was dissoi' ed ‘:y the.
Minjs : of Cul: : ro and Islam:;: Gnidance in Februar ? : , and has failed in
numerons attsnTt : to get approi al to r opon. The lra' n ible Society has
opera:ed iegal, and openly fo: the. :st 1' years ,A f e : its dissolntion, it
files w r•a confiscated and it. :h:s ff locked out of the premises. In addh:ion.
its eo:e :utilre se:retary Mr. adegL eh . his wife an his son hav
allegedly ‘sff : d harassment and threats of imprisooemer :.
251. It has beer. reported that, starting with the academic year i983—l3E
religious education was prohiY ted in all Christian Armerian schools. New
books in Farsi prepared by Muslim theologians were reportedly introducot.
has also been said that as of 1985—1986 all Christian Armenian schoolg:::ls
were forced to wear an Islamic veil, irrespective of the fact that the ,
already wearing scarves covering their hair and neck. It has also beer -
reported that Armenian clergymen, including the Archbishop, have been
prohibited from entering school compounds, while Muslim clergymen have free
access. It was also alleged that messages to the students on the occasion of
religious holidays have to be submitted in Farsi for approval by the
authorities two weeks in advance.
252. It was also reported that the Ardak Manoukian Armenian School was
forcibly taken from the Armenian community and transformed into a Muslim
school.
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 49
253. It was alleged that, in April 1990, Guardians of the Isla mic Revolution
entered the Sipan Cultural and Athletic Club of the Armenian community, closed
the club and detained three members of the board and the office clerk. They
were reportedly accused of allowing girls to be present in the premises
without headacarves. The four detained persons were reportedly sentenced to
74 lashes for violating the constitution. Allegedly, they were allowed to
“purchase” the lashes by paying 70,000 rials each. (See also para. 458.)
254. With regard to the situations of Christians in the Islamic Republic of
Iran, by letter dated 22 January 1991, the Government stated the following:
“It should be noted that: According to article 13 of the
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Christians are considered
as religious minorities and are free in performing their religious
rituals and acts in accordance with their canon law as far as their
personal status and religious teachings are concerned;
“OEe Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution of the Islamic Republic
of Iran has authorized religious education according to the custom and
language of religious minorities. All school s belonging to religious
minorities are acting accordingly. OEerefore any allegation in this
respect is false;
“Christians and other religious minorities in Iran have their own
independent schools and their children are free to take any course in
undergraduate curriculum;
“All students are obliged to respect the regulations and discipline
set forth by the Ministry of Education;
“All women in Iran should observe the special dressing prescribed by
Is lam;
“The ‘Iranian Bible Society' was closed temporarily for wrongdoings
and failing to respect the laws and regulations of the Islamic Republic
of Iran and violating the rights of the people on the part of the persons
in charge of the Society. OEeir case has been brought to the court and
obviously, after the issuance of the verdict and when the situation of
the accused becomes clear, the Society could continue its activities;
“All schools pertaining to religious minorities are being
administered by themselves and, naturally, the principals of these
schools are appointed by them and in accordance with regulations of the
Ministry of Education;
“The Aram Manoukian School was put at the disposal of other students
for not having enough Armenian students. OEis has been done with the
consent of persons in charge of the Armenian community and according to
the agreement; they can restore it whenever it is deemed necessary;
“The Christian Armenian clergymen, including the Archbishop, have
free access to school compounds and any allegation on restriction in this
respect is invalid;
E / CN .4/1991/35
page 50
“Some members of the Sipan Cultural and Athletic Club were arrested
for their immoral offences according to the decision of the judicial
authorities and they were convicted by the court. It should be mentioned
here that Armenians and other religious minorities are free to take part
in cultural and athletic activities in their clubs and no restriction
whatsoever (including the separation of males from females or observing
Islamic veil by women) is imposed in this regard.”
255. By note verbale dated 22January 1991, the Permanent Mission of the
Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Office at Geneva made available
to the Special Representative the text of a communication which the Conseil
Apostolique des Arin niens de OEh ran had addressed to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs:
“The Conseil Apostolique des Arm niens de OEh ran has the honour to
inform you that, having become acquainted with the report of the Special
Representative of the United Nations Secretary—General on human rights
concerning his meeting with Archbishop Ardak Manoukian and the
Archbishop's statements about the status of Armenians in Iran, it has
studied the report minutely and exchanged opinions with the Archbishop,
leading it to conclude that the report is high—handed and addresses
some persistent problems in a negative — even, on occasion, partial and
biased — manner.
“The Conseil would accordingly like to clarify some points so as to
correct and provide additional detail for the report. It requests the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs to transmit the following to the Special
Representative of the Secretary—General or any other organization
involved.
“During Mr. Galindo Pohl's meeting with Archbishop Ardak Manoukian
on Sunday, 14 October 1990, representatives of the Conseil Apostolique
des Arm niens were also present. Before alluding to the ‘limited
possibility of language training in the Armenian schools' and expressing
his regret at ‘the lack of religious education', the Archbishop spoke of
the preservation of the Armenian language, cultural identity and
particularly religion down the centuries, giving lengthy accounts of the
Armenians' growing religious sentiment, their increasing attachment to
the Church and religious observances after the victory of the Revolution,
and their complete freedom to practise religious rites and register their
civil status — marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc. — with the Iranian
legal authorities in accordance with the requirements and principles of
their Church. Re also mentioned the community's identity and legal
capacity as a religious minority lawfully recognized under the
Constitution and its continual active presence, in the person of its
elected representatives, in the Islamic Assembly.
“It is regrettable that none of the above points was mentioned in
the report. Why should such impartial organizations be made aware of the
problems of this community in such an arbitrary, negative fashion — one
influenced, at times, by the propaganda of hegemonistic countries? Since
the beginning of the Revolution such propaganda has seized every
opportunity to harm the Islamic Revolution, making use of sensitive
issues in certain communities to sow pessimism and despair.
El CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 51
“For example, one widely exploited issue is the teaching of the
Armenian language and religion in Armenian community schools. Yet, under
the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in keeping with other
legislation approved by the Islamic Assembly and communicated to the
Ministry of Education, and according to the decree—law recently approved
by the Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution, there is no impediment to
the teaching of religious rites in Armenian at Armenian schools.
“The Conseil Apostolique des Arm niens understands that the
regulations for the application of this law are being drawn up, and we
hope they will be communicated and enforced as soon as possible so as to
remove even this pretext and prevent foreign propaganda from taking
advantage of it.
“Our best wishes for the increasing advancement of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, the noble Iranian people and our beloved fatherland,
Iran.”
256. Subsequent to the interim report, the Special Representative has
continued receiving information concerning freedom of religion.
257. It has been reported that Rev. Hossein Soudmand, a Muslim convert to
Christianity and pastor of the Assemblies of God Church in Mashad, was
executed on 3 December 1990 in Mashad (see para. 72 (r)).
258. Several communications were received which refer to other manifestations
of religious intolerance against Christians. OEe authors of these
communications explained that the execution of the above—mentioned pastor had
prompted them to bring to the attention of the Special Representative all
grievances regarding the enjoyment of religious freedom.
259. In particular they alleged that the pastor of the “Injili” Presbyterian
Church of Tabriz was arrested on 7 December 1990 and is being held in the
Tabriz prison. It was also said that another Muslim convert from the Nfioo
Church in Tehran was imprisoned for a month in September 1990. After several
days of alleged torture, both reportedly recanted the Christian faith in
writing and returned to Islam, thus obtaining their liberation from prison.
260. It has been reported that in 1988, the Ministry of Culture and Islamic
Guidance closed a Christian church in Sari, in northern Iran, and the pastor
was forced to leave the city.
261. Many Christians in Ahwaz, most of whom are Muslim converts to
Christianity, were said to have been imprisoned. Other Christians have
reportedly been threatened with imprisonment on numerous occasions. The
pastor of the Assemblies of God Church in Ahwaz was allegedly arrested in 1987
and imprisoned for one month and was then taken to Tehran where he was ordered
to report to the Komiteh once a week. A short time later, his replacement was
allegedly also arrested, imprisoned and then banished to Tehran and the church
has been closed by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance and the church
property confiscated. —•—— 7
E/CN.4/1991135
page 52
262. It has been reported that Mehdi Dibaj, who converted to Christianity
some 25 years ago, continues to be imprisoned in Tehran. He was arrested in
1983 in the city of Babol and was detained there until the church paid
$us 20,000 as security for his temporary release. Shortly thereafter, he
was again arrested and allegedly tortured in attempts to force him to renounce
Christianity.
263. e Qrdenof Evangelism, a Christian training centre in northern Tehran
which has been us jChri tian churches for over 45 years for pastoral
training, was said to have been closed by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic
Guidance in July 1989. The closing of various Christian churches and
bookstores has also been reported. Christian conferences were said to have
generally been banned and Government approval is required for Christian
weddings or even church outings. It was also alleged that the authorities
have reportedly warned Iranian Christians “not to contact the West”.
264. It has further been reported that in 1985 the Government required all
churche s to re—register. Although the Church of the Assemblies of God
reportedly submitted all of the required documents over three years ago, the
Government has not yet registered it.
L. Situation of the Baha'i community
265. Although no executions of Baha'is were reported since December 1988 and
the number of imprisoned Baha'is was said to have declined from 13, as at
28 November 1989, to 7 as at 3 January 1991, it was alleged that a generally
discriminatory attitude towards the Baha'i community persisted. A great
number of cases were brought to the Special Representative's attention in
which termination of discrimination and persecution was said to be conditioned
on the Baha'is recanting their faith. It was also asserted that in many cases
administrative and judicial decisions concerning Baha'is were characterized by
arbitrariness and that the degree of discrimination or tolerance towards
members of the community depended to a large extent on the attitude taken by
particular authorities or individual civil servants. Baha'is were generally
considered as ‘uIlprQteCj,eiufi&el.S.'!. outside the protective precinct of the
law and in cases brought before a court their rights frequently depended on
the individual judge's good will.
266. On 12 July 1990, the Special Representative received a person who
requested to give testimony with regard to the situation of the Baha'is, but
asked that his name be kept confidential. He said that he had converted to
the Baha'i faith in 1973. He stated that Baha'ism mixes religion with
politics. He was forced to attend all the meetings, which drained his
physical and psychological energy. In 1988, he converted to the Muslim
faith. He stated that nowadays, the Baha'is were free to develop their
activities with the consent of the Government. Indeed, he said, it was better
to say you were a Baha'i to get work or get a passport more.promptly. In his
view, there was no discrimination against Baha'ism in education, whether in
school or in the university, or in medical or hospital care.
267. Three other persons asked to speak with the Special Representative
on 12 July 1990 and requested that their names be kept confidential. They
stated that as a result of the Special Representative's first visit to the
Islamic Republic of Iran, the Government had released several followers of the
Baha'i faith who were being detained, had lifted the ban on travelling in the
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 53
country without permission, had facilitated their access to farm property and
established special preferences enabling them to obtain passports. According
to their reports, one had only to say he/she belonged to the Baha'i to get a
passport immediately. The attitude towards the Baha'is in the communication
media had also changed for the better. However, they stated that some Baha'is
still maintained a posture of confrontation and were trying to create tensions.
268. Reference is also made to the statement reflected in paragraph 249.
269. During the period under review, the Special Representative has received
various specific allegations of violations of basic human rights affecting
members of the community, accompanied in many instances by official Iranian
documents. The information received has been divided into the following
categories:
1. Executions and disappearances
270. It has been reported that, since 1979, 197 Baha'is have been executed.
The two most recent executions took place in December 1988. Fifteen Baha'is
have disappeared and are believed to be dead.
2. Indictment andlor imprisonment
271. As of 3 January 1991, seven Baha'is were reported to be imprisoned.
Allegedly none of these cases has come before the judicial authorities.
272. In a letter dated 12 March 1989, the Islamic Revolutionary Court of
Gombad referred to the case of Mrs. Bihidukht Tibiyani, belonging to the
Baha'i faith, in the following terms: “The case concerning the accusation
that you take part in Baha'i activities has been considered by the Islamic
Revolutionary Court of Gombad andy in accordance with verdict No, 1684—7 of
26 February 1989, you have been sentenced to one year's imprisonment; the
verdict was handed down in your absence since you did not appear before the
court.”
273 It has been rerorted that one person was arrested in Tehran
cc. I C:otcher 985 T.coacLss f his r azticiaricn in Baha'i activities. He
‘ ;as takan to Tt r r. p::on nod interrc a't d and was imprisoned there in solitary
- r'o-' ‘o -i 19 Octob r 1987 the trial was held
ho ns sen: ccod to ice years inprisorment. OEe two years of pre—trial
detention 1ere not counted in the sentence and the date :3t Ms release was
announced to be October 1992. On 11 February 1989 a public pardon of
political and religious prisoners was issued. He was informed on 10 May 1989
that he would be released provided he promised in writing not to take part in
any activities of the “wayward Baha'i sect”. He replied that he would under
no circumstances sign such a declaration. The Islamic Revolutionary Court of
Shiraz cancelled the pardon and announced the date of his release to be
October 1992, adding that if he did not sign the above—mentioned declaration
on that date, he would have to remain in prison beyond that date. ,
274. Mr. Rahim Makhani, a retailer of decorative objects, was summoned by the
tribunal at Rainsar to appear in court on 7 November 1989 to answer allegations
of being a member of the misguided Baha'i sect.
/CN.4/l99l/35
page 54
275. On 3 March 1990, the Commission of Administrative Faults of tne Ministry
of Education summoned Mrs. Parvin Keshavars Rahbar to present the elements of
her defence with regard to the accusation of belonging to the misguided Baha'i
sect, for which she had already been condemned to a correctional prison
sentence of one year.
276. It was also reported that on 27 February 1990, the Council of
Administrative Faults of the Melat Bank summoned Mr. Zekrollah Ismail Arabi
to defend himself before the Council with regard to the accusation of being
a member of the misguided Baha'i sect.
277. It was further reported that, during August, September and October 1990,
three Baha'is were arrested simply because of their religious beliefs; one of
them was subsequently released.
3. Dismissal of Government employees
278. In a letter dated 22 February 1990, addressed to Izzatu'llah Nazari, a
retired employee of the Baha'i faith, the National Iranian Oil Company
stated: “As you have already been informed, in accordance with Civil Court
verdict No. h.b. 1236/7 of 15 Ordibehesht 1362 (5 May 1983) and because you
belong to the misguided Baha'i sect, you have been permanently disqualified
from exercising Government functions and from serving in any
Government—affiliated organization”.
279. In a letter dated 13 January 1990, the Department of Social Security
stated that, in accordance with the decision of the Town Committee of the
Manpower Section of the Ministry of Health, Manuchihr Shirvani and Au Akbar
Nawruziyan had been sentenced to permanent dismissal from their posts because
they belonged to the misguided Baha'i sect.
280. On 10 December 1989, the Department of Social Security informed the
Office of Social Services for the Employees of the Ministry of Labour that, in
accordance with the relevant decision, Dhabihuillah Fada'i had been
permanently dismissed from his post because of his membership in the misguided
Baha'i sect and that payment of his pension continued to be suspended on the
basis of verdict No. 28827/6 of 14 September 1983.
281. In a letter dated 25 October 1989, Primary Section of the Administrative
Court handed down decision No. 1002 upholding an earlier decision concerning
Mrs. Izzat Ha'i Najafabadi who was dismissed from the Ministry of Education
and deprived of her retirement because of being a Baha'i. The charges against
her were based on Section 2 of Act No. 19 containing the Regulations on
Administrative Of fences and the decision was declared final, since the
plaintiff did not submit any grounds or evidence to change it.
282. In a letter dated 30 September 1989 from the Office for the investigation
of Administrative Offences of the Ministry of Agriculture to Mr. Payduilla'h
// -A1i—Tabar. who had been dismissed from his post, it was stated that the fact
that he belonged to the misguided Baha'i sect had been proved on the basis of
his confession and statement of 7 April 1982; that the decision relating to
his dismissal from his post was therefore valid; and that it was legally
unnecessary to submit the case for review.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 55
283. On 12 September 1989, a judge of the Administrative Court handed down a
ruling in connection with the consideration of a complaint against the
Ministry of Health, stating that Mr. Hushang Gulistani considered himself
a member of the misguided Baha'i sect, that an administrative decision of
21 March 1981 had ordered his dismissal from his post and the suspension of
his pension payments and that, as that decision had been based on the law, it
could not be changed.
284. On 19 February 1989, verdict No. 855 of the Central CounciL. for the
Investigation of Administrative Off ences described the case in question in the
following terms: Mrs. Qudsi Ridvani was registered as a member of the Baha'i
sect and acknowledged that she belonged to a Baha'i family and had given that
group financial assistance. OEe Court found her guilty and requested her to
return the funds she had sent abroad; and, since the charges against her had
been proved, she was sentenced to permanent dismissal from her post.
285. On 6 November 1989, Section 7 of the Administrative Court handed down the
following decision: Mrs. Surayya Samimi “admits to having been born in a
Baha'i family, but has not made any statement recanting her faith. The
Tobacco Products Company has sent her a reply number 42749124 Mordad 1366
(15 August 1987), stating that she is accused of membership in tbejsg ided
Baha'i,sect and through the verdict of the Civil Committees and the review of
the Reforming Councils, she has been sentenced to permanent dismissal from
has been cut off. Considering the above ... as well as
the fact that her being a Baha'i is confirmed, her objection is overruled and
rejected. This is a final verdict and may not be reconsidered in this court”.
4. Refusal or withdrawai. oZ work permits
286. In a letter dated 31 October 1989, the National Veterinary Organization
informed the Director of the Inspection Group of the Ministry of Agriculture
that it was not possible to give a permit to Jamshid Farsi because, in his
request of 2 November 1988, he had acknowledged that he was a member of the
misguided Baha'i sect, and that sect was an agent of foreign interests and
Governments.
287. A letter from the Central Council of Trades of Simnan, dated
20 January 1990, informed a Baha'i, Mr. Afrasiyab Subhani, that his work
permit had not been approved and that , as from 21 January 1990, he would have
to close Ms business and return the original permit to the Council. It also
stated that, if the order was not complied with, he would be treated in
accordanca with Act No. 72 of the Union Regulations. .
288. In a letter dated 4 May 1989, the Trade Union for Repairs of House
Equipment in Gurgan informed Mr. Massud Masudi that, following the
investigation which had been carried out confirming that he belonged to the
Baha'i sect, the Trade Union was unable to give him a work permit and he would
therefore have to close his business.
5. Suspension of pension or salary payments including orders to return
a1aries received as public employees
289. By a letter dated 13 February 1989, the Assistant—Director of the
Department of Administration and Finance of the Organization of Forests and
Prairies of the Ministry of Agriculture informed Mr. Hossein Nazeri that the
E /CN.4 11991135
page 56
suspension of his pension had been based on the proposal of the former
Committee of Purification of the Ministry of Agriculture and on the order
issued on 3 June 1981 by the former Minister of Agriculture, on the grounds
of his belonging to the Baha'i sect.
290. On 11 March 1989, the Bank of the People gave the Secretariat of the
Banks the following information: “With regard to letter No. 3342, dated
16 February 1982, Mrs. Bihidukht Tibiyani has confessed that she belongs to
the Baha'i sect and the payment of her retirement pension has therefore been
cut off”.
291. On 23 July 1989, the local Health Department in Khurasan sent a letter
to the Office of Personnel of the Ministry of Health indicating that
Mr. Dhabihullah Dhabini—Muqaddam was a member of the misguided Baha'i sect
and that the payment of his salary had.therefore been discontinued.
292. On 20 January 1990, the Head of the ITTIKA Company of the Ministry of
Defence and Arms Support sent a letter to Mr. Nurullah Baba'i in which he
informed him that “on the basis of decisions taken by the Government and the
authorities, the people who follow the Baha'i sect will not receive any
pension. As you have clearly recognized that you are a Baha'i, no pension can
be given to you through ITTIKA factories and through the organizations for
pensions”.
293. In May 1990, the Administration Justice Court No. 15 issued verdict
No. 121, rejecting Mr. Yazdan Bakhsh's petition against an earlier decision to
withold his pension.
294. Hushang Tabish, an employee who had worked for the Sadirat Bank, was
arrested because he refused to return the salary he had received. After being
in prison for some time, he agreed to pay monthly amounts of 3,000 tumans as
from October 1988. When he had made seven monthly payments, he decided to
stop them. Reportedly the prosecutor is currently dealing with his case.
295. Mrs. Tal'at Mazlumi, a former employee of the Department of Education,
was ordered to return the salary that she had received while she was in
Government service. The order came from the Prosecutor's Office of Section 1
at Evin prison. The prosecutor's last order that the former employee should
provide a guarantee of payment was dated 28 January 1990.
296. Colonel Muhtashimi, a retired army officer, received a summons to appear
before the Prosecutor's Office of Section 1 at Evin on 18 February 1990. A
piece of land that belonged to him was confiscated as compensation for the pay
he had received during his service in the army.
297. Isfandiyar Ghadanfari, Nadir Ghadanfari and Nadir Vahid have been
summoned repeatedly. They were taken to Section 13 at Evin prison because
they have not provided a guarantee that they would pay back the salaries they
received during the timethey were in Government service.
298. Mr. Manuchihr Mishn Chi was reported to be held in Evin prison because he
would not or could not pay back the salary he had received.
299. Mr. Yusuf Ahmada'i, whose case is with Section 4 at Evin, agreed to
provide a guarantee that he would pay back the salary he had received. He has
already made two payments.
E/CN .4 / 1991/35
page 57
300. Vahid Sabuhiyan, a former army officer who received an order for the
repayment of 153,000 tumans, agreed to pay back that amount, but later decided
not to do so and to await official reaction.
301. Mrs. Faridih Ahmadiyyih, a former employee of the Tijarat Bank, received
a summons concerning the repayment of salaries from the prosecutor of
Section 12 at Evin, dated 5 August 1989.
6. Denial of education
302. Prior to 1988, Baha'i children were reportedly expelled from elementary
and secondary schools throughout Iran. However, Baha'i children
are generally being admitted both to elementary and secondary schools upon
making an application. Recent official documents, however, indicate that
incidents continue to occur in which schools refuse to accept Baha'i children.
303. At the university level, Baha'i students are systematically denied their
right to education according to testimony received. OEe condition placed on
these students for being allowed to resume their studies is allegedly that
they recant their faith.
304. The following specific cases were reported to the Special Representative:
305. On 9 November 1988, a committee to investigate cases of expelled students
informed Miss Farzanih Khusravi Hamadani by letter that her case had been
considered and that, since she had been banned frdin continuing her education
because she belonged to the Baha!! sect, she would have to publish three
announcements in major newspapers recanting her Baha'i faith and that, if she
did not do so, her situation would remain unchanged.
306. On 30 August 1989, a secondary school in Tankabun wrote a letter to the
Department of Education regarding Mr. Mahmud Mukhta'ri, a father wishing to
enrol his son: “According to his clear statement, they are members of the
Baha'i sect. This school is exempted from having to accept the student in
question in accordance with the rules of the Islamic religion”.
307. On 3 October 1989, the implementation Board of the Ministry of Science
and Higher Education addressed a letter to the University of Siatan and
Baloochestan opposing Mr. Mehran Ahmadi's continued study in the field of
development eng .neering because of his being a Baha'i.
308. By letter dated 16 October 1989, the Ministry of Education informed
Ms. Taraneh Navidi Moghadain, student of English language and literature at the
University of Allaheme—Tabatabai, that she had been barred from continuing her
studies. She was told that in order to resume her studies, she would have to
place advertisements in three widely distributed newspapers stating that she
had recanted from the “misguided sect”. The letter added that “in the event
that these documents are not presented, there will be no change in the
decision”. A similar letter was sent on 10 November 1988 to Mr. Erfanollah
Masoumian, student of mechanics at the University of Babol.
7. Confiscation of property
309. It has been reported that property of individual Baha'is has been
confiscated since 1980 and has generally been turned over to revolutionary
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 58
organizations and institutions. In some cases it has been put up for auction
by the Government. It was also reported that in most cases the confiscation
verdicts have not been made available to the Baha'is concerned.
310. Baha'i owners usually objected to the confiscations at auction of their
property, but their appeals to the judiciary have reportedly not been
successful. Although some high—ranking authorities have recommended that the
grievances of individual Baha'is be redressed, their farms and orchards are
reportedly still in the possession of officials and individual transgressors.
It was reported that, as a result, over 1,000 Baha'is from Boveir Ahmad,
500 Bah&is from Seissan, 150 Baha'is from Ilkbchi, 50 Baha'is from Jassp, and
over 300 Baha'is from Eevel of Mazanderan have been uprooted and dispersed all
over the country.
311. During the period 1978 to 1981, in the city of Yazd, all the properties
and belongings, moveable or otherwise, of 260 Baha'i families were allegedly
confiscated or taken, and all the members of these families were expelled and
are now scattered all over the country. Since then some of the houses and
farms have been sold, some are being let and some were occupied by the Imam
Khomeini IMDAD Committee.
312. It has been reported that Mr. Enayatollah Eshraghi, Mrs. Ezzat Eshraghi
and Miss Roya Eshraghi, members of the Baha'i community of Shiraz, were
executed in June 1983. The family home of Mr. Enayatollah Eshraghi, at
105 Palestine Street, in Shiraz, was confiscated by the Government and will
reportedly be auctioned in the near future.
313. In 1989, the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Rafsanjan issued a verdict
ordering the confiscation of all the properties and possessions of
Mr. Assadullah Sadeghzadeh in the interest of the Islamic Revolution Martyrs
Foundation.
314. The Special Representative has also received a copy of a letter
dated 16 October 1988, signed by the Head of the Executive Commission of
the Ministry of Justice, by which Hojatol—Islam Velayati is appointed as
representative of the Executive Commission in the province of Ilkhaji. OEe
appointment is accompanied by the following instructions: “(I) Identify the
belongings of the runaway Baha'is of Ilkhaji; (2) Facilitate the sale of the
perishable goods among these belongings at the day's prices and deposit the
amount received from the sale of these goods into Account 4 at the Melat Bank
of Ilkhaji which has been opened for this purpose; (3) Prevent persons from
using various pretexts to take possession of such goods; (4) Mediate on behalf
of this commission in the event of a dispute and have any such matters brought
before the court”.
8. Other incidents of economic discrimination
315. It has been reported that the Baha'is in the Islamic Republic of Iran are
still beset by various forms of economic discrimination. The restrictions
imposed upon them include denial of commercial licences, prohibition of
business transactions, violations of the right to own property, deprivation
of the right of inheritance and the impossibility to seek employment in the
nationalized industry or public departments.
E/CN.4/199 1/35
page 59
316. Although in some cases Baha'is have recently been granted work permits
in the private sector, documentary evidence submitted to the Special
Representative shows that in other cases Baha'is continue to be denied
such permits on the grounds of their religious beliefs.
317. The Special Representative has also learned that in January 1990 two
Baha'i families applied and received certificates of successorship.
318. Reportedly there is a considerable number of Baha'is throughout the
country who remain unemployed because of dismissal in the early 1980s. OEe
number of Baha'is dismissed from posts in education and government allegedly
exceeds 10,000. These Baha'is receive no unemployment benefits.
319. It appears that Baha'i families are now generally receiving foodstuff
allowance booklets and coupons. It was added, however, that incidents are
still occurring where Baha'is are being denied such booklets. In one document
submitted to the Special Representative, the Islamic Council on Supervision
and Distribution of Goods of the Department of Commerce had stated the
following: ‘We hereby respectfully inform you that the ration card of
Mrs. Ishrat Shahriyari has been confiscated and invalidated because she is
a Baha'i”.
9. Right to leave one's country and to return
320. It has been reported that hundreds of Baha'is have applied for passports
to travel abroad in order to visit their children or relations and seek
medical treatment. OEeir applications have reportedly been sent to the office
of the President for approval, but only 24 persons have received exit permits.
10. Restr ctions regarding religious activities
321. it has been reported that Baha is continue to be deprived of the right to
freely express and manifest their religious beliefs. OEey continue to face
restrictions as regards the right of assembly and the right to maintain the
administrative institutions of their faith, All of their holy shrines,
historical sites and endowments reportedly remain confiscated and have, in
some cases, been destroyed or desecrated.
32 .2, As of late 19899 Baha'is have been allowed to bury their dead in Baha i
ce eteries In most cities Baha is ere now permitted to have their own
cemeteries and to hold funeral meetings without restriction as to the number
of persons attending.
323. The ban on other Baha'i meetings has been partially lifted so that up
to 15 individuals are now permitted to meet for special events.
324. It was reported that on 19 December 1989, Mr. Seyyed Mohainmad Razavi
Yazdi, Representative of the Parliament, addressed a letter to
Mr. Hedayatollah Jamshidi stating that “Baha'ism is not a religion. It is a
misguided political sect that the foreigners have created to bring discord and
conflict among Muslims”.
El CN. 4 / 1991/35
page 60
11. Discrimination in the military s rvice
325. It has been reported that on 23 June 1989, the Vi e—Director of Nazaja
Personnel Division addressed a letter to Army staff coi taming the following
instructions:
“1. The commanders of the educational centres ha' e the duty to report
those who are followers of the misguided Baha'i a Ct to the section for
security and information of the relevant Yikan un t.
2. That unit, while observing all necessary prec utions, should carry
out the duties according to known guidelines.
3. They should, while evaluating the situation, ake action to guide
them to the straight path.
4. After transferring these individuals from the ducational centres,
their records should be forwarded to the Yikan un: t of their place of
service.
5. The commanders of the Yikan unit, after obtaii ing the opinion of the
security and information unit, should decide abou the services to which
they will be appointed.”
326. It has been reported that the Office of Inspectioi —Assistant of the Army
Division stated on 19 October 1989 that no followers 0: the misguided Baha'i
sect should serve at Headquarters and in places which : equire the observance
of the purity regulations.
327. According to a recent instruction Baha'i conscrip a are now permitted to
benefit from the general regulations concerning the ri 1 hts of married
conscripts.
E/CN.4/199 1/35
page 61
III. REPORT ON THE SECOND VISIT TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN
A. Introduction
328. The second visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran was made
from 9 to 15 October 1990. The exchange of letters and notes concerning this
visit has been referred to in paragraphs 22 to 26 of the interim report
(A/451697). The Special Representative was accompanied by three staff members
of the Centre for Human Rights and a United Nations interpreter. The Special
Representative acknowledges and expresses his appreciation to those members of
the Secretariat for their efficiency and co—operation. He also wishes to
mention the co—operation of Mr. Per Janvid, Resident Representative of the
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), who, as he had done on the first
visit, spared no effort to assist the Special Representative and his team
members in accomplishing their task and in achieving their objectives.
329. By a letter dated 17 September 1990, the Special Repres ntative had
requested the Government to arrange for the following appointments with
official or religious personalities: the Ministers for Foreign Affairs,
Interior, and Culture and islamic Guidance, the Head of the Judiciary, the
President of the Supreme Court of Justice, Ayatollah Montazeri and Ayatollah
Ja'afari, the Special Prosecutor for Drug Trafficking, and a senior president
of a revolutionary court. By a letter dated 5 October 1990, the Special
Representative added the Minister of Intelligence to the list of requested
appointments.
330. OEe Special Representative also requested the Government, by a letter
of 17 September 1990, to arrange a visit to Evin prison and pointed out that
he would ask to visit one or two other prisons in the Tehran area, if
considered necessary. He further indicated that it would be his intention to
conduct hearings, in private, with prisoners of his choice, the names of whom
would be communicated in due course. OEe Special Representative also stated
that he would appreciate being given the opportunity to be present at trial
proceedings of a revolutionary court concerning an offence for which capital
punishment may be pronounced.
331. In the first meeting with the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Mr. Manouchehr Mottaki, the Special Representative was handed a programme
based on his aforementioned requests. In the course of the visit, the
programme underwent a number of changes, some of which were requested by the
Special Representative, who asked, in particular, that Saturday,
13 October 1990 be entirely devoted to the hearing of prisoners. The meeting
foreseen with Ayatollah Montazeri, at the latter's request, had to be
postponed from Wednesday, 10 October 1990 to Friday, 12 October 1990 and was
eventually cancelled by the Ayatollah. The Special Representative, therefore,
requested, in line with the written indication given in his letter of
17 September 1990, that he be permitted to visit Gohardasht prison in the
afternoon of 10 October 1990. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
informed the Special Representative that it was not possible to comply with
the request. The Special Representative further asked for assistance of the
authorities in enabling him to meet Ayatollah Seyed Abolfazl Musavi Zanjani.
It did not prove possible to have this visit arranged through official
channels. The Special Representative was, however, able to make arrangements
for a meeting with the Ayatollah directly and met him on 9 October 1990.
E/cN.4/ 199 1/35
page 62
332. OEe programme of official meetings that took place during the visit is
reproduced in appendix III of the interim report (A/45/697).
333. On 9 October, the Special Representative and his team members
co—ordinated their own programme of work with official proposals and
incorporated the activities they would conduct without official contacts or
assistance. This programme was considered chiefly with a view to allotting
time for the examination of specific cases, mainly of prisoners and for
interviews with a number of personalities in Iranian public life and
individuals who, through contacts in Geneva, seemed willing to provide
information on their experiences and observations concerning human rights.
B. Meeting with representatives of the executive and judicial
branches of Government
334. The following paragraphs summarize the highlights of the interviews
conducted by the Special Representative with governmental authorities. They
are in chronological order.
1. Meeting with the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs
335. The Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. M. Mottaki, thanked the
United Nations mission for coming and said that the first visit had opened a
new chapter in the relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the
United Nations. He pointed to the expanded role of the United Nations in
world affairs and said that the end of the cold war would open a new chapter
in international relations. Disarmament and human rights will be the two
basic issues of the new age. OEe Islamic Republic of Iran is strengthening
its spirit of co—operation with all nations and with the United Nations. OEe
search for negotiated solutions to all international problems is another
feature of the new age. OEe issue of human rights figures prominently among
the concerns and goals of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
336. Mr. Mottaki said that the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights bad been
adopted by experts at the Islamic Conference and that the Declaration was
taken up and adopted at the meeting of Ministers of the members countries of
the Islamic Conference held at Cairo.
337. Mr. Mottaki said that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran had
examined closely the recommendations of the Special Representative. OEe
Iranian Government was now in a position to refute the false allegations made
by its political enemies. A Human Rights Department has been established in
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Two seminars have been held in Iran — one
locally, dealing with a comparison of human rights in the West and in Islam,
and another dealing with Islam and Christianity from a human rights
perspective. Preparations are under way for a third seminar in co—operation
with the Centre for Human Rights planned for late January or early
February 1991.
338. Mr. Mottaki considered eight categories of recommendations issued by the
Special Representative and said that they have all been considered by the
Government. Substantial action has been taken on each recommendation. A
letter addressed to the Special Representative summarizes the measures taken
(see A/45/697, para. 12).
E/cN.4/1991/35
page 63
339. Mr. Mottaki referred to a pending matter: visits to prisons by the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). OEe Red Cross has already
been notified that the Government is prepared to allow visits by ICRC. OEe
Special Representative could visit any prison he liked.
340. OEe Islamic Republic of Iran abides by the teachings of Islam and wishes
to co—operate with the international community, but this does not mean that it
is prepared to disregard Islamic principles. OEe United Nations should
distinguish between those States which systematically violate human rights and
whose conduct derives from high—level policy, and those countries which
occasionally commit a few violations.
341. OEe Special Representative expressed the hope that the discussions with
ICRC with a view to reaching a concrete agreement on visiting prisons could be
concluded very soon. Mr. Mottaki replied that his Government saw no problem
whatsoever in reaching an agreement with ICRC and hoped that visits to the
prisons would begin very shortly.
342. The Special Representative referred to two memoranda submitted recently
and reiterated the importance of receiving official replies. Mr. Mottaki
announced that the Special Representative would begin to receive specific
replies in the course of his visit.
343. OEe Special Representative gave Mr. Mottaki a list of 202 prisoners in
connection with whose whereabouts, arrest or possible sentencing (see
A145/697, appendix II), information had been requested and submitted the names
of 26 prisoners he wished to visit. OEis list of 26, reproduced in
appendix IV of the interim report, contained names of persons about whom the
Special Representative had received information during or after his first
visit to Iran.
344. OEe interview concluded with an official statement by the Government that
it would co—operate fully with the United Nations in general and the
Commission on Human Rights in particular.
2. Interview with the Minister of Intelligence
345. On Wednesday, 10 October, at 9.30 a.m., Hojatolislani Fallahian, the
Minister of Intelligence, was interviewed. OEe Special Representative
requested clarification of certain matters which had arisen in the course of
the investigations. In particular, he asked questions concerning the
following: the role played by information or intelligence officers and agents
in the trial of prisoners, chiefly in cases submitted to the revolutionary
courts; the specific role of intelligence agents who worked with the
prosecution and, particularly, their participation in interrogations; the
hierarchical relationship between intelligence officers, Komitehs and Pasdaran
(Revolutionary Guards); and the degree to which intelligence agents could act
on their own initiative without express orders from their immediate superiors.
346. The Minister spoke of plots against the Iranian nation and then referred
to observations in the Special Representative's reports, which, in his view,
did not do justice to Iran. With regard to the activities of his Ministry, he
recounted many incidents of past years and referred to the hostile attitude of
the foreign media. He said that the function of his Ministry is to prevent
El CN. 4/1991/35
page 64
and bring to light cases of espionage and to preserve the culture and
integrity of the Iranian nation. According to the Constitution, the people's
rights must be respected and intelligence agents must act within the law both
in making arrests and during trials. He then referred to bands of smugglers
who attack private homes and mentioned cases of persons who had recently been
killed by smugglers.
347. The Minister went on to say that the Constitution establishes three
branches: legislative, judicial and executive. In the executive branch, the
revolutionary Komitehs and the Pasdaran maintain public order and security and
are accountable directly to the President of the Republic; however, they
perform their duties in respect of citizens' rights under the supervision of
judges. The Pasdaran are under the Ministry of the Interior for matters of
public order, under the Ministry of Defence for military matters. OEe
Komitehs are under the Ministry of the Interior, and the intelligence
officers, under the Ministry of Intelligence. Co—ordination takes place at
the highest level, that of the President of the Republic.
348. Commenting on the role of intelligence officers at trials, he said that
it was not true that judges consulted them during the trials. In many cases,
the judges do not accept testimony by intelligence officers and deny them
permission to arrest suspicious persons. Indeed, while intelligence officers
did participate in interrogations, they do so under the supervision of the
judges. It is not true that they use any means, including violence and
torture, to obtain confessions.
349. Intelligence officers take orders; they are not independent agents. In
certain cases, they may take initiatives, for example, when they see someone
trying to enter the country with a false passport or someone planting a bomb.
In such cases they can arrest the culprits. However, they must so advise the
judge within 24 hours and he must decide whether or not there are legal
grounds for the arrest. OEere is a department which oversees the activities
of these agents and is responsible for punishing them. In some cases, they
are referred to an administrative tribunal and, in very serious cases, to a
military tribunal. Many agents have been dismissed or sentenced to prison
terms.
350. The Minister reported that in addition to the Pasdaran, the Islamic
Revolutionary Committees, the officials of his Ministry, the police and the
gendarmerie were responsible for preventing and investigating ordinary crimes
like homicide and robbery and ensuring the safety of the citizenry. Both
police forces were under the supervision of the Ministry of the Interior.
Lastly, the Minister of Intelligence said that, in his view, the Special
Representative should focus the attention of world public opinion on the acts
of aggression committed against the Iranian nation and adopt a clear stance
denouncing and condemning acts perpetrated by terrorist organizations. He
added that the family and relatives of the martyrs and victims of terrorism
shared that feeling.
351. Responding to a question from the Special Representative, the Minister
said that there was no prison attached to the premises of the Ministry of
Intelligence and that all detainees were subject to the authority of the
Prison Organization. He then invited the Special Representative to visit the
building complex where the Ministry has its offices so that he could make sure
that there was no prison attached to or included in the building complex where
the Ministry is located.
El CN . 4/1991/35
page 65
3. Interview with the Special Prosecutor for Narcotic Drugs
352, The Special Representative submitted the following questions to the
Special Prosecutor, Hojatolislain Zargar: (a) How many drug traffickers have
been executed in 1990? (b) How many are currently tried? (c) Row many of
those being tried may be condemned to death? (d) How many of those condemned
to death have seen their sentence commuted? (e) How many executions in public
or mass executions have taken place during the last few months? In reply to
these questions, the Prosecutor stated the following:
353. He said that the number of traffickers who have been arrested since the
first visit, including traffickers and consumers, comes to 9,201, of whom
8,898 are addicts and have been sent to rehabilitation centres.
Rehabilitation centres are still inadequate and, for that reason, the
Government has requested assistance from international organizations. The
remaining 303 are traffickers. Not all of the 303 traffickers can be given
the death penalty; some will be sentenced to prison. Of the groups previously
sentenced to death, six have had their sentences commuted.
354. The Special Prosecutor said that the 1990 capital punishment figures are
lower. In 1989, 4,113 persons were pardoned. Of tLiose 2,259 were released
and 1,854 had their sentences commuted. Many obta ied permission to live at
home for three days and some were already enjoying this benefit for the sixth
time.
355. He also stated that there had been no public executions since the first
visit. At times 15 or 20 persons were executed in the prison courtyard. The
Special Representative emphasized two points: the need to guarantee due
process of law to traffickers and to reduce significantly the number of death
sentences pursuant to the international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
356. OEe Special Prosecutor referred to opium that is being processed into
codeine at laboratories under his supervision. The codeine will be
transferred to the Ministry of Health. A total of 1,320 kilos of heroin and
9,090 kilos of opium were confiscated in the first six months of 1990. Those
drugs were largely intended for European countries.
357. The Special Prosecutor said that he would obtain an exact figure showing
the number of persons executed in 1990 for the Special Representative through
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs because he did not have it available at that
time. The Special Representative asked whether consideration had been given
to transferring jurisdiction over such crimes from the revolutionary courts to
the ordinary courts, and the answer was no.
358. At the suggestion of the Special Prosecutor the Special Representative
briefly met two detainees convicted on drug trafficking charges who were
working on the premises. One of them, who had admitted carrying 20 kg of
opium from Kerman to Tehran, had been convicted to 18 years of imprisonment.
The trial before the revolutionary court took place two years after his
arrest. His sentence was later commuted to five years. The other prisoner
had admitted carrying 7 kg of opium and was first convicted to a penalty of
1 million rials. OEe Special Prosecutor, however, had protested against the
sentence and one year thereafter, he was sentenced anew to 16 years of
imprisonment. In 1987, the sentence was commuted to 15 years. Both were
tried before revolutionary courts without the assistance of a lawyer. One of
E/CN.4/199l/35
page 66
them stated that the interrogators had beaten him during the period of
investigation in order to obtain his confession. Both prisoners stated that
their condition had improved, since they could now work on the premises of the
Special Prosecutor. Once a month they were granted leave, usually for a
period of three days.
4. Interview with the Commission on article 10
359. OEe Chairman of the Commission, Deputy Asgharzadeh, explained that the
Commission on article 10 is composed of representatives from the three
branches of government. The purpose of the Commission is to apply the
constitutional principle of the people's right to form associations in general
and political parties in particular. The Commission is made up of two members
of Parliament, two from the judicial branch and one from the executive
branch. The Secretary of the Commission is independent and the Minister of
the Interior carries out the decisions of the Commission.
360. The procedure is as follows: whenever a certain number of citizens wish
to form a political party, they register the members' names and the leaders
submit their personal documents and a charter of principles and objectives.
The Commission considers such requests at its weekly meetings. The
applicant's background is investigated, on the basis of reports from the
security and judicial authorities.
361. The Commission has four divisions: (a) The religious division, which
places restrictions, for example, on autonomous groups or sects, which do not
have the right to form associations; (b) The trade union and crafts division;
(c) The division that deals with political groups wishing to function as
political parties which are subject to restrictions relating to public
security and co—operation with foreign political parties; and (d) The division
that handles associations of groups engaged in social activities — i.e.,
cultural or technical activities. Requests are considered in the order that
they are received and authorization is granted to associations that are not
political more promptly than to political parties. In the past year and
a half, 20 to 22 associations were approved. Seven requests from minorities
(Armenians), and a request from a political group in Tehran and another in the
province of Khusestan are being considered.
362. Replying to a question from the Special Representative, the Chairman of
the Commission said that the request from the Association for the Defence of
the Freedom and Sovereignty of the Iranian Nation is under review. As long as
some leaders of this group are having security problems, this association
cannot be authorized. Some members of this group are on trial and in prison
on charges of espionage.
363. The Special Representative also enquired about the reasons for the
dissolution of the Bible Society. The answer was that it had been asked to
appear before the Commission several times and bring its activities into
compliance with the law. The Society also required authorization from the
Ministry of Culture. Since it failed to submit that authorization, its
activities were suspended. The Special Representative learned from a
well—informed source that the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance had
refused to grant the authorization.
36L . The Special Representative explained his ideas on the responsibility of
individuals and societies and suggested that the doctrine which clearly
H / CN .4/1991/35
page 67
distinguishes between the responsibility of individuals and the responsibility
of associations should be accepted and applied. In his view, he continued,
Iranian law projected onto associations what was exclusively the
responsibility of the individual members. He was told in reply that this
theory would presumably be taken into account when Parliament reconsidered the
law on political parties.
365. The Secretary said that the Commission has had difficulty in applying the
law in force and that revisions have been considered and proposed for
submission to Parliament.
366. A discussion ensued on whether activities for the protection of human
rights are considered political. The answer was that this topic has been
debated time and again. The defence of human rights is in the interest of the
people; however, certain groups claim to be defending human rights in order to
mask political activities — at times, political activities designed to
destabilize the Government.
5. Interview with the Deputy Minister of the Interior
367. Deputy Minister Atrian—Far said that it was natural that the Special
Representative should have identified a number of ambiguous situations on his
first visit; he hoped that any such situations would be cleared up during the
second visit. Some ambiguities concerned the revolutionary courts, while
others concerned political parties.
368, Concerning the unification of the police, Pasdaran, Komitehs, gendarmerie
and judicial police, their co—ordination had been entrusted to the President
of the Republic with a view to improving their functioning and thereby
guaranteeing citizens' rights. A bill for the integration of those security
and protection forces had been approved. A thousand hours of work with
experts had been devoted to the issue and the act was being implemented.
369. OEe Ministry of the Interior must provide an organizational chart and job
descriptions in order to implement the act within a year. Two months had gone
by and the integration of all police forces would be complete within
10 months. OEeir integration would considerably enhance efficiency.
370. The Special Representative asked about the press. OEe Deputy Minister
told him that the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance would give him more
information on that subject. He then gave some details. Anyone that was
qualified to do so could publish ideas or news with his own resources and
means. OEe Government considered it its duty to provide facilities to people
who wished to engage in news activities and it therefore gave permission for
the import of machinery and paper. The Government welcomed anyone who wished
to engage in journalism, and also accepted criticism if it was presented
“earnestly and truthfully”. Newspapers and magazines contained abundant
criticism of the Government. The same approach was taken with political
parties. OEe Government could not renounce that principle. Everyone must
adhere to one basic, inviolable principle, namely, respect for the
Constitution. The press and political parties must accept and adhere to the
Constitution. That imposed certain responsibilities on writers. The Ministry
of Culture and Islamic Guidance was responsible for applying the Constitution
and therefore monitored publications and associations. It was lenient with
them, however, even when there was cause for severity.
E/ CN. 4 / 1991/35
page 68
37L No newspaper sent its articles for prior review by the authorities, but
if an article was published containing erroneous or untrue information or if
someone was insulted, the newspaper must give equal space to a correction.
Otherwise, the complainant could take legal action.
372. In the past 10 years, over 50,000 books on different topics had been
published. OEe organization which had oversight of books monitored
publishers activities. It also studied books before they were published and
if it found them contrary to the Constitution or liable to corrupt or offend
public dignity, it could ask the authors to correct the inappropriate or
detrimental parts. The problem was almost always solved by negotiation and
the authors were satisfied with the outcome.
6. Interview with the Deputy Minister of Culture
and Islamic Guidance
373. Deputy Minister Aininzadeh said that he was sceptical about the activities
of international organizations and that it would be a long time before Iran
solved its international problems.
374. The Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance was the product of the
merger of two ministries, the Ministry of Art and Culture and the Ministry of
Information and Tourism; the merger had beet designed to enhance their
functioning. The Ministry of Culture and Isl inic Guidance worked with cinema,
theatre, the performing arts, music, publications, books, art (painting,
drawing, etc.), press, radio, television, printing, tourism, and pilgrimages
to holy places. Radio and television were under the joint supervision of the
three branches of Government.
375. The Government had never been opposed to foreign films and television but
had put a stop to propaganda that caused moral corruption. OEe same was true
of music: the Government had never been opposed to music but had eliminated
certain kinds of music which encouraged prostitution and corruption. The same
had happened with other forms of artistic expression such as painting.
Iranian films had won international prizes. Artists were aware that limits
had been drawn to prevent corruption and that they must not overstep those
limits.
376. Before the Revolution, many books had been banned. After the Revolution,
the number of books published had increased enormously. There were sometimes
arguments about permission to publish a book. When a book contributed to
prostitution and corruption, its publication was not permitted.
377. The press enjoyed protection and freedom, but anything that was contrary
to Islam and public order was inadmissible. The press promoted Islamic
values, opposed colonialism, promoted morality and upheld the policy of
“neither East nor West”. The committee that granted permits for the founding
of newspapers was made up of representatives of the three branches of
Government, the universities, publishers and the Ministry of Culture and
Islamic Guidance. There were 15 daily newspapers and 300 monthly, weekly or
bimonthly magazines.
378. The Special Representative asked what action the Ministry took with
regard to the day—to--day activities of newspapers. He was told that if a
newspaper insulted Islam, the Leader or the Government, it could be penalized
by cancellation of its operating permit.
E / CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 69
379. The Special Representative referred to the distribution of paper. The
Deputy Minister replied that his Ministry distributed paper. Any authorized
newspaper was entitled to the paper it needed. OEere were limitations on the
allocation of paper. For instance, Kayhan and Ettelaat were daily papers with
the potential to increase their circulation but there were limits on the
amount of paper the Government could distribute at a relatively low price. No
limitations had been placed on the amount of paper that the opposition press
could receive.
380. The Special Representative asked about the conditions for distributing
paper for books. Paper was supplied to printers or authors. Books needed
authorization before they could be published. There had been criticisms when
the publication of some books had been allowed, but the only criterion for
authorization had been moral, never political.
381. The official interview over, the Special Representative talked to working
Iranian journalists in the same building.
7. Interview with the President of the Supreme Court of Justice
382. The President of the Supreme Court of Justice, Ayatollah Moghtadaei, said
that according to Islam, judges were answerable bef e God and sat among the
prophets and that the place of trial was the place of God. Under Iranian law,
a defence lawyer was necessary and mandatory and both the accused and the
lawyer were given certain facilities. Sentences could be brought to the
Supreme Court on appeal or for review. When the accused had not had a lawyer,
the Supreme Court revoked the sentence. Parliament had just adopted an act on
procedures under which, once the case was concluded, it was considered
res judicata . The act enabled the President of the Supreme Court to consider
the case and decide whether it needed to be reviewed.
383. Under the Islamic judicial system, all individuals were equal. Only
recently, at an annual nation—wide seminar, the President of the Republic had
expressed satisfaction that the judiciary judged law—breakers strictly and
equally. The Islamic legal order had special features with regard to respect
for human rights. Iran was prepared to exchange views on those matters, to
pass on its experience to others and to learn from the experience of others.
384. Under the Islamic legal order, the purpose of bringing a person to trial
was not punishment but rehabilitation. If the prisoner showed that he was
sorry and could be rehabilitated, he was included in the list of those
eligible for amnesty, even if much of his sentence remained to be served.
Amnesty was granted to groups and individuals. Only rarely did prisoners
remain in prison for the full term of their sentence.
385. No one was ever arrested because he adopted a different ideological line
from the Government. Baha'is were not arrested because they were Baha'is, but
for specific of fences. The same was true of political prisoners: if they
were arrested and executed it was because they had been involved in acts of
violence. If the detainee or accused repented, he could be amnestied, even if
he had committed horrendous crimes.
386. Another question related to the campaign against drugs. OEe judiciary
was determined to take vigorous action in that regard. Drugs were a problem
in the country. Cases came to the Supreme Court, where they were reviewed. A
sentence could be applied only with the approval of the Supreme Court.
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page 70
387 OEe Special Representative asked about cases in which a number of yo o
elapsed between the guilty verdict and the actual sentencing. The Presidan :
replied that that sometimes happened because further investigation were
conducted. On other occasions, the prisoner could not be informed of tho
sentence because the case was awaiting review. OEe sentence was mada known
only when the Court had approved it. OEe prisoner could appeal onca he wns
informed of his sentence. Prisoners sometimes did not know that their case
had been passed on to the Supreme Court, which was why they complained and
felt that an excessive period of time was elapsing between the guilty verdict
and the sentence.
8. Interview with the Political Deputy to the Read of the Judiciary
388. The Political Deputy, Mr. Badamchian, said that the Freedom Movement and
the Association for the Defence of Freedom and the Sovereignty of the Iranian
Nation had published their manifestos freely during the war, even when these
dealt with sensitive issues that affected national security. The Freedom
Movement had not been authorized, but it had been active recently.
Mr. Bazargan and other members were at liberty; other members of the Freedom
Movement had been arrested on serious charges.
389. The Association for the Defence of Freedom and the Sovereignty of the
Iran ian Nation had been operating without authorization. It had declared its
existence without authorization and had published illegal declarations; many
of its members were actively involved in politics. Some of its members were
being tried on serious charges. The Association had not been set up to defend
human rights but as a cover for illegal political activities.
390. The Special Representative said that, according to the information he had
been given, the two groups had submitted applications in due form but had been
denied authorization. Their property had been confiscated or frozen, since
the authorities had occupied them, and their documents had been seized. OEe
Freedom Movement had existed prior to the Revolution and had simply been
required to adapt to the new legal statute. OEe Movement had filed an
application and documents with the Ministry of the Interior and since the
Ministry had not raised any objection within three months, the Movement had
been tacitly authorized under the law in force.
391. The Political Deputy replied that the Movement had engaged in sabotage
and had had contacts with the country's enemies abroad. While it was true
that it had been recognized before the promulgation of the new act on
political parties and after it had filed an application with the Ministry, the
application had not met the necessary legal requirements and the Movement
could not be authorized. The members of the Movement had not been acting in
good faith. The act which said that if no objection was raised within
three months, the applicant organization was automatically recognized did not
apply in that case.
9. Interview with the Head of th Judiciary
392. The Head of the Judiciary, Ayatollah Yazdi, said that the main source of
Iranian law was the Holy Scriptures, which were intended for mankind's
salvation. The Koran said: “I respect and honour mankind”.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 71
393. The Special Representative drew the following situations to the attention
of the Head of the Judiciary: (a) public trials were impossible in prisons;
(b) some people who had been condemned to death had not had lawyers, and a
person accused of spying, for which he could be sentenced to death, had been
tried two years previously and still did not know his sentence; (c) the
question of the applicability or the repeal of article 11/2 of the
Administrative Regulations governing the Revolutionary Courts and Public
Prosecutor's Offices of 1979.
394. The Head of the Judiciary said that there was a principle whereby the
interests of society must prevail over the interests of the individual. The
international community paid little attention to that principle because the
issue of human rights had been politicized. Such politicization undermined
the enjoyment of those rights. In eight years of war, the international
community had never concerned itself with the crimes perpetrated against the
Iranian people. He then referred to recent events in Palestine and to the
Gulf crisis.
395. The Head of the Judiciary went on to say that no legal system protected
human rights as thoroughly as Islamic law. The best evidence of that was the
existence of groups which were opposed to Islamic principles, expressed their
views publicly and were left in peace as long as they did not engage in armed
action.
396. Concerning the openness of trials, he said that court sessions were held
at IIe Palace of Justice in the city centre and that no less than 20 trials
were held each day, all of them public. When citizens were interested in a
ase, larger premises were used. At Evin prison there were restrictions on
access, but the principle of public trials was in force. In any case, the
judge could prohibit access for reasons of public order.
397. Everyone was entitled to defence counsel and when the accused could not
obtain it, the court provided it. Since that was the accused's right, if the
accused said that he considered himself better equipped than the lawyer to
conduct his defence, he was not forced to accept the lawyer. OEe Special
Representative said he had observed that, in practice, accused persons tried
by the revolutionary courts did not have a lawyer.
398. The Head of the Judiciary said that in the case of ordinary of fences,
when the parties reached a compromise, the proceedings ended. In cases of
espionage, after the accused had been arrested and the accusation
substantiated, the investigation and gathering of evidence began. Evidence
was weighed by the judge. If it was deemed adequate, sentence was passed.
399. Crimes could be committed by individuals or groups. In the latter case,
the accused could not be informed of the charges against them during the
investigation stage because that would prejudice the outcome of the
investigation. Concerning the applicability of article 11, he said that
decisions of the revolutionary courts were not final: the accused could
appeal them or request that they be reconsidered and the Supreme Court could
review them.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 72
10. Interview with the Judicial Deputy to the Head of the Judiciazy
400. The Judicial Deputy, Dr. Mehrpoor, referred to the Islamic Declaration of
Human Rights and to the Special Representative's previous report. He said
that comparative study of the Islamic system and the interna iona1 system had
begun with particular reference to human dignity and the right to life,
drawing comparisons between Islam and Christianity. Concerning the ccd fo
defence counsel, he said that the Constitution provided that . .a ye:c must
assist the accused in court. The Head of the Judiciary had made a statement
on that point. Concerning the crediting of the period of pre—trial detentic
to the term of imprisonment imposed by the sentence, he said that under a bill
currently being drafted detention prior to the date of the verdict would have
to be credited to the term of punitive detention. He added that many people
had been amnestied, and provided a list which is reproduced in appendix VII of
the interim report. He said that the rules of Islamic law could not be
repealed: the penalty of flogging, for instance, was provided for in Islamic
law. However, it was being imposed less and less frequently, for it was
usually replaced by a fine or imprisonment. The Special Representative said
he hoped that flogging would be replaced by fines in all cases.
401. Concerning the revolutionary courts, the Judicial Deputy said that the
sentences passed down by those courts could be appealed, or reviewed by the
Supreme Court of Justice. The act allowing for the possibility of appeal or
review had been promulgated two years previously. Article 11/2 of the
Administrative Regulations governing the Revolutionary Courts and Public
Prosecutor's Offices of 1979, which provides that “judgements of the
revolutionary courts shall be final and no revision be made thereon”, had been
tacitly repealed because the 1988 Act on appeal procedures took precedence,
particularly its article 5 which stated: “With regard to the decisions of
penal 1, legal 1, military 1, special civil and revolutionary courts which
have been reversed by the Supreme Court, the authority for revising and
passing a new judgement is a court equal to the court which had passed the
first judgement”.
11. Interview with the Minister for Foreign Affairs
402. On Monday, 15 October, the last day of his visit, the Special
Representative was received by the Minister for Foreign Affairs,
Mr. Ali Akbar Velayati. The Special Representative summarized the main points
of his visit and thanked the Iranian Government for its co—operation. The
Minister said that it was his Government's policy to continue its co—operation
with the Special Representative. He said he hoped that by now, at the end of
his second visit to the country, the Special Representative was able to see
that the allegations of human rights violations were false and that the
situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran was comparatively
better than in other countries of the so—called “third world”. The Minister
expressed surprise that the Commission on Human Rights should have decided to
examine the situation of human rights in his country and not the situation in
other countries where respect for those rights was known to be much worse. He
said he hoped that such discriminatory treatment was not politically motivated
or designed to put pressure on his country. He also hoped that the Special
Representative had not been pressured by other Powers or groups.
E/CN.4/l99 J
page 7
L O3. The Special Representative replied that he had not been pressured by any
Government — neither the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran nor other
Governments — or by individuals or groups. In any case, his sense of duty
woul make hilD reject any attempt to pressure him.
40A . The Minister said he hoped that at its next session, the Commission on
Human Rights would change its attitude to the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Otherwise,, a sector of national public opinion might interpret the official
attitude of co—operation with the Special Representative and the Commission on
Human Rights as a mistake. in any event, international monitoring of the
human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran should not continue
indefinitely. The country could not tolerate such monitoring for long. If
the Commission on Human Rights did not change its attitude to the country,
some hard—liners within the country would argue that the conclusions of the
Special Representative's reports and his visits to the country, as well as the
voting within the Commission, were politically motivated.
405. The Special Representative expressed satisfaction that the Government had
acted on one of the recommendations made in his earlier report and had invited
the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to visit Iranian prisons.
However, an agreement would have to be concluded with ICRC so that prison
visits could begin as soon as possible. The Minister said that a high—level
ICRC delegation had already visited the country and that a director would be
arriving shortly to work out the details of the agreement. Once the necessary
arrangements were made, ICRC would be able to begin its work immediately and
make regular prison visits. The Minister mentioned that the Special
Representative had been able to interview, in private and in complete freedom,
many of the prisoners he had asked to see. That was a demonstration of the
Government's trust, for he bad even been allowed to interview people convicted
of supplying information on national security to foreign Powers.
406. OEe Special Representative then asked the Minister for a detailed
Government response to all the allegations of human rights violations
contained in his earlier reports and in the two memorandums submitted in
1990. Such replies were crucial to the performance of his mandate. He also
asked that the Government respond to his requests made on purely humanitarian
and non—political grounds. The Minister answered that his Government would
provide such replies, some of them before the end of his visit, and that it
would consider his humanitarian requests.
407. Lastly, the Minister expressed satisfaction at the holding at Tehran
University of a seminar on human rights in international law and Islamic law,
which had been attended by eminent legal experts and philosophers from Germany
and a number of Islamic countries and had formulated valuable conclusions.
12. Final interview with the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs
408. After the meeting with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the last
official meeting of the visit took place. Deputy Minister for Foreign
Affairs Mottaki recalled that during the Special Representative's first visit
there had been a discussion of the particular features of Islamic human rights
principles and the Government's attitude of co—operation with the Special
Representative and the Commission on Human Rights had been confirmed. It was
in keeping with that attitude of co—operation that the Special Representative
had been invited to visit the country a second time. One practical result of
E/CN.4/l991/35
page 74
that co—operation was that talks had begun with senior ICRC officials on
authorizing members of ICRC to make regular prison visits, as recommended by
ctke peciai Representative. A specific agreement to that effect would be
reacned shortly.
Q9, concerning the Special Representative's recommendation that the right of
all accused persons to legal counsel must be guaranteed, he said that a bill
o chat effect, which would expand on the relevant provision in article 35 of
cne Jonst tution, had been presented to Parliament. Legal counsel would even
be available before the oral proceedings, in other words, during the
investigation of the detainee.
4.LO. The Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs also said that, in keeping with
che role played by compassion in Islam and with the Special Representative's
recommendations, the policies of amnesty and pardon had been developed and
expanded. Moreover, concerning the recommendation that comparative studies
and seminars be conducted on the international system for the definition and
protection of human rights and the Islamic system, he said that the progress
made included the recent holding of a seminar at Tehran University. Further
to another of the Special Representative's recommendations, the Government had
decided to request assistance from the Centre for Human Rights, under the
latter's prograimne of advisory services, for a comprehensive, long—term
project.
411. Concerning the number of executions, he said that further to one of the
Special Representative's recommendations, the number of executions had
declined significantly since 21 March 1990, the date of the Iranian New Year.
The purpose of executions was not only to punish criminals but also to deter
others from committing of fences. However, executions were being carried out
only for the most serious crimes, such as drug trafficking, espionage and
murder. In that connection, be handed over a list of 113 executions carried
out since the Iranian New Year (21 March 1990). According to that list,
32 people had apparently been executed for ordinary crimes, 71 for drug
trafficking, 4 for activities contrary to national security, co—operation with
armed groups and drug traffickers, 3 for terrorist acts, 2 for espionage and
one on unspecified charges.
412. Concerning replies to the allegations transmitted by the Special
Representative, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs said that the
Government would do its best to reply to all the allegations made. However,
those allegations would have to refer to problems in applying the law, the
severity of penalties in relation to the crimes committed, or consistency
between the penalties imposed and the laws in force. They could not be
allegations questioning the Islamic legal system, laws or, specifically, the
provisions of the Penal Code of the Islamic Republic. Those were issues which
must be dealt with in other, primarily academic, forums and in other
circumstances. The Deputy Foreign Minister also announced that the Government
had presented to Parliament a bill under which the time spent in prison before
sentence was passed must be credited to the term of punitive detention. The
Special Representative expressed satisfaction at that initiative. ,
413. The Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs also said that the Islamic
Republic was open to anyone who wished to examine the situation of human
rights there. In that connection, he announced that the Government was giving
favourable consideration to a request by Amnesty International to visit the
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 75
coufltry. Hc also reported that the Head of the Judiciary had replied to many
1e ers cunta ning allegations. He said that there was complete freedom of
expression n e country and that a wide variety of views existed on domestic
anj. inte naLi nal issues. No one was being investigated or detained simply
bc aust 3f is political views and any citizen could express his political
views openly every day in the mass media, on the street or in the mosque.
Parliament reflected the diversity of political views in the country.
414. :he Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs next referred to the Special
Represefltative's visit to Evin prison. He said that the Special
B.ep:esentative had been able to interview in complete freedom most of the
prisoners he had asked to see, including those accused and convicted of spying
for enemies of the nation and of attempts on the security of the State. He
added that the reasons why he had not been able to interview the other
prisoners had been explained to him at the time: they bad been released, they
had been on temporary leave from the prison, or their trials were at the
investigation stage and the prosecutors had not given the necessary
authorization. In any case, the Government had trusted the Special
Representative enough to let him interview people who had supplied foreign
Powers with highly strategic internal information, even in wartime. That
demonstrated the Government's attitude of co—operation towards the Special
Representative and the Commission on Human Rights. If that co—operation was
to continue, however, prejudiced attitudes and preconceptions about the
situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in his country would have
to be abandoned, the remaining obstacles would have to be removed and there
would have to be an end to the double standard whereby the human rights
situation was investigated in some countries but not in others where there
were more serious and systematic human rights violations. He hoped that the
meetings of the Third Committee of the General Assembly would mark the opening
of a new chapter in co—operation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the
United Nations.
615. Lastly, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs handed over to the
Special Representative a list giving official Government information on the
alleged executions of 3,620 people mentioned in different reports of the
Special Representative (E/CN.4/1988/24, E/CN.4/1989/26, A/44/620 and
E/CN.4/l990/24). The information in the list had been compiled by the
Statistics Department of the Ministry of Justice, the Police Identification
Unit and the Registry and Statistics Organization. A summary of the list is
contained in appendix VI of the interim report.
416. The Special Representative thanked officials of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Government for the facilities and co—operation extended to him
during his visit.
C. Hearing of prisoners at Hvin prison
417. The visit to Evin prison took place on 13 October 1990. The Special
Representative was received by the Chief of the prison administration for the
Tehran area, his deputy, the director of Evin prison and an official of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Chief of the prison administration explained
that there were presently some 2,000 prisoners detained at Evin, of whom
60 per cent had been sentenced on charges relating to the use or trafficking
of narcotics, 35 per cent were common criminals and only 5 per cent (between
100 and 105 persons) were political prisoners. He added that all political
E /CN .4/1991 / 35
page 76
prisoners of Tehran province were detained at Evin. The Director oi Evin
prison again stressed the special character of the Iranian prison system which
was aiming at the rehabilitation and re—education of offenders. That
explained the frequency of amnesties as well as the possibility for many
prisoners to be granted leave which could range from three days tp to a year.
Leave could be granted both to common and political prisoners. OEe prison
officials expressed regret that the Special Representative had chosen mainly
persons who were known as opponents to the government, or had teen newly
arrested, because there had been little time for the authorities to influence
in a positive manner their misguided convictions. He further stressed that
the prison administration must be given an opportunity to defend itself
against any unjust accusations that might be voiced by any prisoners the
Special Representative would see.
418. Since the Special Representative had already visited various
installations at Evin prison, he requested that his visit be devoted this time
exclusively to a hearing of the 26 prisoners he had selected. OEe 26 names
given to the authorities on 9 October 1990 concerned cases on which the
Special Representative had received particularly detailed information. They
can be classified into the following categories: (a) prisoners allegedly
convicted and sentenced to execution; (b) prisoners allegedly subjected to
torture; (c) prisoners who allegedly suffered reprisals after having met the
Special Representative during his first visit; (d) prisoners of foreign
nationality; (e) prisoners belonging to the group of persons who had signed
the open letter of former Prime Minister Bazargan to the President;
(f) prisoners belonging to the Baha'i community; and (g) a group of female
prisoners, two of whom the Special Representative had seen during his first
visit.
419. The Special Representative was told upon arrival at Evin prison
on 13 October 1990 that, for various reasons, it would not be possible to see
all 26 persons. The Special Representative, therefore, handed to the
authorities an additional list of six persons.
420. The Director of Evin prison explained that two persons appearing on the
first list had been released, four persons had been granted leave, and that
two persons were detained at Arak and Karaj, respectively, and could,
therefore, not be met at Evin. For a group of 10 prisoners (6 on the first
list and 4 on the second) he had not received authorization from the
prosecutor to present them to the Special Representative, since their cases
were still under investigation. The Special Representative pointed out that
the cases of other prisoners whom he would be allowed to meet were also under
investigation, in some instances even in connection with the same offence of
which other prisoners whom he would not be permitted to see were charged.
421. Appendix IV of the interim report contains the names of all those
prisoners which the Special Representative had requested to see, as well as
the reasons given by the authorities with regard to those with whom he could
not meet. .
422. Among the persons who were not available for a hearing by the Special
Representative was Mr. Roger Cooper, whom the Special Representative had
unsuccessfully tried to see during his previous visit. Asked about the
reasons, the Director of Evin replied that the trial of Mr. Cooper was still
pending. The Special Representative recalled that, on his first visit, he had
El CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 77
been told that Mr. Cooper had been sentenced to 10 years in prison and that
his sentence was being translated into English. The Director said that the
trial was not over because the sentence had been appealed. The Special
Representative said he did not consider this a valid reason for refusing to
let Mr. Cooper see him, for the interviews were neutral and had nothing to do
with the status of trials. Mo eover, some of the other prisoners he was going
to interview had appealed their sentences and he did not see why Mr. Cooper's
case should be handled any differently. The Director replied that a new
accusation had been made against Mr. Cooper and another trial had begun,
related this time to moral issues. He then confirmed that Mr. Cooper had been
sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment.
423. During the ensuing interviews, which took place in an office of the
administration of Evin prison without the presence of Iranian officials, the
Special Representative spoke briefly with the following persons:
Mr. Jainshid Amiri—Bigvand, Mr. Bahxnan Agahy, Mr. Hooshang Ahinadi Bigvand,
Mr. Noureddine Kianouri, Ms. Meriain Feirouz, Mr. John Pattis,
Mr. Nour Au Tabandeh, Mr. Ali Ardalan, Mr. Farhad Behbahani,
Mr. Hossein Shah Hosseini, Mr. Bad u1l h Sobhn , Ms. Sakineh Sedaghat,
Mr. Ezzatollah Sahabi and Mr. Khossro Mansourian.
424. The Special Representative first received Mr. Kianouri, the former
Secretary—General of the Tudeh Party, whom he had already seen during his
first visit and who, on that occasion, had made serious allegations of
torture. He also saw his wife Meriam Feirouz. Concerning both persons,
allegations have been received that they had suffered reprisals subsequent to
the Special Representative's first visit (see A145/697, para. 76).
Mr. Kianouri stated that the permission given to him to see his wife and
daughter once a week for one hour had been reduced to one telephone call to
his wife every four weeks and one visit from his daughter every two weeks.
However, he had not been placed in solitary confinement, as alleged, and three
weeks before, the previous rhythm of visits was again being applied. He
appeared to be in better physical condition than in January 1990.
Mr. Kianouri further stated that he had requested that permission be given to
his wife to urdergo surgery outside the prison, but that the authorities had
so far not acceded to this request. Mrs. Meriazn Feirouz referred to various
types of torture inflicted upon her at the beginning of her detention, which
started in 1982. This torture had resulted in the loss of hearing in one ear,
considerable difficulty in swallowing food and various other consequences as a
result of heavy beatings. She requested that she be allowed to give her
statements standing, as she suffered pain when sitting. Given her physical
condition, she had requested the prison authorities not to oblige her to share
a cell with others and this had been granted. On the other hand, the lack of
company had resulted in serious psychological strain. She also said that
during the eight years of her detention, and particularly during the past
three years, she had received sympathetic treatment from a number of persons
within the prison.
425. The Special Representative then met Messrs. Ardalan, Behbahani,
Mansourian, Sahabi, Shah Hosseini and Tabandeh, who had signed the open letter
of former Prime Minister Mr. Bazargan to the President of the Islamic Republic
of Iran. These persons stated that they had been arrested in June 1990, some
20 days after the publication of the open letter, and since then had been kept
in solitary confinement, some at Tohid prison (formerly called Central Komiteh
Prison) and at Evin prison. While some of them stated that they had received
written charges, others said that they had learned of the accusations
E/CN.4/ 1991 / 35
.— page 78
indirectly through questions put to them by their interrogators. According to
the detainees, the charges varied from case to case, such as “measures
offending national interest and sovereignty”, “participation in activities
against the revolution and national interests”, “publication of the open
letter and dissemination of its content abroad”, etc. In several instances,
the interrogators alleged that there had been a co—operation between the group
of signatories of the open letter and a forei i intelligence agency and that
by publicizing the letter abroad the group had played into the hands of the
enemy. Mr. Ardalan, the Chairman of the executive committee of the
Association for the Defence of Freedom and the Sovereignty of the Iranian
Nation, categorically denied that the Association had attempted to become a
political alternative to the present Government or had ever engaged in
activities that could be construed in any way as espionage. If any of the
co—signatories of the open letter had had contacts abroad, this was a private
initiative of the individual concerned and not a policy of the Association.
Mr. Behbahani stated that the authorities had resented that the open letter
had reached foreign media. In this connection, he was questioned about a
visit to the United States where he had met friends nine months before his
arrest. He stressed, however, that he had neither been accused of, nor had he
confessed to, any charges of espionage. When he appeared on television on
6 August 1990, he had simply admitted to have realized that the position taken
by the group of signatories was in conformity with the policy of a foreign
Power and that, as such, their position was wrong. He also expressed himself
in favourable terms with regard to prison conditions. He said that the
treatment was satisfactory and the food superb. OEis contrasted sharply with
statements by others who complained about the extended duration of solitary
confinement (at Tohid prison in cells not bigger than 3 x 1.17 metres) for
which there was no legal limit as long as the case remained under
investigation, the very rare occasions on which contacts with relatives had
been permitted and the lack of legal counsel. In one case, severe beatings
were alleged. Generally, most of the persons belonging to this group appeared
to be under great stress. Some of them requested specialized medical
treatment from outside the prison, in view of their ailments, advanced age and
the difficult conditions of four months of solitary confinement.
426. The Special Representative also met Messrs. Atniri—Bigvand, Agahy and
Abmadi Bigvand, all accused of espionage. The first two persons confirmed
that they had been tried and sentenced to execution, whereas the third person
declared that his trial had taken place two years ago and that he was still
awaiting to be informed of the sentence. Their trials had taken place before
a revolutionary court, without formal charges or defence counsel. One of them
stated that his trial had lasted only 15 minutes. The two convicted persons
had made confessions on television and had appealed against the verdict. They
had not been informed of the follow—up to their appeals.
427. The Special Representative also saw Mr. John Pattis, a United States
citizen sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment on spying charges. Mr. Pattis
said that he had admitted having worked for a foreign intelligence agency.
During the investigations, he had never been presented with formal charges and
was held for three months in solitary confinement. In September 1986, he made
a public confession on Iranian television. His trial before a revolutionary
court took place in March 1987 before one judge, one representative of the
prosecutor and one interpreter. There were three witnesses of the prosecution
and the court session lasted approximately four hours. He had not benefited
from legal counsel and the sentence was passed with the annotation that it
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 79
could not be reduced. Since then, he had received three consular visits, in
1987, 1988 and 1989, from the United States Interest Section at the Swiss
Embassy. He had not been tortured but had received threats. He was being
held in a cell with two other foreigners (Mr. Cooper and a prisoner of German
nationality) and affirmed that prison conditions had improved significantly
before the Special Representative's two visits.
428. Mr. Sobhani, a retired employee of the Ministry of Education, stated that
he had been arrested a month before, as he was unable to repay the pension he
received during the past 14 years. This had been requested since he was a
Baha'i. He was simply told by the authorities that, as long as his family
could not pay his bail, he would remain in prison. He had never been formally
charged, nor had he been presented to a judge. Since he had no hope of ever
being able to pay the requested sum, he feared that he would be imprisoned for
the rest of his life.
429. The Special Representative also received Ms. Sakineh Sedaghat Rashdi, who
was arrested in 1988 while trying to leave the country illegally. She was
sentenced by a revolutionary court to three years' imprisonment, without
access to legal counsel and stated that she had recently received permission
to leave the prison for one week and was receiving visits from members of her
family.
D. Trial proceedings at Evin prison
430. The Special Representative had requested the opportunity to be present at
trial proceedings of a revolutionary court concerning an offence for which
capital punishment may be pronounced. On 14 October 1990, he was invited to
attend trial proceedings at Evin prison which, however, appeared to concern an
offence (armed robbery and banditry) that does not fall into the competence of
revolutionary courts. According to official information received from the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, revolutionary courts are competent for the
following cases: “All crimes committed against the internal and external
security of the State, or related to corruption on earth or war against Allah;
attempts against the life of political authorities; all crimes related to
narcotics and smuggling; all cases related to murder, massacre, imprisonment
and torture with the purpose of consolidating the Pahiavi r gime and
suppressing the struggle of the Iranian people, both as perpetrator and
abettor; misappropriation of public funds and profiteering and hoarding of
foodstuff”.
431. A judge presided over the hearing in the presence of nine accused and
five victims. OEere was a defence lawyer who asked to speak at the end of the
hearing, before sentence was passed. OEe judge read out verses from the Koran
and then asked the accused to introduce themselves and answer questions. The
prosecutor read out the accusation, mentioning eight different acts of armed
robbery committed by the nine accused. The six victims then testified.
432. The prosecutor asked each of the accused whether they admitted to having
committed the offences, and all of them answered in the affirmative. The
judge repeated the question, asking the accused whether they admitted to the
of fences; they again answered in the affirmative. The judge asked each of
them what he had to say in his own defence and they all answered that they
simply begged forgiveness. He then asked one of them why he had committed the
E/CN.4/l991/35
page 80
offence and the answer was one word: “stupidity”. The judge asked whether
they were ready to apologize to the victims and some of them simply said no.
433. The judge turned to the victims. The first of them said that he held to
his version that the attackers had used weapons, even though they denied
this. One of the plaintiffs said that one of the accused had apologized to
him but the other two had not, and that if they apologized he would withdraw
his complaint. Each plaintiff in succession then described his reactions and
wishes.
E. Information received by the Special Representative
from non—governmental sources
434. The Special Representative was informed by the Minister for Foreign
Af fairs that a number of Iranian non—governmental organizations had requested
the Ministry to arrange for meetings with him during his stay in Tehran. The
Special Representative accepted this request and, on 12 October 1990, met
representatives of the following organizations: Organization of Iranian
Women; Workers' House; Organization for Defending Victims of Violence;
Association of Families of Martyrs; Teachers' Association; Writers'
Association; Association of High School Students; and Organization for the
Defence of Victims of Violence.
435. The Organization of Iranian Women stressed that women enjoyed freedom in
absolute terms without any limitations. They stated that women had freely
chosen the law of Islam and that their only complaint was that not all Islamic
rules were as yet fully implemented. They thought it a cruelty to pretend
that men and women are equal, since the two sexes had very distinct
characteristics.
436. The representative of Workers' House explained that that organization was
the principal trade union of the country and participated in the work of the
International Labour Organisation. He stated that many of its leaders had
been assassinated by counter—revolutionary groups and that they still feared
for their safety. The most recent assassination had taken place at Sanadaj
some two weeks before. He described the union's relationship with the
Government as satisfactory, although not all promises had been fulfilled and
difficulties with regard to housing and the level of salaries still existed.
However, the organization had realized the limitations that the Government was
facing in this regard in view of the consequences of the war that had been
imposed upon it.
437. The Organization for Defending Victims of Violence presented several
witnesses, three of whom stated that they had been former members of the
Mojahedin Organization, They had subsequently been imprisoned and amnestied.
All of them stated that they had received “humane and Islamic treatment” while
in prison. At present they did not have problems with the authorities but
were living in constant fear of reprisals by the Mojahedin Organization. One
of them said that he had been given a job in the administration. A fourth
witness said that he was a former communist but had realized that his activity
as a journalist for communist publications was equivalent to the crime of
spying. Two persons presented by the Organization, Ismail Asghar—Nejad and
Mohammad Shabanzadeh, stated that their names had been included in a list
published by the Mojahedin Organization of persons allegedly executed by the
Government. They showed their identity cards, of which photocopies were
E / CN.4/1991 / 35
page 81
taken. The name of the first person appears in the list of alleged executions
annexed to the Special Representative's report to the forty—fifth session of
the Commission on Human Rights. The name of the other person does not figure
in any list available to the Special Representative.
438. The Association of Families of Martyrs requested the Special
Representative to devote particular attention in his report to the problem of
terrorist acts committed by the Mojahedin Organization and, in this
connection, reported several killings. The Special Representative was also
asked to reaffirm the specific rights of the martyrs of terrorism. The
Association further referred to the Baha'i community, which they accused of
financially supporting the State of Israel. Those Baha'is who refrained from
such activity did not suffer any discrimination in the country.
439. The Association of Teachers referred to certain problems that those in
their profession were facing, which they, nevertheless, fully accepted. The
difficulties they mentioned concerned economic restraints for schools,
limitations for women with regard to pursuing certain university studies and
limitations for Armenians and Kurds regarding the teaching of their respective
languages and culture in their schools. They also complained that it was not
admissible to criticize the Government for such situations.
440. The Writers' Association, represented by three women, referred to the
strict control to which they had been subjected during the Government of the
Shah. The main problem they were facing at present was the fact that they
were not allowed to write about non—religious subjects. Numerous members
wished to describe the problems of present—day Iranian society in the form of
a story. This was, however, not permitted. All literary works required the
approval of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance and it was impossible
to have paper allotted by the Government and have literature published without
such approval. The association considered itself in opposition to the
Government, but wanted to underline clearly the distinction between themselves
and any opposition groups existing outside the country. They stated that the
Government did not prevent unarmed opposition.
441. The Association of High School Students informed the Special
Representative that an organization of guardians of the Islamic society had
been established in every high school, which resulted in certain limits with
regard to the freedom of expression and instruction. Generally, they
complained that standards of teaching were low and that classes were
over—crowded. Although secondary education was free of charge, important
expenses had to be incurred by the families for books and teaching material.
For that reason, they had decided to leave the organization of Guardians and
to create their own association. This did not mean, however, that they were
political opponents of the Government or that they sympathized with the
Mojahedin Organization, whose members they considered as terrorists.
442. The Association of Students explained their objectives as encompassing
the struggle for freedom of expression, the promotion of sound intellectual
and political activities, and a campaign against oppression and anti—human
movements. The Association presented various allegations concerning the
activities of the Mojahedin Organization.
443. The Association for the Defence of the Victims of Violence also denounced
several attacks by the Mojabedin Organization.
E / CN .4/1991 / 35
page 82
444. At the request of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Special
Representative also paid a brief visit to the Institute for International
Studies. The Director of the Institute explained that, already in the late
nineteenth century, a similar institution was founded which was later
incorporated into the University of Tehran. In 1973, a new Institute,
separate from the University, was created. It was seized in 1980 and
re—established in 1983. At present 380 students studied at the Institute, of
whom 100 were staff members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Four
permanent professors and several invited professors gave courses on the
practice of diplomacy and negotiations. Every year a number of students
attended the session of the General Assembly. Owing to the lack of time, the
Special Representative briefly greeted the students, but was not in a position
to give a lecture to them, as had been requested.
F. Information received from private persons
445. During his stay at Tehran, the Special Representative once again paid a
visit to Mr. Mehdi Bazargan, first Prime Minister of the Provisional
Revolutionary Government, who received him in the company of Dr. Yazdi, former
Foreign Minister of the same Government. Mr. Bazargan expressed great concern
over the detention of signatories of his open letter to the President and
emphasized the illegality of both the arrests and the fact that the
authorities had voiced accusations in public, in particular, such serious
charges as espionage. The latter violated the principle of presumption of
innocence of the accused. Mr. Bazargan pointed out that, after the arrest,
he had sent a series of additional letters to the authorities, in
particular the Head of the Judiciary, of which he handed copies to the
Special Representative. He said that he had never received any reply to those
letters.
446. The open letter criticized the Government for the worsening economic and
social situation and the lack of freedom and security in the country. It
accused the Government of mismanagement and of an extremist foreign policy
which has led to the country's isolation in the international community. The
signatories of the letter invited the President and his Government to take the
following measures and policies:
“(a) To prevent the perpetration of violations and destructions in
the country and to avoid signing subjugating and not nationally
supervised agreements with foreigners;
“(b) To restitute the legitimate rights of people stipulated in
chapters 3 and 5 of the Iranian Constitution and to stop suppressive
policies of some [ government] institutions and organs;
“(c) To safeguard and guarantee freedom of activity for those
political parties and associations and press which have legal and open
activities;
“(d) To provide opportunities for free and undisturbed debate's,
talks and exchange of views for the purpose of resolving problems of the
country and seeking sincere co—operation of people and eventually paving
the way for establishing the legitimate rule of the people.”
E/CN.4/199l/35
page 83
447. Mr. Bazargan further stated that none of the arrested persons had been
allowed to avail themselves of legal counsel, that virtually all were held in
isolation and that their contacts with relatives and friends had been
extremely limited. As he had stressed in various letters to the authorities,
it was illegal to detain persons without informing them of the charges held
against them within 24 hours and keep them in solitary confinement for such
extended interrogation by agents of the Ministry of Intelligence without
passing the cases to the competent courts. He also drew the Special
Representative's attention to the precarious health situation of some of the
detainees. He further mentioned that the offices of both the Freedom Movement
(the party of which he was president) and the Association for the Defence of
Freedom and the Sovereignty of the Iranian Nation had been closed by the
authorities and that all their files had been confiscated. According to an
announcement of the revolutionary prosecutor, the Association for the Defence
of Freedom and Sovereignty of the Iranian Nation had been prohibited.
However, the revolutionary prosecutor was not competent to make such a
statement and a ruling concerning the dissolution of a political party or
association, in accordance with the existing laws on political parties and
associations, could only be made by a special court of the Ministry of Justice
upon a complaint by the Minister of the Interior. With regard to his own
party, the Freedom Movement, no formal decision had been taken, but since its
building and files had been confiscated, its activities were de facto
restrained. OEe Freedom Movement had provided all the information required by
the Ministry of Interior in accordance with the Law on political parties and
the Minister had not declared its functioning illegal within the three—month
period stipulated by the law.
448. Mr. Bazargan further mentioned that on numerous occasions the authorities
had officially recognized the right to criticize the Government and an example
of this were the discussions in the Majlis (Parliament). However, a number of
deputies had publicly declared that they did not feel safe to say everything
they wanted to say. He cited several names of deputies who had been
eliminated from the Majlis as a consequence of critical statements.
449. Other private persons, including Ayatollah Seyed Abolfazi Musavi Zanjani,
the author of a comparative study on Islamic principles and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, complained about the lack of freedom of
expression. According to assertions by several persons, the manner in which
this manifested itself varied from case to case, ranging from intimidation and
threats by members of the revolutionary guards or other organized groups,
dismissal from employment, exclusion from public activity to detention and
indictment or de facto isolation or house arrest, such as in the cases of
Ayatollah Qomi in Mashad or Ayatollah Rohani in Qom. These persons also
referred to a variety of strict measures of control over any opposing views,
such as the inspection of correspondence, the tapping of telephone
conversations, and a network of inquisition exercised by the revolutionary
guards and agents of the Ministry of Intelligence.
450. Relatives of Mr. Astir Taavoni reported that he was arrested, together
with his wife and his four—year—old daughter in 1982, on charges of
sympathizing with the Mojahedin Organization. His daughter was released after
40 days of detention and he was sentenced seven months later to five years of
imprisonment. The relatives affirmed that he was tortured and that as a
result of beatings he could hardly stand on his feet when they visited him at
Evin prison. He was released in 1986 and, since he could not obtain a
E /eN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 84
passport, he fled the country together with his wife and daughter. He was
rearrested at the frontier in 1987 and, after 10 months of imprisonment,
without trial, was executed at Evin prison.
451. One person, who requested that his name be kept confidential, alleged
that some 50 former members of the Mojahedin Organization were kept in
incommunicado detention at Evin prison in the so—called “Section 209”. The
names of these prisoners did not appear on the prison register and the persons
detained in this Section required the urgent attention of the Special
Representative. A similar assertion was received from a former detainee at
Evin prison. Since this information was given to the Special Representative
on the last day of the visit, he had no occasion to follow it up with the
authorities.
452. Nahid Arabali, Ef fat Bahrololoum, Au Jajarmi, Maryam Rahinanian—Kooskaki
and Mahshid Shakernia stated that the Mojahedin Organization had reported
their execution. They presented their identity cards and it was later
established that the names of the first and third persons appear in a
publication by the Mojahedin, that the names of the second and fifth persons
are listed in the annex of the Special Representative's report to the
General Assembly at its forty—fourth session (A/44/620), and that the name of
the fourth person is included in the annex to the report to the Commission on
Human Rights at its forty—fifth session. It should be noted, however, that
the lack of personal data other than the name, as well as discrepancies in the
spelling of names do not permit one to establish with certainty that the
listed persons are identical with those who appeared before the Special
Representative.
453. Several persons said that they were Iranian prisoners of war in Iraq and
alleged that they had been induced by the Mojahedin Organization to join their
ranks. The Special Representative considers these situations outside the
framework of his mandate and, therefore, refrains from reporting on the
numerous detailed descriptions he received on such cases.
454. Co—ordination between Islamic law and international law was the subject
of a private conversation with Ayatollah Yafari, who long before had invited
the Special Representative to discuss that matter with him. The Ayatollah
expressed the view that a truly universal order of the rights of human beings
should be based on the common principles of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
In this connection, he suggested the creation of an “Abraham Society” in the
framework of which the implementation of these principles could be studied.
455. Hundreds of letters and written communications were again received by the
Special Representative during his visit.
G. Meeting with members of the Baha'i community
456. The Special Representative also met three members of the Baha'i
community, who essentially confirmed the allegations received earlier. At the
same time, they recognized the willingness of the Government to solve the
outstanding problems and stated that discrimination, in particular business
and occupational deprivation, although still existing, had been somewhat
relaxed, that confiscation of property had been limited in the present year to
one case only and that petitions regarding confiscation of farms and orchards
had met with some positive reactions, though so far with little tangible
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 85
results. Nearly 300 Baha'is had applied for passports but only 24 had
obtained them, as well as the necessary exit permits, and some more had been
summoned to interviews, possibly leading to the issuance of passports. Baha'i
students were still not admitted in colleges and universities, but those who
were denied admittance in primary or secondary schools were now permitted to
continue their education at pre—college levels. The courts of justice still
did not accept heredity petitions presented by Baha'i heirs and many Baha'is
were deprived from entering into business transactions. However, in some
localities Baha'is were now being granted business licences. With regard to
the problem of cemeteries, there were still no formal ownership rights given
to the Baha'is guaranteeing their places of burial. Medical doctors could
only exercise in private practices and could not take part in the national
insurance scheme, and Baha i lawyers were not admitted in the bar association
or in courts. Reference was also made to the enormous financial pressure to
which members of the community were subjected, to the impossibility of
obtaining credit, or to accede to higher positions, even in cases of academic
qualifications acquired abroad. A person who had been involved in scientific
research for many years related how she had been ousted from Tehran
University, together with other Baha'i professors who were now trying to
survive as truck drivers or flower salesmen.
457. Some positive developments were said to consist in the partial lifting of
the ban on meetings, allowing a maximum of 15 Baha'i to attend their 19—day
feasts. For Baha'i funeral meetings there were no restrictions on the number
of persons attending. Furthermore, Baha'i families received food allowance
booklets and coupons and were given permission to connect their telephones,
which had been interrupted for many years. Finally, the regulations affecting
married conscripts were now also being applied to Baha'is.
H. Meeting with the Armenian community
458. On Sunday, 14 October 1990, the Special Representative attended mass at
the Armenian Orthodox church and met Archbishop Artak Nanoolcian. Allegations
received prior to the visit in connection with the situation of the Armenian
community are reflected in paragraphs 98 to 101 of the interim report. The
Archbishop deplored in particular the extremely limited possibility of
language training in the Armenian schools — only two hours per week at the
primary school level and none at the secondary school level — as well as the
lack of religious education. In the latter respect, some progress had been
made in reaching an agreement with the Government in the question of the
catechism, but the implementation of the agreement was still being awaited.
I. Comments and observations received from the Government
on the report on the second visit
459. With regard to the report on the second visit to the Islamic Republic of
Iran, the Government provided, by letter dated 22 January 1991, the following
general comments and observations:
UThe Islamic Republic of Iran following the views expressed by the
forty—sixth session of the Commission on Human Rights on repeating the
visits by the Special Representative provided necessary arrangements for
the co—operation of various organs in judicial systems, the Ministry of
the Interior and other related organs. In this regard, all the names
included in the report of the Special Representative were brought into
scrutiny. OEe report of the Special Representative was also studied in
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 86
various sessions and measures were taken to take the contents into
consideration. Although he expressed on many occasions his thanks and
appreciation for the co—operation extended to him, yet it is unfortunate
to say that this fact has not been well reflected in writing the report.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran met all requests of the Special
Representative to meet whoever he wished and went to wherever he wanted.
Through a well planned arrangement efforts were made to prevent any waste
of time.
“The statements of the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran
made at the meetings with the Special Representative have not only not
been reflected but rather some of them have been distorted as well.”
460. With regard to specific paragraphs of the report on the visit, the
Government stated the following:
(a) With reference to paragraphs 250 to 256:
“The contents of paras. 250 to 256 are clear evidence that people
are free to express their thoughts although the allegations are refuted.
“The debates of the Islamic Consultative Assembly are directly
broadcasted on the radio and the people are informed of the details on a
daily basis. Deputies are free to elaborate on any issue and due to
their immunities they do not face any difficulties and restrictions in
expressing their views. Those deputies who have been brought to courts
were charged for immoral acts and had nothing to do with expressing views
critical to the Islamic Republic of Iran.
“There is no section called 209 in Evin prison and the list of all
prisoners is available in the prison.”
(b) With reference to paragraph 267:
“The list presented by the Special Representative contained only the
names of three individuals who are to be executed on the charges of
espionage with whom the Special Representative had the opportunity to
meet.
“The Special Representative did not submit any request to visit the
Gohardasht prison. He refused to visit this prison during his first trip
to Iran, although he had requested then to pay such a visit.”
(c) With reference to paragraph 278:
“The Special Representative's view in para. 278 of doe. A/45/697 is
groundless because according to the law all accused are briefed about
their charges prior to their arrest and moreover, according to the
recently adopted bill by the Islamic Consultative Assembly,
interrogations are to be conducted in the presence of lawyers.”
. E/CN.4/1991/35
page 87
(d) With reference to paragraph 279:
“Television interviews are conducted with the agreement of the
accused and permission of the court in order to inform the people of
plots against the country. No threats or intimidation are applied for
interviews and giving an interview does not reduce the charges against
the accused; thus the observation in para. 279 is meaningless.”
(e) With reference to paragraph 280:
“With regard to para. 280 of the interim report, it should be noted
that there are different offices which study people's complaints in every
ministry. The representative of the President in that ministry receives
these complaints and has the right to notify the minister of the
complaint. The President himself intervenes in case the complaints are
ignored. In addition, the judicial system has established a few
organizations such as: the organization for justice administration, the
State organization for inspection, the department for attending to the'
complaints of the people, etc. ... ,The Islamic ‘Consultative Assembly has
also established an office under article 90 of the constitution to
receive and pursue such complaints.” ,
(f) With regard to paragraph 163:
“It should be said that:
“a. The meeting took place at the request of the Special
Representative and since the location of the inmates was far from the
meeting place, two of the inmates who were close by were brought to meet
the Special Representative.
“b. OEe two inmates are members of a gang of drug smugglers who
were arrested at the time of carrying two tons of opium in late 1989.
Since they confessed their crimes and co—operated with the officials,
they were assisted to get defence lawyers and called for appeal and
finally their prison term was reduced.
“c. All allegations of torture, maltreatment, long trials,
non—access to lawyers and work of the accused in the court are denied.”
(g) With regard to paragraph 168:
“The allegation of the above paragraph that permission has not been
accorded by the Ministry of Islamic Culture and Guidance for the Bible
Association is denied.”
(ii) With regard to paragraph 228:
“The Special Representative on his first day of arrival provided the
Iranian officials with a list of 202 names and asked to be permitted to
meet with 26 of them.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 88
“Since the judicial system acts independently from the Executive
Branch, the request was forwarded to the judicial system. OEe meeting
with those whose files were being studied by the prosecutor was not
possible at that time.”
Ci) With regard to paragraph 229:
“Mr. Noureddin Kianouri, the leader of defunct Tudeh Communist Party
was arrested along with some of his associates for espionage activities.
The files of some of the Party were studied and verdicts of the court
were issued. The files of Mr. Kianouri, Ms. Meriam Feirouz and several
others were sent several times to the court and brought back to the
prosecutor for further investigation. Although everybody knows that his
criminal charges are very heavy [ ones] of espionage, planning a coup
attempt with the help of aliens and with the collaboration of some
personnel of the army at the time of war, [ and] transmitting sensitive
information to the enemy, and the prosecutor will call for the maximum
penalty, yet the trial has been long, due to the orders of the
prosecutor. Mr. Kianouri has not been subjected to any intimidation and
the allegation of his torture is groundless. There is no doubt that he
is old and as a result suffers some health problem which have nothing to
do with his imprisonment. He is constantly under medical treatment.
“Mrs. Neriam Feirouz who is also an accomplice in the crimes of her
husband has not undergone any intimidation or torture. Her health
problems such as being deaf in one ear and gynecological diseases all
date back to her pre—prison term. Her doctors believe there is no need
to transfer her outside for treatment. The prison hospital in their view
has adequate facilities for medical operation if necessary.”
Ci) With regard to paragraph 230:
“Those who have been arrested in the recent plot are living in a
good and proper situation. There are no difficulties vis— -vis the
condition of living, food, visits, etc. although their charges are
related to security issues of the country, but they are well respected by
the prison officials and no one has maltreated them inside prison.”
(k) With regard to paragraph 233:
“Allegations put forward by Mr. Sobhani are refuted. Although he is
a Baha'i, he has been imprisoned for financial charges. On the request
of the Special Representative he was set free. t '
(1) With regard to paragraph 234:
“Miss Sakineh Sedaghat intended to join the MKO forces in Iraq via
western borders in 1988. She was arrested in a war zone by military
forces stationed there. No lawyer volunteered to defend her. The, court
taking into consideration the condition of her repentance issued the
least possible punishment for her.”
E/CN .4/1991/35
page 89
(m) With regard to paragraph 235:
“During the Special Representative's stay in Tehran, there were no
court cases dealing with political activities for the Special
Representative to be acquainted with the court conduct in this field.”
(n) With regard to paragraphs 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255 and 256:
“OEe contents of those paragraphs are clear evidence that people are
free to express their thoughts although the allegations are refuted.”
(o) With regard to paragraphs 261 and 262:
“Regarding the situation of Baha'is, the Govermnent of the Islamic
Republic of Iran draws the attention of the Special Representative to the
following points:
“The number of aha'is in the Islamic Republic of Iran is less than
one thousand of the population.
“Muslim Ulanias have declared Baha'ism as heresy.
“The centre of Baha'ism is located in Israel and is under the direct
control of Zionism. Baha'is are enjoying the same rights as any other
citizen in the Islamic Republic of Iran and no one is persecuted for
being a Baha'i. -
“All Baha'is who applied for passports in 1990 were able to obtain
it.
“It could happen that some of the executive organs commit errors or
be reluctant to provide services to certain citizens. In this regard the
judiciary has designated the General Inspection Organization to examine
any complaint received from individuals and identify offenders. Should
the Special Representative provide more specific information with regard
to complaints about executive organs, more investigation could be done by
this organization.”
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 90
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOIIMENDATIONS
461. The report submitted to the United Nations General Assembly (A/45/697
of 6 November 1990) was designed and prepared as an interim report, even
though it contains most of the allegations received in 1990 and an account of
the second visit to the country. Since various government replies to such
allegations and the account of the activities carried out during the second
visit were received in January 1991, the present report contains a chapter on
the visit and paragraphs relating to the allegations contained in the interim
report in order to make the Government's replies and observations easier to
understand.
462. Further complaints of human rights violations were received during the
short period of time between the interim report and the final report. As a
result of the first visit, the number of information sources both in and
outside Iran increased and it was therefore possible to make comparisons
between information received from various sources which are apparently
unrelated.
463. It should be pointed out that, both in the interim report and in the
present report, allegations of human rights violations have been classified by
category and, in some instances, this may involve repetition, since a case may
be included in two different categories.
464. The Special Representative has expressed the view, which is also his
belief, that, on the basis of existing international principles and known
facts, a critical analysis should be made in order to arrive at some
recommendations and conclusions in the light of criteria of probability. The
aim is, of course, to base conclusions and recommendations not on findings
similar to those of a court of justice, but, rather, on probability and
reasonable belief. At the start of his mandate, the Special Representative
stated that, in his view, international monitoring should be founded on
principles and criteria of objectivity and co—operation and that selective
procedures should be avoided.
465. This exercise is particularly complex and complicated because of the
specific circumstances which characterize the monitoring of human rights in
the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is obvious that there are persons who are
making every effort, and even going to any lengths, to politicize this
exercise, politicization being taken to mean a departure from the objective
consideration of the facts and their consequences and the use of human rights
as an instrument in the struggle for political power. Reports on
international monitoring procedures may be used for political purposes and
such use is beyond the scope of the competent United Nations bodies, but the
aim of the exercise is not to support or destabilize Governments, but, rather,
to encourage the fulfilment of international obligations relating to human
rights. The purpose of international monitoring is to bring about fulfilment
of international human rights obligations by gathering information and
evaluating, analysing and criticizing it. .
466. The mandate relating to Iran is one of the most controversial of all the
mandates on which international monitoring has focused in particular countries
in recent years. This is probably the result of the radical polarization of
political forces, the conflict between opinions that have turned into
EICN.4/199 1/35
page 91
pre—established, inflexible, intransigent credos and the struggle between
national arid international political interests. OEe situation is being
followed attentively and even passionately in and outside the United Nations
and in the media throughout the world. OEe prevailing philosophy and world
view appear to be extremist, with no happy medium between good and evil or
light and shadow and with emphasis on the totally absorbing, exclusive and
excluding dimension. Room to move forwards or backwards is unthinkable;
instead, issues are presumed or made to be crystallized and are judged
unbendingly and unalterably.
467. The controversy about the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic
of Iran has gone on in prejudiced and speculative terms, which have been
accompanied by reactions of hypersensitivity. If the controversy is to be
constructive, cases have to be discussed on the basis of evidence so that the
investigation and analysis of situations in the light of specific information
may be as thorough as possible.
468. OEe Special Representative has concentrated on objective consideration of
the facts and the preparation of observations and recommendations on the basis
of critria of probability without giving in to the pressure and Manichaeism of
persons or groups not connected with international monitoring. However, every
voice which has expressed an opinion or criticism and drawn attention to
procedures has been listened to. This task is one plagued by doubts,
questions, conflicts of conscience and contradictory requests and it is a
difficult one because the aim is to guarantee objective and independent
international monitoring and compliance with international instruments,
without complacency or fear.
469. OEe General Assembly considered that the two reports which were submitted
by the Special Representative in 1990 (EICN.4f1990f24 and A145 1697) and
prepared following his two visits to the country provided useful information
and shed light on some allegations concerning the human rights situation and
it expressed appreciation of the observations contained therein
(resolution 45/173, fifth preambular paragraph and operative para. 1). The
supreme United Nations body bases its opinions on the reasoned analysis of
allegations, replies and circumstances and establishes the consistency between
facts, observations and conclusions, using both the reports of the
Special Representative and information made available by diplomatic and
consular representatives. ,
470. The second visit to the country led to important results, took place in a
much calmer atmosphere than the first visit and made it possible to
investigate specific cases and obtain information from witnesses selected by
the Special Representative. The interviews with two persons sentenced to
death for espionage and with a number of persons accused of espionage provided
important information on the application of guarantees of due process of law.
471. During the second visit, information was received on the categories of
acts which have been considered in previous reports, such as executions, the
lack of a defence lawyer, failure to notify detainees of the charges against
them immediately following arrest, difficulties in making trials public and
ill—treatment and torture. Consistent information was also received on
E /CN .4/1991/35
page 92
restrictions on freedom of the press, the publication of books and artistic
creation, and delays and difficulties in exercising the right to freedom of
association, including the right to form political parties. Information on
freedom of association and expression in books and other media was consistent
with the administrative laws and regulations described by Iranian officials
during the interviews.
472. In explaining the powers and functions of certain officials, government
representatives provided information which made it possible to regard as
plausible the allegations that there were delays in the authorization of
political parties, that artistic and literary creation was subject to prior
authorization and that expressions of ideas took place in an atmosphere of
uncertainty. The Government should consider the possibility of eliminating
any kind of prior authorization in respect of expressions of ideas in general
and of artistic creation in particular, on the understanding that, if such
expressions did constitute criminal offences, it would be the responsibility
of the courts, to try and punish the offenders a posteriori .
473. It should be noted that the laws governing political parties in
particular and associations in general, contain provisions which in theory
refer to the safeguarding of the Constitution and moral and religious
principles, but whose practical effect is that associations whose objective is
political propaganda and participation in electoral activities or the
protection of human rights are not legally recognized. There is also no
clear—cut distinction between the activities of the members and the activities
of the associations and, consequently, there is a tendency to confuse the
responsibility of individuals and the responsibility of associations which
have been authorized or are being formed. There is also no legal remedy in
the event of excessive delays in decision—making or when the administrative
authorities question the lack of or irregularities in compliance with legal
requirements.
474. The positive measures adopted by the Government include: (a) the replies
to many allegations which were communicated to it and which are reproduced
in extenso in the present report; (b) the favourable outcome in a number of
cases submitted by the Special Representative for consideration on
humanitarian grounds; (c) the periodic adoption of clemency measures which
benefit both ordinary prisoners and political prisoners; (d) the release of
seven of the signers of the so—called “Letter by the 90”; and (e) the decree
of 31 December 1990, which requires a defence lawyer to be present at all
stages in criminal proceedings, including the investigation stage, which makes
no distinction between ordinary, revolutionary, military and ecclesiastical
courts and which decides that proceedings in which no defence lawyer has been
present are to be declared null and void.
475. The Iranian Government has continued to provide replies to the
allegations communicated to it. In January 1991, replies were received
concerning most of the allegations contained in the interim report. The
Special Representative considers it useful to continue the exchange of
explanations with the Government in order to supplement and clarify the
information on the alleged acts and situations and thus be able to arrive at
specific conclusions whenever possible.
476. The Government acknowledged 113 executions between the first and second
visits. Calculations based on the gathering of information broadcast on the
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 93
official radio indicate that about 500 persons were executed between January
and October 1990. The second visit had barely ended when Iranian radio
reported further executions. The media reportedly announced several dozen
executions in January 1991. It is also known that some missing persons were
in some way linked with executed persons and their disappearance is thus a
matter of concern to their families and friends.
477. According to the information received, most of the executions concern
persons accused of drug trafficking and the others are for ordinary of fences
of various kinds and political of fences. The study of Iranian legislation
clearly indicates that, because there are no gradations in the penalties for
various types of criminal involvement and as a result of very general wording,
the death penalty tends to be applied on a large scale. The adaptation of
the legislation to technical criminal law criteria might considerably .
reduce the application of the death penalty and make it genuinely exceptional,
as required by international instruments. In paragraph 2 of its
resolution 45/173, the General Assembly called upon the Government to
intensify its efforts to comply with international instruments on human
rights, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The Special Representative recalls that his own point of view is that the
death penalty should be totally and fully abolished, although he expresses
this very personal opinion without prejudice to recognition of the fact that,
for the time being, the international instruments in force allow the
application of the death penalty in exceptional cases.
478. Executions in the Islamic Republ-ic of Iran continue to go beyond the
narrow limits within which the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights allows the application of capital punishment. Some of the previous
reports of the Special Representative referred to the number of executions as
indicating that the limits in question are being exceeded. OEe number in this
case is an indirect element of appreciation because, when the number reaches
the hundreds, it may be assumed that effect is not being given to the
international principle that the death penalty should be imposed exceptionally
and only in respect of the most serious crimes.
479. The information received in 1990 included some cases of terrorism
reported by members of the Organization for Defending Victims of Violence and
other persons who travelled to Geneva to offer their testimony or wrote to the
Special Representative from the country or from abroad. OEis information is
reflected in the interim report and in the present report. The Special
Representative reiterates his belief that terrorism is a form of political
struggle which must be eradicated for legal, humanitarian and even political
reasons and which should be condemned in all its manifestations.
480. OEe Iranian authorities made it possible to hold interviews
with 14 prisoners, some of whom had been convicted and others of whom were
under investigation on charges of espionage. Chapter IV contains a summary of
the conversations with the prisoners. The Special Representative considered
at the time and continues to consider that the persons who were arrested after
having signed an open letter in which they called for the implementation of
some articles of the Constitution and criticized economic policy are prisoners
of conscience. Official reports confirm that seven of the persons arrested
have been released. The Special Representative objected to the prisoners
being put before television cameras, particularly while the charges are being
investigated. It may generally be considered that the trial of 23 signers of
E/CN.4/l991/35
page 94
the so—called “Letter by the 90” is a test case for the application of the
rul of due process. International opinion concerning the investigation and
trial of the signers of the ietter; i ‘e based on the principles of criminal
law applied, the evidence and its evaluation by the courts and the application
of the rules of due process. In its latest resolution on human rights in the
Islamic Republic of Iran (45/173), the General Assembly reiterated its appeal
to the Government to intensify its efforts to investigate and rectify various
issues, in particular as regards the administration of justice and due process
of law.
481. The Special Representative has encouraged acceptance of visits by the
International Committee of the Red Cross to Iranian prisons. The Government
has officially informed that organization that it has decided to allow it to
visit the prisons and all prisoners without distinction or exception, i.e.,
political prisoners and ordinary prisoners. The General Assembly welcomed
this decision of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran. On
24 October 1990, ICRC submitted a draft agreement to the Government in
accordance with its standard practice. At the time of completion of the
present report, no specific agreement had been reached on this important
matter.
482. For the first time, information has been received in recent months on the
persecution of Christian Evangelical groups. An Evangelical minister was
executed recently and, after that, the group concerned decided to bring its
si iiation, which it claims is years old, to the attention of international
bodies in charge of the protection of human rights. These cases have been
communicated to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its reply.
483. The situation of followers of the Baha'i faith continues to be uncertain,
given the unequal treatment they receive in different provinces and cities,
depending on the ideas and temperament of individual officials. No reports of
executions have been received in recent months. There do not appear to be any
exception to the prohibition on admission to universities and there have been
very few ex eptions to refusals to grant legal recognition to inheritance
rights, sinte information has been received on only two cases in which
inheritanc r*ghts were legally recognized. The report includes information
obtained fromi any documents signed and sealed by administrative authorities
of various ranks who deny followers of the Baha'i faith enjoyment of the same
rights asother citizens. Most passport applications by Baha'is are rejected
or she1v cYand only about 12 per cent of applicants receive their travel
documents. This is why an appeal should be made to the Government to grant
equal treatment, without exception, to all citizens, including followers of
the Baha'i faith. The General Assembly requested the Government to ensure
that all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction,
including religious groups, enjoy the rights recognized in international
instruments (resolution 45/173).
484. During his second visit to the country, the Special Representative talked
iu privat homes to people unconn ' d with the Government who lead a normal
life and have no judicial or police problems. These people agreed to be
interviewed after taking precautions to preserve their anonymity since they
feared reprisals if it became known that they had given information about the
human rights situation prevailing in the country. They said they feared
mainly the activities of irregular groups and of Komiteh and Pasdar n agents
who use intimidatory tactics Other people interviewed at the United Nations
Development Programme offices and the Esteghial Hotel voiced the same fear.
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 95
485. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran and to its representatives abroad for their co—operation in
respect of the fulfilment of his mandate, for submitting replies to the
allegations communicated to him, for giving them the opportunity of having
private talks with prisoners charged with serious offences and for the
favourable solution of a number of humanitarian requests. The Government's
co—operation with the Special Representative is on course and has reached its
highest level, despite the critical tone of the reports and the repeated
official indications of disagreement with the allegations and observations
submitted.
486. The representative of the Government of the islamic Republic of Iran
criticized the assertion in the interim report to the effect that
nternational monitoring of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran
houid continue and again raised the question of the termination of the
mandate. This was the culminating point in the talks with the
Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Geneva. The
Permanent Representative repeated that international monitoring should be
concluded, first, because it was selective, in other words, it was applied to
Iran while neighbouring countries which were known to have engaged in
systematic violations of human rights were not subjected to monitoring and,
second, because human rights are not violated as a matter of routine. The
identification of the criteria for extending or suspending international
monitoring was discussed and is referred to in the letter from the
Permanent Representative dated 5 February 1991 and contained in chapter II of
this report.
487. In the letter dated 5 February 1991 (see para. 7 of this report), the
Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Geneva alluded to
the so—called criteria which, in his view the Special Representative should
use as the basis for his conclusions concerning the continuation of the
international monitoring of the human rights situation in the country.
488. Two of the four criteria mentioned in the letter are irrelevant in this
context: the possibility that the Islamic Republic of Iran should become a
model country for human rights and the fact that some countries elude
international monitoring even though the infringements of human rights that
occur in them are known. With regard to the Islamic Republic of Iran becoming
a model country for human rights, the Special Representative referred to this
possibility in a conversation a very long time ago, and it was meant as a
maximum objective suggested to the Government and certainly did not mean that,
in his view, a country would have to become a model in order to be exempted
from international monitoring. As for the countries whose human rights
situations should be subjected to international monitoring, the Special
Representative was voicing a very personal opinion in the course of
discussions. He never said that international monitoring should be
indefinite, since he had written in his reports that, by its very nature,
international monitoring was temporary. The fact that a number of countries
that ought to be under supervision are not is an interesting topic for debate,
but the decision in that regard lies with the Commission on Human Rights and
does not affect the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
since it neither makes it better nor worse.
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 96
489. Two of the four criteria are relevant, albeit under specific terms and
conditions and with certain modifications. The first indicates that “The
Special Rapporteur makes that conclusion on the basis of the report” and the
second states that “Response by Iran to the recommendations and replies to the
allegations is the basis for such conclusion”. These two criteria may be
applied in order to formulate an opinion on the point under consideration,
although neither of them functions independently or absolutely and,
consequently, it cannot be asserted that this or that criterion “is the basis
for such conclusion”. What is involved are concurrent criteria. A study of
the reports clearly identifies the viewpoint of the Special Rapporteur on the
circumstances which, in his judgement, lead one to the conclusion that it is
appropriate to continue international monitoring.
490. When concluding this report and as mentioned in chapter II, the
Special Rapporteur received a formal request from the Iranian Government to
give special attention to the situation of displaced persons, of victims of
indiscriminate bombardments and raids with chemical weapons during the late
war with Iraq, as well as the situation of the millions of foreign refugees
who are still in the country. The Special Representative wishes to point out
that these issues fall essentially within the sphere of international
humanitarian law and are therefore not central to his mandate. However, it
would be extremely useful for the Special Representative to have the opinion
of the Commission in this regard. .
491. The enormous number of complaints received from very diverse sources,
including independent sources even after discounting errors and exaggerations,
provide a credible factual basis for the belief that human rights violations
occur in the country. It would be desirable for the Government to study these
cases and to adopt appropriate measures to prevent and remedy them. OEe
General Assembly called upon the Government to intensify its efforts to
investigate and rectify the human rights issues raised by the
Special Rapporteur (45/173, para. 2).
492. The Special Representative is of the opinion and belief that there are
arguments in favour of extending the international monitoring of the situation
of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran with the objective of
assuring, through co—operation, criticism, international public opinion and
measures adopted by the Iranian authorities, that Iranian legislation,
administration and practice are brought fully into line with the international
instruments in force.
493. On the basis of the aforementioned information, the Special
Representative, as in previous reports, ventures to make a number of
recommendations. To avoid misunderstandings, it is appropriate to define the
scope of the Special Representative's recommendations. The recommendations
are addressed to the Government and the competent bodies of the
United Nations. The Special Representative states opinions and cannot act as
a substitute for the Government, the General Assembly or the Commission on
Human Rights, whose respective attributions include decision—making powers.
It is for them to consider the recommendations and decide on them.
494. The Special Representative wishes to state that, in his view, it would be
appropriate to adopt the following measures:
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 97
(a) The Government should take immediate, action to reduce drastically
the application of the death penalty, and, while technical reforms are being
introduced into penal legislation, clemency and the right of pardon should be
exercised broadly;
(b) Just as the penalty of flogging is being gradually replaced by a
fine or imprisonment, consideration should be given to replacing the penalties
regarded by the international organizations as forms of torture, including
stoning and amputation;
(c) The Government should be urged to initiate forthwith or to speed up
the pace of legislative and administrative reform to make national
institutions compatible with the international human rights instruments,
beginning with the introduction of technical reforms to penal legislation, as
well as to introduce remedies to make moral and economic redress effective and
to assign responsibility for abuses or excesses of power;
(a) The Government should carefully supervise the enjoyment of equal
rights and equal treatment for all citizens, regardless of their political
opinions or their religious beliefs;
(e) The Government should be urged to take, immediately and urgently,
effective measures to establish a climate of confidence and legal certainty in
institutions to enable citizens to express themselves without fear or
intimidation;
(f) OEe Government should take care to apply the rules of due process of
law, including the notification of charges immediately after arrest, public
trials and the assistance of a defence lawyer, as well as the prevention of
ill—treatment and torture during investigation of off ences and during
imprisonment, since, in addition to having suitable legislation, care must be
given to its implementation, as misuse nullifies the best laws;
(g) A specific agreement should be concluded soon with the International
Committee of the Red Cross so that prison visits may be carried out regularly
and without exceptions;
(h) The legal functioning of independent organizations should be
authorized, including political organizations and organizations that seek to
defend human rights;
U) OEe prior examination of books and forms of artistic creation in
general should end;
(j) Measures should be adopted to guarantee genuine freedom for the
media and journalists should enjoy full guarantees for their professional
activities;
(k) Compensation should be granted to persons affected by violations of
human rights or to members of their families.
(1) Officials, employees and agents should be instructed specifically to
apply laws and administrative decisions forthwith and to maintain direct
contacts in police and judicial matters; they should be informed that they
have an obligation to conform in their behaviour to international principles
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 98
and standards on human rights and to refrain, inter qua , from taking
initiatives that are outside their legal powers and that they must avoid any
action which may be regarded as intimidatory and which may create doubts about
the normal operations of the institutions;
(m) The investigation of the allegations transmitted to the Government
should be pursued and, as a practical outcome of the investigations, agents or
officials who have taken extra—legal initiatives or violated human rights
should be brought to trial;
(n) Measures of clemency for persons convicted of various off ences
should continue to be granted and should be extended in scope, particularly in
the case of persons sentenced to capital punishment and for persons sentenced
for political offences;
(o) The human rights teaching programme should go ahead, as far as
possible with the technical assistance of the United Nations Centre for Human
Rights.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 99
Annex I
NAMES AND PARTICULARS OF PERSONS ALLEGEDLY EXECUTED IN THE ISLAMIC
REPUBLIC OF IRAN, SUPPLEMENTARY TO THE LISTS CONTAINED IN PREVIOUS
REPORTS OF THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE
Surname First name Date Place
Adibi Syrousse Gholam Reza 1988 Gohardasht
Afghani Dazeky Manocher Kernianshar
Akbari—Kurdistani Kassra 09.1988 Gohardasht
A lizadeh Mabmoud 1988 Gohardasht
Amir Ansari Hamid 1990
Anik Gol—Ali 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Arian Heshmatol lah 1988 Gohardasht
Assadolahi Rahim 1988
Azali Reza 1988
Azarang Said 1988 Evin
Baba—Nejad Sattar 1988 Gohardasht
Bakati. Reza 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Barazandeh 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Barazandeh 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Bazargban Bidjan 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Behkish Mohaminad—Ali 09.1988 Gohardasht
Behkish Mahmaud 09.1988 Gohardasht
Behzadi Manoutchehr 1988
Bestareh Reza Abasse 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Binai Khalil 09.1988 Gohardasht
Dade—Marzi Faradjallah 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Dade—Marzi . . Faradja l lah 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Dalili Mohaxnmad—Reza 09.1988 Gohardasht
Danesh Shariatte—Panahi Ahmad 1988 Evin
Darvish—Kohan Sohila 1988 Evin
Daryabari Mohammad 1988 Evin
Dashi—Arra Hassan 1988 Evin
Davaran Maussour 1988 Gohardasht
Davari Gholam—Ali. 09.1988 Gohardasht
Delidjani Mohssen 09.1988 Gohardasht
Djodat Hassan 1988
E /CN.4 / 1991 / 35
page 100
Surname First name Date Place
Dyanak—Shouri Mohainmad Hassan 1988 Evin
Dyawat Fatollah 1988
Edrissian Ahmad 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Eskandari Ali—Reza 1988 Evin
Eslami Sainad 1988 Evin
Esmail—Zadeh Saber 13.11.1990 Tehran
Esmail—Zadeh Saber 13.11.1990 Tehran
Ga lam—Bar Hussein 1988 Evin
Ghaem—Abadi Djavad 09.1988 Gohardasht
Ghanbari Bahmin 09.1988 Gohardasht
Ghandi Sasan 09.1988 Gohardasht
Ghassem—Nejad Hussein 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Ghorban—Nejad Houshangue 09.1988 Gohardasht
Golpaygani Mohanunad—Reza 1988 Evin
Habab Akhar 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Habab Akhar 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hadi—Mohssen Amir—Hussein 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hadi—Mohssen Amir—Hussein 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hadj—Malleki Eshagh 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hadj—Malleki Eshagh 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hadjari—Bedjestani Abasse 1988
Hakimi Nalehoda 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Ham—Djavar Firouz 1988 Gohardasht
Hassan—Pour Shirazi Ebrahim 09.1988 Gohardasht
Heydari Mohammad 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Heydari Mohanunad 19.11.1990 achsaran
Houshyari Khalil Khalil 09.1988 Gohardasht
Husseiny—Nedjad Mohssen 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Hydari—Zadeh Abmad 1988 Gohardasht
Karami Mohanunad 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Keshavarz Massoud 10.1990 Karaj's Qezel
Keshavarz Massoud 10.1990 Karaj's Qezel
Khademi 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Khademi 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 101
Surname First nwne Date Place
Khan—Darabi Mabmoud 03.10.1990 Kermanshah
Khan—Darabi Matunoud 03.10.1990 Kermanshah
Khatib Aboihassan 1988 Evin
Khatibi Akhar 09.1988 Gohardasht
Kompany Morteza 09.1988 Gohardasht
Kyai Ali—Reza 09.1988 Gohardasht
Kyhan Mehdi 1988 Evin
Lahidjanian Mohammad—Djavad 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Lahidjanian Mohaminad—Djavad 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Langaroudi
Lotfollah Zadeh Khali l 1988 Evin
Mahboub Assghar 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Mahboubian A li—Assghar 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Mahmoudi Sassan 1988
Mahshid Kyvan 1988 Evin
Manbari Madjid 1988 Gohardasbt (sec. 7)
Masouri Gholain Reza 02.1990 Arak
Masouri. Gholain Reza 02.1990 Arak
Mehraban Nader 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Mizani. Faradjolah 1988 Evin
Mc,azemi Reza 1988 Gohardasht
Mohanid—Zadeh Saber 1988
Mohebi Au 1988 Gohardasht
Moini Hybatollah 1988 Evin
Montazeri Hamid 1988 Evin
Morad—Pour Band—AU. 1988
Mostavafi Kyvan 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Nadjafi—Shoushtari Maussour 1988 Gohardasbt (sec. 7)
Nasser. Davood 04.1990 Tehran
Nasser. Davood 04.1990 Tehran
Nazemi Ainir Houshang 1988
Panahi . 13.11.1990 Tehran
Panahi 13.11.1990 Tehran
Partovi. Mohainmad—Ali 1988 Evin
E / CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 102
Surname Date Place
Pejman Asado llah 1988
Pourhorhozan Mohaimnad 1988
Radjab—Zadeh Mohssen 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Rahimi. Moharnmad 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Rahinanian Javad 10.1990 Jahrom
Rahmanian Javad 10.1990 Jahrom
Razm—Dydeh Assef 1988 Evin
Reza'i Ahmad 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Reza'i Mohammad 19.11.1990 Cachsaran
Reza'i Abmad 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Reza'i Mohammad 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Rezaian Rassaul 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Rezaian Rassaul 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Rouze—Dar Adel 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Sacilini. Akhar 1988
Sadrai—Eshkouri Aft 1988
Safavinia Hussein 09.1988 Gohardasht
Sa lahshour Davood 10.1990 Tehran
Salahshour Davood 10.1990 Tehran
Salehi. Fariborz 1988 Evin
Sale4man—Nejad Mohammad—Mehdi 17.08.1988 Zahedan
Sassani—Pake Mehdi 1988
Shaabani AU. 09.1988 Gohardasht
Shaf ii Khazaneh Mojtaba 1990
Shahbazi Djalil 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Shahbazi Au 09.1988 Cohardasht
hahbazi Dja li l 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Shahbukhari Seyyed Mohanunad Au 12.11.1990
Shahbukhari Seyyed Mohanunad AU. 12.11.1990
Shahssavand Nasser 09.1988 Gohardasht
Soodmand Hossein 03.12.1990 Mashad
Taheri Aniauche 1988 Evin
Ta l lai Hassan 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Tallai Hassan 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 103
Surname First name Date Place
Taqavi—Yeganeh Moussa 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Taqavi—Yeganeh Moussa 19.11.1990 Gachsaran
Tashaiod Ali—Reza 1988
Taymouri Oholam—Ali Gohardasht
Taymouri Bahram Gohardasht
Tayinouri Darvish—Ali Gohardasht
Taymouri Haydar Gohardasht
Taymouri Yahya Gohardasht
Tayinouri Cholam—Ali Gohardasht
Taymouri Bahram Gohardasht
Taymouri Darvish—Ali Gohardasht
Taymouri Haydar Gohardasht
Taymouri Yahya Qohardasht
Tebabati Mohaminad—Reza 1988
Vatan—Khah Esmail 1988 Gohardasht (sec. 7)
Zarshenass Kyoumarsse 1988 Evin
Zomoradian Ali—Reza 1988 Evin
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 104
Annex II
NAMES AND PARTICULARS OF PERSONS ALLEGEDLY EXECUTED IN
THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN. GOVERNMENTAL REPLIES
TO THE LIST CONTAINED IN THE INTERIM REPORT TO THE
GENERAL ASSEMBLY (A145/697, APPENDIX I)
Reference* Surname Name Date Place
A'yar AU. Fathe Babol
—— Abbas—Ali Ravanipoor 05.02.1981
01 Abedini Esmaie l 1981
03 Abrandi 1988 Evin prison
—— Adibi. Mahmoud 1984
18 Afsari Au 1982
—— Afshar Masaumeb
Afshari. Ezat 1981
Afshari AU.
—— Aghaei Hamid 1982
14 Aghai Ahad 01.1990
Ahmad Pour Mohaminad Birjand
—— Ahmadi—Nejad Saeed 1989
01 Ahmadi—Nezhad Saed 1989
—— Abmadian Bizhan 1985 Babol
17 Abmady Khosrow 1981
01 Abmady Fariba 09.1988
08 Abmady Mohainmad 09.1988
01 Abmady Farahnaz 09.1988
11 Abmady Mansour 09.1988 .
—— Ahrari Leyla 1981 . . . .
Aimyari Abdolmajid 1988
Akbarzad—Yousefi Nasser 1981 Tabriz prison
Alami. Mahnaz 08.1981
—— A lamzadeh Batoul
08 Alemi Moha nmad—Reza 1981
—— Alemi Mohammacl—Hadi 1981
—— All Seyed 01.1990
12 Ali—Nejad Abdoighader 25.07.1988
—— A lian—Nezhad Mehri. . Bandar—Gaz
Alidoust Masoud 1988
EICN.411991/35
page 105
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
17 Alipour Hosein 19.02.1990 Sabzevar
19 Ameli AU. 1982 Evin prison
Amendi Vahid Mohammadi 19.02.1990 Tehran
Aniin Saleb
—— Mdrapanahi Hossin Evin prison
01 Amiri Abdollah 19.02.1990 Karaj
08 Anari Aft Asghar 1981
—— Arak Sadeghi Balakhan 19.02.1990 Arak
07 Ashar Akbar Esna 1988
—— Ashrafi Maryaxn Sadrol 1981
01 Ashtari Mehrad 08.1987
Ashtiyani. Sadegh
—— Azah Hamid 1981
05 Azimi Kaveh 08.1989
— Azzani Farzaneh 1984
Bahadori Kianoosh 1983 Mased Soleiman
—— Bahinan Masha lah 1981
01 Bahrami Ahmad 19.02.1990 Boushehr
—— Bakhsha li Mehdi.
03 Bakhtiari. 04.1990 Sanandaj
—— Banafsheh Aft Ousati. 1989
04 Barash Mohsen 1983 Tonekabon
—— Baseri Au 1982 Tehran
08 Bashiri Mansour 19.02.1990 Tehran
17 Bazargan Bijan 09.1988
Bazazan Hossin 1981
Behdarvand Parvin 1982
Behnani Assado lah 1983 Tehran
Belivand Kumars 1982
—— Birany Au Reza 1981 Ardbil city
17 Bladi Rogheyeb 15.12.1983
— Bolur—Forush Mehdis 04.1990 Sanandaj
06 Bordbari Aft 1984
—— Bordbari Reza 1984
—— Borghei Mehdi
17 Chegini Hassan
E /CN. 4 / 1991 / 35
page 106
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
—— Cheragh—Disi Jamal 04.1990 Sanandaj
04 Dadgar Esmaeel 1983 Esfahan
Dahangiri Yafar 12.1988
—— Danesh Mohainmad—A min 12.01.1986 Iranshahr
05 Darabi Sayeed 1981 Moshar
-— Darabi Saman 1982 Hainedan
—— Darabi Mehrdad 1989 Boroujerd
06 Darvishi Mahmoud
—— Daryaii Mohammad—Hosein 1988
—— Dehchi Nader 19.02.1990 Tehran
01 Dehghan Gita 1981
—— Derakhanfar Mehrdad 08.1989
18 Dinkhah Hamid 1988 Ourmieh
14 Doulatabadi Mahmoud 1984
Dowlat—Abadi Mohaznmad—Darab 19.02.1990 Arak
Dowlatzehi Besmellah 19.02.1990 Tehran
Ebrahim—Abadi Salatin 19.02.1990 Sabzevar
—— Ebrahimi Azizollah 1989 Boroujerd
01 Edulati. Parviz 1981 Tehran
—— Eezad—Khah Kermani. Massoud
12 Eliasi Nemat Tonekabon
08 Esfahanian Mojgan 1981 Evin prison
01 Esmaieli Javad
Etemadi Tazzebeh 1989 Evin prison
Fadaii Mohanunad Meshed prison
Fadee Jamshid Masjed Soliaman
—— Fadee Mehrdad Masjed Soliaman
07 Fanny Ebrahim 1981
12 Farahinand Mohanunad 1988 Adelabad prison
Farabmandian Javad 1981
Farahniandian Esmat 1981
—— Farhad 1988 .
01 Farhangi—Sabet Katayoun 19.02.1990 Sari
—— Fat'Hi Nader 04.1990 Sanandaj
08 Gaffarian Iray 1983
Ghafoury Mohanimad Sadegh 19.09.1981
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 107
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
Go lzadeh .
Chajar Azdonloo Masomeh 10.1982
Ghanamati. Mostabah 1989
Chavami. Mousa 1988
Cholain Reza Klakjory 1988
—— Golijan—Moghadam Fardin 1984 Tonekabon
01 Golijan—Moghadam Au. 1984 Tonekabon
—— Goizar Gholamosseiu 02.1990
—— Goizar Gho laxnhassan 02.1990
08 Gorbani Hussein 1981
04 Goreishi Saman 1981 . Bandar, Abbas
Hadadan Isa 1983 Zanjan city
Haddadi Mohainmad—Saiid 1988
—— Hadidi Arya 07.1981
04 Hadipour Babak 1981
Haffari A li—Akbar 19.02.1990 Tehraxi
—— Uaj—Mohsen Hosein 1988
04 Hainini Daryoush
Hamzeii Au 19.02.1990 Arak
—— Hariry Majid 1981 Rasht
01 Hariry Massoud 1982 Evin prison
—— Hariry Shohreh 1981 Rasht
—— Hariry Mansoor 1988 Gohar—Dasht
05 Ilassani Mahmoud
08 Hassani Abmad Birjand
—— Hassein Azimi Birjand
Hayati Tazzebeh 1989 Evin prison
Hedayati Zia Qabaem Shar
— Heidari Jorsumeh
05 Hejatalah Gho lainy 1984
—— Hematti Nashaa'l lah Hainedan
03 Heydar—Fakouri Seyyed 19.02.1990 Sabzevar
—— Hojabre Cyrous 1981 Suary
—— }Iojabre Seeinin 1981 Tebran
10 Hoseini Ai 27.03.1988
19 Hoseini Farideh 25.07.1988
E/ CN. 4/ 1991/ 35
page 108
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
, ,
13 Hossaini Hossain
12 Hossein Mohammad 08.1981
07 Hosseinpour Hossein 06.1981
—— Hosseinzadeh—Arabi Susan 14.09.1989 City of Rasht
Hossieni Seid Saleh 04.1990 Sanandaj
—— Hydasi Amir 06.09.1981
11 Izadshenas Mehdi
08 Jabarzadeh Rasoul 1988
Jafari Mehdi 1985
Jahan—Biglari Kamyar 1981
Jahangiri Mohainmed—Gho li 1981
Jahangiri Abolgasem
Jahangiri Mahin 198]. Semiron
—— Jahanian Hamid 1981 Evin prison
19 Jahanshahi . Seyed Gholam Reza
—— Jalal Layghy 1984
01 Jalali Naser 04.1990 Sanandaj
—— Jalisi Mehidae l
08 Javan Vahid Kaki 1982
01 Javani Fridon 1985 Evin prison
—— Javazadeh Au
Kaikavous i Far ideh
Kaissi Abbas 28.03.1990 Seistan
Kalangari Mahmod 10.09.1984
—— Ka lat—Gharbi Mohammad—Reza 19.02.1990 Sabzevar
08 Kargar Sina Evin prison
08 Karimi Asghar Ramsar
—— Katozian Sadegh
08 Kazem Assadi
—— Kha—Kermani Naahed 09.1981
—— Khabbazi Mostafa
01 Khakbaz Abmad
0]. Khakbaz Ahmad
11 Khanian Reza 02.1990
Khakbazi Abmad Ghasem—Abad
E/CN.4/ 1991/35
page 109
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
Khatibani Mohammad R. 24.05.1984 Soum'e Sara
Kheraclinand Zakieh 1989 Adelbad
Khor Hosein 1989 Evin prison
12 Khosravi Nabio lah 1982
07 Kiaie Massoud Evin prison
15 Latif Mozhgan 1989 Evin prison
Madadi Hosein 1983
03 Madani. 1989 Tonekabon
Mahjoub Mehdi 1988
Mabmodi. Aref 1988 Adel Abad
12 Mahnioudi Abbas—Ali 19.D2.1990 Tehran
01 Makvandi Mahmood 20.06.1981
08 Makvandi. Bijan 1988
—— Maleki Maryam 1988
11 Maleki Jamshid A ligoudarz
Maradi Chavam 1982
Marandi Hasan Jafarzadeh 12.1981 Vazin Gaid
Marzban Fahimeh 1981
Mashkouri 1989 Ramsar
—— Mashoiif Javad 1988
07 Masoumi Haxnid—Reza 1989 Boroujerd
13 Massoumi Mahmoud 1985
Mazji Bahieh 1988
Mehrizi Ghassem
Meshkinf am Shokrol lah 1981 Mash
Meshkinfani Shokro l lah 1988
—— Meshkini Sedigeh 1982
11 Mir—Arab Ainir 1988
15 Mofarrahi Saeed 1984 Khoy
—— Mogharrabian Parvaneh Bandar—Gaz
18 Moghrazi Au Birjand
07 Mohainadi Abmad 04.1990 Sanandaj
Mohaxnedi Akber 1981
16 Mohammadi Abdollah 19.02.1990 Bakhtaran
05 Mohainmadian Reza 1989 Tonekabon
Mohkami Au Asgar 13.10.1982
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 110
Reference* Surname Name Date Place
Mohseni Au. Reza
Moini Mohammed
—— Mojaher AU.
14 Mojtabaie Fakhri 1988
01 Molavi Jalal Hamedan
Moradi Masoud Masyide—Soleiman
Moradi. ALL Ashraf 04.1990 Sanandaj
—— Morsaley Jaf far 1981
06 Morshed AU. 19.02.1990 Sabzevar
Mosanna Au 19.09.1981
—— Motaghi—Talab mir 1983 Rasht
01 Motahayeri. Mansour
Motahhedin Saeed 03.08.1981
Mousavi Enayatollah 19.02.1990 Tehran
Moussavi Hashem Madadi
—— Murteza Lebas 1984
07 Mussavi. Mohssan 1981 Sarri
08 Naddaf ian Iraj 1989 Rainsar
Naderi Manouchehr Evin prison
Nader. Ziaoddin 1988
Najjaran Ebrahim 1988 Gohardasht
—— Najjarian Ali—Reza 19.02.1990 Boushehr
03 Nainvar Sgagruar 1984 Tonekabon
—— Naroui Mohainmad K. 28.01.1990
16 Narouyi Houshang 19.02.1990 Tehran
—— Nasser Barariy 1984
15 Nassirian Zari
Nazari. Abdol Mohammed
—-- Nazarzadeh Mohanimad Hosein 1984
01 Nazemi Zahra 1988
01 Negarestani Javad 19.02.1990 Kerman
19 Negarestani Mashaallah 19.02.1990 Kerman
13 Nemati Moussa 19.09.1988
12 Nemovi. Abbas 01.1984
07 Nilou Akbar 02.09.1981
08 Otbman Pour Mohsen 04.1990 Sanandaj
E/CN. 4/1991/35
page 111
Ref erence* Surname Name Date Place
Pah levandoo Mohamniad Rezh 1982 Mashhad
—— Parrar Ahmar
11 Parsiana Majid
17 Parvaneh Abolghasem 1981 Ramsar
—— Parvizi. Ahmad 04.1990 Sanandaj
18 Pastegar Reza
—— Peerhadi Rossin 1982 Evin prison
15 Pin Mi 19.02.1990 Tehran
—— Poladi Hadi 1988
11 Qadaksaz Rahim
—— Rafati—Mogadain Nahid 01.1982 Tehran
Rafati—Mogadam Hanen 1984
Rafeie Mohanunad 19.02.1990 Arak
—— Rahim Saide 1981
05 Rahimi Ahmad 1981 Ramsar
03 Rahimian 1981 Ramsar
03 Rahimian 1981 Ramsar
03 Rahimian 1981 Ramsar
01 Rabmani Ezato llah 19.02.1990 Karaj
—— Rahmati Marzieh 09.09.1988
05 Rajabi Massoud 07.1982
14 Rajai. Au Reza 1989 Gohardasht
08 Rajavi Nasrim
—— Ramahani Astol lah
16 Ranjbar Mohanunad 19.02.1990 Rasht
—— Ranjbaran Amano l lah 1982 Evin prison
Ranjbaran Amanollati 1982 Evin prison
Ranjbaran Aman—A l lah 07.08.1981
Rashed—Marandi Fariba
Razhi Ahniad—Janghi. 28.03.1990 Seistan
Reza Falanik 1984
Rezai Sardar 1985 Evin prison
Rezai Fazed
—— Rezaie Yarali Qorgan
11 Rezaiian Behrouz 1988
Roknania Afagh 1989 Evin prison
E/CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 112
Reference* Surname Name Date Place
Roudgari Ezzat
—— Roudgari Nemat
03 Roya 04.1990 Sanandaj
Rozaii Mohamad 04.1990 Sanandaj
Sadaghi. Hasan 1988
Sadegh Mohammad
—— Sadeghi Balakhan 19.02.1990 Arak
01 Sadeghi Rabman
17 Sadeghi Jainshid 1989 Tonekabon
01 Sadeghi. Yousef 1981
12 Sadeghpour Lamed Birjand
—— Sadehgi Parvin 1981 North
04 Sadigh Habib 1989 Ramsar
—— Safaran Mohsen 1983 Evin prison
08 Safatian Hosein 1989 Raxnsar
08 Safer. Khamran 1988 Gohardasht
01 Safer. Oholam Gohardasht
—— Saffaran Hassan
Saffaran Hassan 11.1989
—— Safiden Namor 1984
11 Saghar Massoud 1985
—— Salali Saeed 04.1985
—— Samad—Nosrati Hosein 19.02.1990 Qoin
17 Sedaghat Mohamadtaghi 1988
11 Seyedi Majid
Shaabani Fraidoon 15.04.1984 Adel Abad
Shademani Sosan 1981 Rasht
Shah—Abadi Mahin 19.02.1990 Tehran
—— Shah—Mansouri 1981 Ramsar
03 Shahi Au Reza Shahroukh 1984
—— Shainsin Isfahan Syavoush 1981 Bandar, Abbas
—— Shapor Irantalap 1984 ,
19 Shariati Anvar 04.1990 Sanandaj
01 Shekarnezhad Washaallah
11 Shirmohamxnedi Davood 1989 Evin prison
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 113
Ref erence* Surname N an Date Place
06 Shirvani Shiva
—— Shojaie Nasrin 1988 Sfahan jail
04 Shojaie Mehran
Shokraneh Sorraya 1981
Sobhani. Naser 04.1990 Sanandaj
—— Soleijnani Ali—Asghar Aligoudarz
07 Sotoudeh Tahmineh 1989 Evin prison
—— Sulemani Nozrat 198].
04 Suliki Behruz 1981 Semiron
15 Taati—Asi l Masoud 1988 Evin prison
Taavoni—Canji Amir 11.1989 Evin prison
Tadainia Homan 1981
Taherpour Bahraxn 1988
Tajalli Hossein 1982
—— Tashayyod Au Reza 1988 Tehran
17 Tasslimi Abdolfazi 1981
— Tavakol Mohesn 1984
16 Tavanian Mariam 1989
— Tazehkandi Au Reza 01.1990
Teherani—Pour Hosein 1989 Karaj
(Gohardasht)
—— Torabi Farah 08.1982 Evin prison
11 Torkpour Gholain R, 1988
— Vahabi. Farah 1989 Evin prison
11 Va lizadeh Habib 08.1988 Rasht
01 Vedadinya Rabibo llah 19.02.1990 Tehran
— Vosoghian Mehdi 06.1981
—— Yeganegi Mehdi 06.1981
04 Yelivand Mi
—— Yosof Feizola 1983 Shiraz
14 Yousef—Taleshi Narollah 1981 Ramsar
—— Zakeri Mostafa 1981 Tehran
—— Zandi Reza 08.1981
07 Zeinali Jahangir
E/CN. 4/1991 / 35
page 114
*01: Persons allegedly executed who are studying in Iranian universities.
02: Names duplicated in the report.
03: Names are incomplete and were not found in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
04: Persons who are working in different organizations of the Islamic
Republic of Iran.
05: Persons who have died due to natural causes.
06: Persons who were terrorists and murderers and who were executed in 1981
and 1982. They were sentenced to death by the courts. Unfortunately,
most of these individuals were influenced by the deceptive slogans
of the rivals of the Islamic Republic of Iran and committed acts of
terrorism and destructive activities, including the murder of innocent
people.
07: Persons who achieved martyrdom while confronting the Revolution's
enemies.
08: Persons imprisoned because of their opposition towards the Islamic
Republic of Iran and who were released from prison later on.
09: Persons who have never been arrested, although the Mojahedin
organization alleged that they were executed in 1981—1982 and
the Special Representative listed them as executed in 1988—1989.
10: Persons who died in street clashes and clashes with border troops.
11: Persons who are studying abroad.
12: Persons who are held as prisoners of war in Iraq.
13: Persons who were missing in action during the war and on whom there is
unfortunately no information due to lack of co—operation by the Iraqi
authorities.
14: Persons allegedly executed who live and work in the Islamic Republic
of Iran.
15: Persons who had to undergo military service, but in order to escape
from this holy duty have sought shelter in foreign countries.
16: Persons who have been imprisoned for various reasons.
17: Persons who, after being released from prison, have escaped to foreign
countries.
18: Persons who were killed in armed clashes with military forces on the
border areas between Iran and Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan.
19: Persons who were members of the Mojahedin Khalq organization and who
were killed in clashes with troops of the Islamic Republic of Iran on
the Bakhtaran border in 1988. These persons were trained for military
and terroristic operations.
——: No governmental reply.
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 115
Annex III
GOVERNMENT REPLIES TO THE LIST OF PRISONERS HANDED TO THE
DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS ON 9 OCTOBER 1990
The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran provided, on
22 January 1991, the following information on the fate or whereabouts
of the following prisoners:
Referenca*
1. Jainshid Amiri—Bigvand 04
2. Babman Agahy 06
3. Hooshang Amjadi Bigvand 04
4. Ardeshear Ashraf 06
5. Manochehr Azar 02
6. Masoud Deadehvar 02
7. Kyanoosh Hakeaniy 06
8. Bahram Ikany 03
9. Heshmatolah Magsoody 03
10. Gahraman Malekzadeh 03
11. Masoud Payaby 03
12. Au Reza Nasiri 02
13. Noureddine Kianouri 04
14. Meriam Feirouz 04
15. Jamshid Torabi 02
16. Ahinad Rashed—Marandi 01
17. Reza Arbabi 02
18. John Pattis 04
19. Mohamadreza Sedaghat 02
20. Addol Au Bazargan 06
21. Ezzatollah Sahabi 02
22. Reza Sadr 02
23. Hussein Bani Assadi 06
24. Shams Shahshahani 06
25. Nour Au Tabandeh 02
26. Yadollah Chainse Ardallan 06
27. Au Ardalan 06
28. Rochan Ardalan 01
29. Farhad Behbahani 02
30. Abbas Ghaem Sabahi 02
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 116
Ref erence*
31. Khossro Mansourian 06
32. Hashem Sabaghian 06
33. Ezatollah Hamed Sahabi 06
34. Mohammad Tavassoli 06
35. Akbar Zarrinehbaf 06
36. Habib Davaran 06
37. Naim Pour 02
38. Amir Tavakol Ebrahimi 06
39. Hossein Shah Hosseini 02
40. Nezaniedine Movahed 06
41. Mabmoud Maleki 06
42. Hormoz Momayezi 06
43. Said Sadr 06
44. Hamid Sadr 06
45. Khosrow Parsa 02
46. Abinad Shayegan 02
47. Mahmoud Habibi 02
48. Shahin Parsa 02
49. Azar Sadr 06
50. Davoud Mir Rahimi 01
51. Mrs. Zaniani 01
52. Mr. Jafarpour 01
53. Abmad Rohdaki. 01
54. Khalil Ghiassi 01
55. Davoud Moyafar 06
56. Mohammad Animal Reaya 01
57. Nader Afshari 02
58. Dr. Assadi 01
59. Manouchehr Motahari 02
60. Norouz Naghizadeh 01
61. Ahmad Bastan 06
62. Mohanimad Dehgh n 02
63. Hussaingholi Roshanzaxnir 06
64. Bakhshullah Miss ghi 06
65. Kayv n Kha1aj b di 06
66. Behn in Miss ghi 06
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 117
Ref erence*
67. Azizullah Mahjoor 02
68. Habibu11 h Hakimi 02
69. Nader Rouhani 02
70. Badiu11 h Sobh ni 02
71. Dr. Mitra Ameli 02
72. Dr. Fatemeh Izadi 02
73. Ms. Fatemeh Hosseinzadeh—Tussi Moghada n
(known as Giti. Azareng) 02
74. Ms. Malakeh Mohammadi 02
75. Ms. Zohreh Ghaeni 02
76. Ms. Nahid Dorudiahi 06
77. Ms. Fatemeh (Zohreh) Sadigh Tonekaboni 02
78. Ms. Hura Fuladpour 02
79. Ms. Manijeh Riazi. 02
80. Ms. Afsaneh Khavar 02
81. Ms. Mahboubeh Kohzadi 02
82. Ms. Mahin Khosravi 02
83. Mr. Roger Cooper 04
84. Mr. Abmad Rezaire Fard 02
85. Ms. Monir Khosroshahi—Baradaran 01
86. Ms. Farideh Mabmood Mohammad Zaniani 01
87. Mr. Franiarz Mabmood Mohainmad Zainani 01
88. Mr. Farsheed Mahmood Mohanimad Zainani 01
89. Mr. Amir Houshang Kamrani. 06
90. Mr. Mansour Taheri 01
91. Ms. Maryam Taleghani 01
92. Mr. Bahrain Alai—Khastou 01
93. Mr. Seyedinehdi Nasry 05
94. Ms. Sakineh Sedaghat 06
95. Mr. Au Sedaghat 06
96. Mr. Abbas Raini 01
97. Mr. Ezatollah Sahabi 06
98. Ms. Narges Akbari—Namdar 01
99 Mr. Rahim Akbari—Naindar 01
100. Ms. Janiileh Akbarzad—Yousefi 01
101. Dr. Bozoo Bagha'i 06
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 118 .
Ref erence*
102. Mr. Esmail Movassaghian 01
103. Mr. Faramarz Abmadian 01
104. Mr. Saeed Taati—Asil 02
105. Ms. Faezeh Sabet—Jahromi 02
106. Mr. Ebrahim Nebahat 06
107. Mr. Mohanimad—Taghi Rahimpour 06
108. Mr. Rajab Bayram—Zadeh 01
109. Ms. Ezzat Habibkhani 01
110. Ms. Mahim Towfighi 01
111. Ms. Shahrzad Mahdavi 01
112. Ms. Farkhondeh Zanjanpour 01
113. Ms. Sousan Gorji—Sefat 01
114. Ms. Lilik Hakoopian 01
115. Ms. Fatema Shafii 02
116. Ms. Akhtar Tabmasbi 02
117. Ms. Mahin Batmani 01
118. Ms. Shokoofeh Ali—Oholi 02
119. Ms. Farkhondeh Tagharsi 06
120. Ms. Mahin Chaffari 01
121. Ms. Sadigheh Ahoumoshk 01
122. Ms. Sadigheh Hashemi 01
123. Ms. Nasrin Salimi—Badr 01
124. Ms. Shina Jahan—Zad 01
125. Ms. Maryain Noun 06
126. Ms. Mehri Salami 06
127. Ms. Maryain—Banou Sepehri Rahnema 06
128. Ms. Minou Naseri 06
129. Ms. Mina Vatanpour 02
130. Ms. Mahvash Keshavarzi 02
131. Ms. Mansoureh Ghanbarpour 01
132. Ms. Bahareh Taghanian 01
133. Mr. Ghadam Khayyer—Nasiri 01
134, Ms. Shahin Samui 01
135. Ms. Shahla Talebi 01
136. Ms. Maryani Ghazi 01
137. Ms. Razieh Ghoreishi 01
EICN.4/1991/35
page 119
R ference*
138. Ms. Homa Ipikchi 01
139. Ms. Taheri Sainadi 01
140. Ms. Katazoun Baghaii 06
141. Ms. Parivash Torshizian 02
142. Ms. Mahdokht Hashemi 01
143. Ms. Esmaieli Afrasiab 01
144. Mr. Mehdi. Knosh Slook 01
145. Ms. Mehri. Knosh Slook 01
146. Mr. T(halid AU. Karimi 01
147. Ms. Mona Abdi 01
148. Ms. Narges Ghanbari 01
149. Mr. Mohammad Hassan 06
150. Mr. Tofygh Setayeshi 01
151. Mr. AU. Reza Sadeghi. 01
152. Mr. Davod Azizy 01
153. Mr. Mohanimad Tala Poor 01
154. Mr. Homaoun Najafi 01
155. Mr. Norasc Karand 01
156. Mr. Sanjabe Asghar 01
157. Mr. Atahay AU. Reza 02
158. Mr. Sandabi Haniid 01
159. Mr. Mohsen Farm 01
160. Mr. Parvin Farzin 01
161. Mr. Mohanunad Mehdi Bladi . 01
162. Mr. Lebas Murteza 01
163. Mr. Layghy Jalal 01
164. Mr. Falanik Reza 01
165. Mr. Gholaniy Hejatalah 01
166. Mr. Irantalap Shapor 02
167. Mr. Anunary Mahmed 01
168. Mr. Barariy Nasser 06
169. Mr. Nainor Safiden 01
170. Mr. Mohaniad Salihi. 01
171. Mr. Hasan Asady 02
172. Mr. Rohalah Rainazani 01
173. Mr. Jafar Trabparhizi 01
E/CN.4/1991/35
page 120
Ref erence*
174. Mr. Adel Saudi 06
175. Mr. Iraj Kafashpour 01
176. Mr. Mahdokht Mohaiuadi Yadeh 01
177. Mr. Mahmoud Akbari. 01
178. Mr. Lotfali Mir Sorow 01
179. Mr. Panahandeh Mohammadi 01
180. Mr. Mohsen Mohammadi Zadeh 01
181. Mr. All Reza Babel 01
182. Mr. Mahmoud Faroukh Manesh . 01
183/ Mr. Reza Hausheki 01
184. Mr. Mabmood Bakshai 01
185. Mr. Gram Rondari 01
186. Mr. All Reza Masondifar 01
187. Mr. Mohainmadali Morshedi 01
188. Mr. Mabmood Tajgardan 01
189. Ms. Zahra Felahati 06
190. Mr. Morteza Ghadiyani 01
191. Mr. Gholani Reza Mirzani 01
192. Mr. Jawad Rainany 01
193. Mr. Kamel Nadery 01
194. Mr. Kazem Karimabadi 01
195. Mr. Souhrab Afhady 01
196. Mr. Farokh Djonaidie 01
197. Mr. Ghasem Daryabaghi Azad 01
198. Mr. All Hessaraky 01
199. Mr. Davoud Rezaie 01
200. Mr. Shahab Nouzary 01
201. Mr. Mohamad Shajerdi 01
202. Mr. Mohammad Taghi. Rahimpour 01
*01: The names of these persons were not identified.
02: The persons were released from prison.
03: These persons were executed under the verdict of court.
04: These persons are still in prison.
05: There are no judicial records on these persons.
06: There is no governmental reply concerning these persons.
