H U MA N
RIGHTS
WATC H
VOLUME 20, No. 1(E)
“You Can Detain Anyone for Anything”
Iran's Broadening Clampdown on Independent Activism
I. Summary and Recommendations i
Key Recommendations to the Government of Iran 3
Recommendation to the Government of the United States 3
II. Methodology 4
III. The Legal Environment 6
Iranian Legal Instruments and International Law 6
Prohibitions on Freedom of Speech, Assembly, and Association 6
Restrictions on Detainee Rights 10
Administration of Detention Facilities 18
IV. Targets of an Expanding Crackdown 23
The Women's Movement 23
The June 12, 2006 Demonstration and its Aftermath 24
Union and Labor Activists 28
Mansour Ossanlu 29
March 2007 Teachers Protest 3 1
Students 32
Independent Journalists, Scholars, and Activists 36
Ayatollah Kazemi Boroujerdi 36
Ali Farahbakhsh, Haleh Esfandiari, and Kian Tajbakhsh 37
V. Ill-treatment of Detained Activists at Evin 209 42
Ill-treatment during Interrogation 42
Solitary Confinement 45
VI. Exploiting Heightened Iranian-US Tensions 48
JANUARY 2008
VII. Recommendations .50
VIII. Acknowledgements 52
I. Summary and Recommendations
Individuals from an ever widening range of groups in Iran are subject to arrest on
security grounds for political activism and peaceful dissent against the government.
Those arrested are frequently detained in facilities operating outside the regular
prison administration, most notoriously in Section 209 of Teh ran's Evin Prison,
where they may be subjected to torture and abusive interrogation. After weeks or
months the authorities frequently release those held on conditional bail or a
suspended prison sentence, using the ever-present threat of a return to jail to
intimidate them against further activism or open dissent.
Crackdowns on peaceful dissent have been a hallmark of all governments in the
Islamic Republic of Iran, and there was already ample legal latitude for the
persecution of government critics when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took office in
August 2005. It is the great expansion in scope and number of individuals and
activities persecuted by the government that seems to distinguish the Ahmadinejad
period to date.
Since August 2005 Iranian security forces have detained at least 3 5 members of the
Iranian women's movement in Evin 209. They have also held teachers calling for
better wages and pension plans, students and activists working towards social and
political reform, as well as journalists and scholars with no history of activism. In the
majority of these cases, the detainees have spent some or all of their detention in
solitary confinement (sometimes for months), been denied access to counsel or
visits with their families, and been put under severe psychological and physical
pressure to give confessions, whether truthful or otherwise.
A set of laws within Iran's Islamic Penal Code entitled “Offenses Against the National
and International Security of the Country” (“Security Laws”), provide the government
wide scope for suppressing any peaceful activity it perceives as critical of its policies.
Iranian law also has grounds for denying basic due process rights to security
detainees. Although the Iranian Constitution, Code of Criminal Procedure, and the
Citizens Rights Law include a number of provisions on detainees' rights and methods
i HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
of interrogation, Iranian law also includes grounds for denying some of these rights
and straying from prescribed procedures. More than in any other period in recent
Iranian history, the authorities have used security legislation as a pretext for
politically motivated arrests and detention. Often there is no warrant or other legal
basis given for the arrest; instead the authorities interrogate detainees without an
attorney present with the intention of “fishing” for a charge. This report begins by
outLining the due process rights under Iran's criminaL procedure code, as welL as the
security-related provisions that effectiveLy undercut those rights.
Another distinguishing feature of politicaLly motivated arrests under the
Ahmadinejad administration is the focus not on individuals' actions, but on their
connections to foreign institutions, individuals, or sources of funding. The
government routinely applies Iran's broadly conceived security Laws to accuse
anyone from women's rights campaigners to union organizers to student Leaders of
“spying,” “acting against nation at security,” “receiving funding from abroad,” or
“planning a soft revolution.” Recent United States government policy promoting
allocations of funds for “regime change” in Iran has been seized upon by the Iranian
government to accuse independent Iranian civil society activists of being the agents
of foreign agendas. Prominent Iranian activists have pointed out the ways that the
Iranian government has exploited the US allocation of these funds in order to
intensify its crackdown on civil society.
Human Rights Watch is calling on the government of Iran to amend or abolish the
vague security laws and other legislation that allow the government to arbitrarily
suppress and punish individuals for peaceful political expression, association and
assembly in breach of international human rights treaties to which Iran is party. It is
also calling on the government to treat detainees in accordance with international
standards, and to either bring Evin 209 under the supervision of the regular prisons
administration or shut it down.
Human Rights Watch is also calling on the US government to engage Iranian civil
society regarding its funding allocations so that US support is not an easy pretext for
continuing repression.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 2
Key Recommendations to the Government of Iran
Full recommendations to the Iranian government can be found in section VII.
• Release all individuals currently deprived of their liberty for peacefully
exercising their rights to free expression, association, and assembly.
• Discipline or prosecute as appropriate officials at all levels of the Iranian
Information Ministry responsible for the mistreatment of detainees at Evin 209
detention center. Bring Evin 209 under the supervision of the State Prisons and
Security Corrective Measures Organization, or immediately close it.
• Amend the “Offenses against the National and International Security of the
Country” (the “Security Laws”) to define both “national security” and the
breaches against it in narrow terms that do not unduly infringe upon
internationally guaranteed rights of free speech and assembly (provisions of
the Security Laws requiring specific attention are enumerated in the “Detailed
Recommendations” in section VII).
• Excise Laws in the Islamic Penal Code that criminalize “insults” against
religious figures and government leaders.
• Change provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure that allow the right to
counsel to be denied in the investigative phase of pretrial detention. The
government should guarantee the right of security detainees to meet in private
with legal counsel of their choosing throughout the period of their detention
and trial.
Recommendation to the Government of the United States
• Engage with Iranian civil society groups to support projects which they believe
will not provide an easy pretext for the Iranian government to repress their
activities.
3 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
II. Methodology
The Iranian government does not allow non-governmental organizations such as
Human Rights Watch to enter the country for the purposes of unimpeded
investigations into human rights abuses. In addition, many activists inside Iran are
not comfortable carrying out extended conversations on human rights issues either
over the telephone or over email. As documented in this report, the Iranian
government often accuses its critics of being agents of foreign agendas. Many
activists expressed to Human Rights Watch that they fear governmental surveillance
of their phone and email conversations.
For this report, Human Rights Watch interviewed former Evin 209 detainees who are
student activists, women's rights campaigners, and journalists. Human Rights Watch
also spoke with family members of former Evin 209 detainees. In addition, Human
Rights Watch consulted with experts in Iranian law and politics, some of whom were
also formerly detained in Evin 209.
With the exception of three conversations over the phone and via email, Human
Rights Watch conducted all of the interviews for this report using online messenger
services. Human Rights Watch has a working relationship with a number of
prominent Iranian activists and human rights lawyers who provided information for
this report and introduced Human Rights Watch to the individuals interviewed.
Human Right Watch also conducted in person, email, and phone interviews with
Iranian student activists, women's rights campaigners, and journalists who are
currently in the United States and Canada.
In the case of all who remain in Iran and several who are currently abroad, Human
Rights Watch has withheld names and locations out of concern for the security of
interviewees and their family members.
Human Rights Watch on December 22, 2007 wrote to the head of Iran's Judiciary,
Sayyed Mahmoud Hashemi Shahrudi, and Minister of Information, Cholam Hussein
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 4
Mohseni Ejhei, with questions about our findings but to January 4, 2008 received no
responses.
5 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
III. The Legal Environment
Iranian Legal Instruments and International Law
Prohibitions on Freedom of Speech, Assembly, and Association
A set of laws within Iran's Islamic Penal Code, entitled “Offenses against the
National and International Security of the Country” (“Security Laws”), constitute the
government's primary legal tool for stifling dissent. 1 These Security Laws are so
broadly articulated that the government is able to punish a range of peaceful
activities and free expression with the legal cover that it is protecting national
security. The provisions governing security offenses have been in place since 1996,
and the government has frequently relied on them to arrest perceived critics. In 1999,
for example, following student demonstrations that the government forcefully
suppressed, the Judiciary used these laws to charge Manouchehr Mohamedi,
Gholam Reza Mohajeri-Nejad, Rahim Reza'i, and Malous Radnia with “incitement”
and “receiving funds from the United States.” 2
The provisions of the Security Laws prohibit various forms of speech, assembly, and
expression, allowing the state arbitrarily and subjectively to judge them as being
“against” the nation or its security. Article 498 of the Security Laws criminalizes the
establishment of any groups that aim to “disrupt national security.” 3 Article 500 sets
a sentence of three months to one year of imprisonment for anyone found guilty of
“in any way advertising against the order of the Islamic Republic of Iran or
advertising for the benefit of groups or institutions against the order.” Article 6io
designates “gathering or colluding against the domestic or international security of
the nation or commissioning such acts” as a crime punishable by two to five years of
imprisonment. 4 Article 6i8 criminalizes “disrupting the order and comfort and calm
Islamic Penal Code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, ratified May 9, 1996.
2 ‘Iran Threatens Revolutionary Court Trials for “Incitement,” Human Rights Watch news release, August 3, 1999,
lo2 l.htm
Islamic Penal Code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, ratified May 9, 1996, art. 498.
“Ibid. Islamic Penal Code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, ratified May 9, 1996, art. 6io.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 6
of the general public or preventing people from work.” 5 In the words of an activist
and law student in Iran who spoke to Human Rights Watch, “The articles on security
are so general that you can detain anyone for anything and give him a prison
senten ce.” 6
The government relies on other provisions in the Islamic Penal Code such as Articles
513 and 514, to silence perceived critics. Article 513 of the Islamic Penal Code
criminalizes any “insults” to any of the “Islamic sanctities” or holy figures in Islam,
while Article 514 criminalizes any “insults” directed at the first leader of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini, or at the current Leader. Neither article defines
what constitutes “insults.” 7
Iran's Constitution provides little effective protection from such ambiguous and
overbroad criminal laws. White the Constitution sets out basic rights to expression,
assembly and association, these are invariably weakened by broadly defined
exceptions. Article 24 of the constitution grants freedom of the press and publication
“except when it is detrimental to the fundamental principles of Islam or the rights of
the public. The details ofthis exception will be specified by law.” 8 Article 26 states
that freedom of association is granted except in cases that “violate the principles of
independence, freedom, national unity, the criteria of Islam, or the basis of the
Islamic Rep ublic.” Article 27 guarantees the right to peaceful assembly again with
exception of cases deemed to be “detrimental to the fundamental principles of
Islam
The rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association provided under
international human rights law may be limited within narrowly defined boundaries.
However, the overly broad exceptions contained in the Iranian constitution, security
Ibid. Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, ratified May 9, 1996, art. 618.
6 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with student activist (name withheld), August 13, 2007
Ibid. Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, ratified May 9, 1996, arts. 513 and 514.
8 .
constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted October 24, 1979, amended July 28, 1989, art, 24.
Ibid. constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted October 24, 1979, amended July 28, 1989, art. 26.
10 Ibid. constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted October 24, 1979, amended July 28, 1989, art. 27.
7 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
laws, and the Islamic Penal Code more generally allow the government to suppress
these rights beyond the limits set by international law.
A party to the ICCPR since 1975, Iran is obligated to abide by this framework. Article
21 of the ICCPR guarantees the right to peaceful assembly. 11 The article specifies that
“no restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed
in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the
interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordrepubllc), the
protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of
others.”
The right to freedom of association is also well established in international law. The
right to freedom of association may be restricted, but only on certain prescribed
grounds and only when particular circumstances apply. According to Article 22 of the
ICCPR:
(i) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of association with others,
including to form and join trade unions forthe protection of his interest;
(2) No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than
those which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety,
public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the
protection of the rights and freedoms of others. 12
According to Prof. Manfred Nowak in his authoritative analysis of the ICCPR, the
restrictions specified in Article 22(2) should be interpreted narrowly. For example,
terms such as “national security” and “public safety” refer to situations involving an
immediate and violent threat to the nation. “Necessary” restrictions must be
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted December i6, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N.
GAOR Supp. (No. i6)at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, art. 21. Iran ratified
the ICCPR in 1975.
12 Ibid. ICCPR, art. 22
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 8
proportionate: that is, carefully balanced against the specific reason for the
restriction being put in place.13
The UN Human Rights Committee, the international expert body that monitors state
compliance with the ICCPR, has repeatedly highlighted the importance of such
proportionality. In international law, “necessary” restrictions on freedom of
assembly and association must be proportionate: that is, carefully balanced against
the specific reason for the restriction being put in place.14
As the cases documented in this report reveal, the government's criteria for denying
the right to free assembly and association are neither proportionate nor narrow;
rather, the government appears to consider any gathering that is critical of its
policies as a threat to national and public security.
Similarly, the Iranian government uses its security laws and other sections in the
Islamic Penal Code criminalizing speech that “insults” the “Islamic sanctities” or the
Supreme Leader to restrict free speech beyond the exceptions allowed in
international Law. Article 19 of the ICCPR, stipulates the right to hold and express
opinions and to have access to information, and the conditions under which these
rights may be restricted:
i. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall
include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all
kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the
form of art, or through any other media of his choice.
. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article
carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be
13 Manfred Nowak, UN covenant on civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary (Kehl am Rein: N.P. Engel, 1993), pp.386-387.
14 The UN Human Rights committee, see for example Vladimir Petrovich Laptesevich v. Belarus. communication 780/1997 of
the Human Rights committee. See also Richard Fries, “The Legal Environment of civil Society,” The Global Civil Society
Yearbook 2003, Chapter 9, Center for the Study of Global Governance, London School of Economics, 2003.
9 NUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
subject to certain restrictions, but these shalt only be such as are
provided by law and are necessary:
a. For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
b. For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre
publlc), or of public health or morals.
Similar to the restrictions it places on freedom of assembly, the government's
designation of speech that endangers national security amounts to expressions of
criticism about current Iranian policies. 15
Forbidding “insults” to the Supreme Leader and setting heavy punishments for so
doing effectively prohibits any critical assessment of the Supreme Leader, the single
most important and powerful position in the Iranian government. 16 In the absence of
a definition of what constitutes “insults,” both this articLe and the article
criminalizing “insults” to the “Islamic sanctities” can be broadly applied to
expressions of criticism about current Iranian policies. 17
Restrictions on Detainee Rights
The government also relies on a number of security amendments for denying the
rights of detainees during arrest, interrogation, and detention outlined in the
constitution and Code of Criminal Procedure. The Iranian constitution and Codes of
Criminal Procedure for the Courts of General Jurisdiction and Revolutionary Courts
outline the rights of detainees and set clear limits for what is permissible during
arrest, interrogation, and detention. (The Revolutionary Courts were established in
1979 with the jurisdiction to try offenses such as crimes against national security,
slandering the founder of the Islamic Republic and the Supreme Leader, and
smuggling narcotics.)1 8
15 art. 19
i6 Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, Ratified May 9, 1996, art. 514.
17 Ibid. Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, Ratified May 9, 1996, arts. 513 and 514.
i8 Official website of the Iranian Judiciary, (accessed September 19,
2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 10
Detention without charge
ArticLe 32 of Iran's constitution requires that “charges with the reasons for
accusation must, without deLay, be communicated and expLained to the accused in
writing, and a provisionaL dossier must be forwarded to the competent judiciaL
authorities within a maximum of 24 hours.” 19 ArticLe 24 of the Code of CriminaL
Procedure also sets 24 hours as the limit within which authorities must provide a
detainee with a written reason “in cases where the detainee must be kept in
detention in order for authorities to continue their investigations. 20 ” Ordinarily,
Iranian Law requires a judge to authorize any pretriaL detention and provide written
charges within 24 hours of any arrest. 21 ArticLe 32 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
states that a judge may issue temporary detention orders for cases involving
offenses under the Security Laws, alLowing authorities to hoLd detainees without
charge beyond the 24-hour period. 22 ArticLe 3 3 of the code gives the accused the
right to appeaL his or her detention order within in days. 23 WhiLe ArticLe 3 3 aLso
states that the detainee's case must be resoLved in the course of one month, it aLso
aLLows the judge to renew the temporary detention order. 24 The codes set no limits on
how many times this order may be renewed. 25
InternationaL human rights Law does not specify a maximum aLLowable period of
detention before triaL. The ICC PR requires that “anyone arrested or detained on a
criminaL charge...shaLl be entitLed to trial within a reasonabLe time or to reLease. It
shalL not be the generaL ruLe that persons awaiting triaL shaLL be detained in custody,
but release may be subjected to guarantees to appear for triaL.2 6 For many of the
cases covered in this report, detainees have been heLd in largeLy incommunicado
19 constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted on October 24, 1979, amended on July 28, 1989, art. 32.
20 Islamic Penal code of Iran, art. 24.
21 Ibid. Islamic Penal code of Iran, art. 24.
22 code of the criminal Procedure for the Courts of General Jurisdiction and Revolutionary courts, Approved by the Islamic
consultative Assembly September 19, 1999, art. 32.
23 code of the criminal Procedure for the courts of General Jurisdiction and Revolutionary courts, Approved by the Islamic
consultative Assembly September 19, 1999, art. 33.
24 Ibid.
25 code of the Criminal Procedure for the Courts of GeneralJurisdiction and Revolutionary Courts, Approved by the Islamic
Consultative Assembly September 19, 1999.
26 ICCPR, art. 9(3).
11 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
detention during the pretrial investigation period. The government denied access to
lawyers during this period in all of the cases covered in this report, and in some
cases detainees, refused to allow little to any communication with family members
or other detainees.
Police and judiciary security forces often hold people under investigation for
suspected violation of the Security Laws, in pretrial investigative detention, for
weeks and months without any criminal charge being brought against them and
without the opportunity to appear before a judge to challenge their detention.
Detainees who are released without having been charged often fear being re-
arrested as a form of harassment. Several of the former detainees Human Rights
Watch interviewed for this report claimed that this process is a tactic the government
uses to create an atmosphere wherein activists fear that they may be re-arrested at
any time. According to these activists, the government deliberately maintains open
cases to intimidate its critics.
International human rights law prohibits arbitrary arrest. 27 An arrest or detention is
arbitrary when not carried out in accordance with the law, or if the law allows for the
arrest and detention of people for peacefully exercising their basic rights such as to
freedom of expression, association, and assembly. 28
Article 9 of the ICCPR states: “Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall
be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise
judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.” 29
Thus, the security exceptions in Article 32 of the Code of Criminal Procedures and the
ensuing articles allowing for the continued renewal of the order of temporary
detention violate the ICCPR's due process guarantees.
27 ICCPR, art. 9
28 According to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the deprivation of liberty is arbitrary when a case falls into three
categories: when there is no legal basis to justify the deprivation of liberty, when the deprivation of liberty violates certain
articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the ICCPR, and when international norms relating to the right to fair
trial are ignored or only partially observed. UN Commission on Human Rights, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention,
.
29 IICPR, art. 9( 3).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 12
Absence of access to counsel
The right to counsel is protected under international Law. The UN Working Group on
Arbitrary Detention expressed concern in its June 2003 report about Lack of access to
counsel in Iran. 3 ° ArticLe 3 of Iran's Constitution guarantees the right to counseL.31
However, the Code of CriminaL Procedure effectiveLy undermines this right. ArticLe
128 of the Code of CriminaL Procedure states that during the investigative phase of a
case, which may Last up to a month (though a judge may renew this detention phase
indefiniteLy), counseL may be denied “in cases where the issue has a secretive
aspect or the judge beLieves that the presence of anyone other than the accused may
lead to corruption.” 32 The articLe aLso states that for crimes invoLving national
security, “the presence of the Lawyer during the investigative stage takes pLace with
the permission of the court.” 33 According to Iranian Legal expert Mehrangiz Kar,
Article 128 effectiveLy aLLows the judge absoLute power to deny counseL during
investigations and interrogations. 34
The Iranian government has also taken legislative measures to reaffirm the denial of
the right to counseL at a judge's discretion. Article 133 of the Parliament's Fourth
Five-Year Economic, SociaL and Cultural DeveLopment Plan confirms the right to
counsel in alL stages of the trial process but repeats almost verbatim the caveat in
Article 128 that grants exception to “cases where the issue has a secretive aspect or
when the judge deems that the presence of anyone other than the court would lead
to corruption.” 35
The judiciary and police security forces routinely rely on these exceptions to deny
counseL to political detainees held for suspected breach of the Security Laws. As a
resuLt, and as documented below, not onLy does the government subject these
detainees to interrogation and detention for months on end, without charge, but they
30 Report of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, Visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran, E/cN.4/sub.2/2003/3/Add.2, June
27, 2003.
31 constitution of the Islamic RepubUc of Iran, adopted on October 24, 1979, amended on July 28, 1989, art, 35.
32 Ibid.
Ibid.
“ Mehrangiz Kar, “Defense Lawyers, Denied the Right to Defend,” website of Mehrangiz Kar, August , 2005,
http://www.mehrangizkar.net/archives/oooo23.php (accessed October 3, 2007).
Fourth Five-Year Economic, social and cultural Development Plan, passed by Parliament on May 2, 2004. art. 133.
13 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
frequently do so without granting them the support, oversight, or assistance of
counseL. Without the presence of counsel and the important measure of
accountability such a third party's presence provides, the investigations frequently
involve physical and psychoLogicaL abuse of detainees.
International law provides that access to counsel must be availabLe soon after
detention. 36 The Human Rights Committee has noted 48 hours as the limit during
which a detainee may be held without access to a lawyer. Exceptions in Iranian Law
that allow for the denial of counsel are in contravention of International standards.
Article 14 of the ICCPR guarantees the right of the accused to prepare a defense. 38
Human Rights Committee General Comment 13 states that under the ICCPR,
The accused must have adequate time and facilities for the preparation
of his defense and to communicate with counsel of his own
choosing... [ T]his subparagraph requires counsel to communicate with
the accused in conditions giving full respect for the confidentiality of
their communications. Lawyers should be abLe to counseL and to
represent their clients in accordance with their established professional
standards and judgment without any restrictions, influences, pressures,
or undue interference from any quarter. 39
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers states, “AlL arrested, detained or
imprisoned persons shall be provided with adequate opportunities, time and
facilities to be visited by and communicate and consult with a lawyer, without delay,
interception or censorship and in full confidentiality. Such consultations may be
within sight, but not within hearing, of law enforcement officials.” 4 ° In laws that allow
the government to deny certain detainees the right to counsel, and in practice
36 See, e.g., Human Rights committee, concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Georgia. 01/04/97.
CCPR/C/79/Add.75, paragraph 27; UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment, principle 17(1); Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, principle 1; UN Centre for Human Rights, “Human
Rights and Pre-Trial Detention,” June 1994, pp. 21-23.
Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee: Israel. 21/08/2003 CCPR/CO/78/ISR. (Concluding
Observations/Comments), para. 13.
38 ICCPR, art. 14(3).
UN doc. HRI?GEN/i/Rev.6 at 135 (2003), para.9.
40 Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, A/CON F.144/28/Rev.1 at 118 (1990), art. 8.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 14
regularly prohibiting security detainees the right to counsel, the Iranian government
breaches its obligations under international Law.
Incommunicado Detention
Detainees are commonly held for Long periods either incommunicado or largely
incommunicado. Incommunicado detention violates important rights of detainees,
including access to family and legal counsel, to be promptly brought before a judge,
and to be treated with humanity and dignity. 41 Incommunicado detention also
heightens concerns about torture and enforced disappearance. The UN Standard
Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners provides that: “An untried prisoner
shall be allowed to inform immediately his family of his detention and shall be given
all reasonable facilities for communicating with his family and friends, and for
receiving visits from them, subject only to restrictions and supervision as are
necessary in the interests of the administration of justice and of the security and
good order of the institution.” 42
The UN Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment on the prohibition against
torture, urged states to take action against incommunicado detention. 43 The UN
Commission on Human Rights repeatedly reaffirmed this position, stating in 2005
that “prolonged incommunicado detention or detention in secret places may
facilitate the perpetration of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment and can in itself constitute a form of such treatment.””
Safeguards against torture and ill-treatment not upheld
Iranian law prohibits torture and other mistreatment of all detainees during
interrogation or in custody, and makes no exception for Security Law detainees or
otherwise. Article 38 of Iran's constitution states that “all forms of torture for the
See lccPR, articLes io(i), 14(3), 17.
42 Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted Aug. 30, 1955, by the First United Nations congress on the
Prevention of crime and the Treatment of Offenders, U.N. Doc. A/cONF/6ii, annex I, E.S.c. res. 663c, 24 U.N. ESCOR Supp. (No.
i) at ii, U.N. Doc. E/3o48 (1957), amended E.S.C. res. 2076, 62 U.N. ESCOR Supp. (No. i) at 35, U.N. Doc. E/5988 (1977), Rule
92.
U.N. Human Rights committee, General comment No. 20, para. 1 1.
“U.N. commission on Human Rights, Resolution 2005/39, para. 9.
15 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
purpose of extracting confession or acquiring information are forbidden. Compulsion
of individuals to testify, confess, or take an oath is not permissible; and any
testimony, confession, or oath obtained under duress is devoid of value and
credence. Violation of this article is liable to punishment in accordance with the
law.” 45
In 2004, the head of Iran's Judiciary, Ayatollah Shah rudi, enacted the Citizens Rights
Law, which outlined detainee rights, reiterating some of these existing prohibitions. 46
The law also forbade certain additional specific practices, such as blindfolding
during interrogation, humiliating detainees, and interrogating detainees while sitting
behind the prisoner and/or otherwise obscuring the interrogator's face from view.
The Citizens Rights Laws helped reinforce the obligation of authorities to respect the
basic rights of detainees in all circumstances, regardless of the grounds for their
arrest.
Prohibitions on the abuse and mistreatment of detainees, for the purpose of
obtaining confessions or for no purpose at all, are also firmly enshrined in
international law.
The prohibition on the torture and other mistreatment of all persons in detention is
enshrined in international treaty law and is considered a fundamental principle
(peremptory norm) of customary law. Article 7 of the ICCPR states that “ [ n]o one shall
be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Article io states that “all persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with
humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” 47 Article 14
protects the right of every person “ [ n]ot to be compelled to testify against himself or
to confess guilt. 48 ”
Prohibitions on torture and other ill-treatment are also found in other international
documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention
Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, adopted on October 24, 1979, amended on July 28, 1989, art. 38.
46 Citizens Rights Law, ratified by parliament on April 19, 2004, amended and ratified by Parliament April 21, 2004.
“ ICCPR, art. lo.
48 ICCPR, art. 14.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 16
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the
UN Body of Principles for the Protection of ALL Persons under Any Form of Detention
or Imprisonment, and the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
Human Rights Watch has documented persistent violations of Iranian and
international legal prohibitions against the mistreatment of detainees during
interrogation and detention, including in Section 209 of Teh ran's Evin prison, which
features in this report. According to what detainees have revealed in public
documents and in statements made to Human Rights Watch, officials working with
the Ministry of In formation ignore, openly defy, or mock the prohibitions in Iran's
constitution, Code of Criminal Procedures, and Citizens Rights Law as well as Iran's
obligations under international law. Ministry of In formation agents routinely
blindfold detainees during interrogations that they carry out at all hours of the day
and often for Lengthy hours at a time. This report also documents allegations that
Ministry of Information interrogators and guards have beaten and verbally
humiliated detainees in order to obtain forced confessions.
The government has also defied Iran's own laws and international law by frequently
holding Security detainees in solitary confinement for extended periods of time. In
the last two years, the government has detained Iranian students, women's right's
activists, journalists, and independent scholars in solitary confinement, at times for
periods exceeding 200 days. This inhumane practice gravely subjects detainees to
lasting psychological damage
The laws governing the Prison Authority allow for disciplinary punishment of a
maximum of 20 days in solitary confinement. 49 International penal standards dictate
that solitary confinement should be imposed only for short periods, in an
individualized fashion, under strict supervision (including by a physician) and only
for legitimate penal reasons of discipline or preventive security. The UN Committee
on Human Rights in a general comment stated that “prolonged solitary confinement
ByLaws of the State Prisons and Security and corrective Measures Organization,
http://www. prisons.ir/fa/ PrisonsOrganN ewFormuatPart2. ph p#anchoroi (accessed September 21, 2007), art. 175.
17 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
of the detained or imprisoned person may amount to acts” of torture or cruet,
inhuman or degrading treatment. 5 °
The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted in its 2004 report on Iran that:
[ for the first time since its estabLishment, [ the Working Group] has been
confronted with a strategy of widespread use of solitary confinement for its
own sake and not for tradition at disciplinary purposes, as the Group noted
during its truncated visit to sector 209 of Evin prison. This is not a matter of a
few punishment cells, as exist in all prisons, but what is a “prison within a
prison” fitted out for the systematic, large-scale abuse of solitary confinement,
frequently for very tong periods.
It appears to be an established fact that the use ofthis kind of detention has
allowed the extraction of “confessions” followed by “public repentance” (on
television); besides their degrading nature, such statements are man ifestly
inadmissible as evidence. i.
The Working Group noted that “such absolute solitary confinement, when it is of a
tong duration, can be likened to inhuman treatment within the meaning of the
Convention Against Torture.”52
Administration of Detention Facilities
Iran's National Prison Bylaws mandate the State Prisons and Security and Corrective
Measures Organization (the “Prison Authority”) to oversee all of Iran's prisons and
correctional facilities. That organization itself falls under the direct supervision of the
Judiciary. 53
50 U.N. Human Rights corn mittee, General comment 20, Article 7, compilation of General comments and General
Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/i/Rev.i at 30(1994), para.6.
Report of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Visitto the Islamic Republlc of Iran,
E/CN.4/2004/3/Add.2, para s s, p. i .
52 Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, E/cN.4/2004/3/Add.2, para , p. i6.
53 Website of the State Prisons and Security and corrective Measures Organization, www. prisons.ir (accessed September 21,
2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 18
The Iranian Judiciary is a complex institution that often reflects the highly
faction alized power struggles within the Iranian government. Many of the activists
and former detainees interviewed for this report told Human Rights Watch of their
varied experiences with the judicial system. They described a Judiciary that is not
monolithic, with branches and authorities that may act in contradiction with one
another.
Human Rights Watch has in the past documented human rights violations originating
with the Judiciary. While the current head of Iran's Judiciary, Ayatollah Shahrudi, has
in the last several years introduced some reforms, his initiatives have not fulfilled
their potentials primarily because officials who defy Shah rudi's orders and Iran's
laws are rarely held accountable. For instance, despite his 2002 order banning
stoning as a form of punishment, court officials from the province of Qazvin stoned
to death a man convicted of adultery, Jafar Kiani, in July 2oo7. The same defiance
and lack of accountability is evident with respect to Iran's Citizens Rights Law, which
Shahrudi enacted in 2004. This report documents numerous instances where
Ministry of Information agents have openly defied these laws without being held
accountable by trial judges or other officials in the Judiciary. (The Citizens Rights
Laws are covered in detail in Chapter III.)
Article 24 of the Prison Bylaws states that “judicial, executive, intelligence, police, or
military organs are prohibited from having their own prisons and detention houses,”
and that the Prison Authority must oversee all detention and correctional facilities.
Despite these legal requirements, the government operates an undetermined
number of detention facilities that fall outside the auspices of the Prisons and
Security and Corrective Measures Organization. 56 These facilities are beyond any
explicit legislative authorization or oversight.
“ See “Iran: Prevent Stoning of condemned Mother,” Human Rights Watch news release, July ii, 2007,
https://www.hrw.org/publications 1 1/iran 16378.htm
citizens Rights Law, ratified by parliament on April 19, 2004, amended and ratified by Partiament April 21, 2004.
s6 Human Rights Watch has previously described illegal detention facilities in Iran in a June 2004 report. See Human Rights
Watch, “Like the Dead/n Their Coffins' Torture, Detention, andthe Crushing of Dissent in Iran, “vol. i6, no. 2(E), June 2004,
https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/irano óo4/index.htm.
19 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
Of the unauthorized detention centers that are known or suspected to exist in Iran,
Section 209 of Evin penitentiary is the best known. The Evin prison complex itself,
located in northern Tehran, is made up of several different detention units. In
addition to the holding units, workshops, and recreational areas designed for use by
the general prison populations, it contains buildings that are completely out of the
control of the Prison Authority. 57 Instead, overlapping authorities from the Judiciary,
the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps and the Ministry of Information variously use
Section 209 to detain “security prisoners.” Section 209 is not the only unit in Evin
Prison that fits this description. Evin Sections 240 and 325 Aleph are also known to
function as detention and interrogation units for security detainees outside the
purview of the Prison Authority. 58 A former detainee described Section 240 as a four-
story building with approximately 700 to 800 solitary cells. 59 The well-known
journalist and political activist Akbar Ganji, who was detained in Section 240, has
claimed that the Judiciary's Security Services (I-fefazat-e Etelaat-e Ghovey-e G/iazai-e),
a force affiliated with intelligence units of the Judiciary, controls the first floor of the
building, while the Police Security Forces occasionally use another section to detain
and interrogate “security detainees.” 60
By operating outside the supervision of the Prison Authority, the Ministry of
Information and police security forces are able to have control over all aspects of
detention, such as interrogation times, methods, and detainees' access to counsel,
phone calls, and visits. It also allows them to keep the status of detainees secret in
certain cases, such as during the investigative pretrial detention period when no
official charges have been brought.
Ibid., and Human Rights Watch interview with former detainee and student activist A u Afshari, February 26, 2007.
s8 Human Rights Watch interview with A u Afshari, February 26, 2007. In addition to units operated from prison grounds, such
as the ones inside the Evin complex, former prisoners have reported the existence of a number of detention centers at various
other locations, including army or Revolutionary Guards bases. Prison , also known as Eshraat-Abad, located on a base
belonging to the Revolutionary Guards corps, is one such detention center. Former Prison 59 detainee Fariba Davoudi Mohajer
provided Human Rights Watch with background information on the detention center and her experiences of solitary
confinement on its premises. Human Rights Watch interview with Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, Washington DC, March 8, 2007.
59 Human Rights Watch interview with Ali Afshari, February 26, 2007.
6 °Akbar Ganji, “Republican Manifesto, Book 2: Boycotting the PresidentiaL election, A step Toward democracy and Open
Society,” post to “Free Ganji” (blog), May 30, 2005, .
preface.html (accessed July i6, 2007). For further information on forces such as the Judiciary's Security Forces, see Human
Rights Watch, “Liketlie Dead/n The/c Coffins, “pp. 13-16.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 20
Under the administration of President Mohammad Khatami, Ahmadinajad's
immediate predecessor, Human Rights Watch documented how the Ministry of
Information deployed security forces and interrogators under their control to
intimidate critics with vague charges such as “disseminating Lies,” “insulting the
leader,” or “disturbing the public mind.” Authorities also occasionally brought
security charges as punishment for peaceful expressions of dissent, most notably
against students during protests in 1999 and 2003.61 Yet the period of the Khatami
administration was one of considerable reform. In 2001. various officials, such as
members of the Iranian parliament, attempted to investigate claims about the
existence of illegal detention centers, and the parliamentarians asked Ministry of
Information officials to allow them to inspect illegal detention units within Evin
complex. The Ministry gave them only partial access to the prison, and did not allow
them to view Section 209 or to meet with prisoners in that unit. 62
Nevertheless, after their inspection, the MPs demanded that the government close
down the unauthorized facilities inside Evin complex and elsewhere in the City of
Tehran. 63 Other than reports of the closure ofTowhid Prison, a detention center
where the government had held and tortured a number of activists in connection
with student protests in July 1999, the government did not heed the MPs' calts. 6 But
these calls for transparency and accountability were important steps towards
officially recognizing the violations of human rights inside Iran's illegal detention
centers.
The Ahmadinejad administration seems to have negated these small gains. The rise
in the number and rate of detentions in unauthorized detention centers indicate that
far from abandoning these practices, the government is increasingly relying on
arbitrary detention and abusive interrogation methods as part of a broad crackdown
on activities and forms of expression that they deem to be critical of the ruling
system. Moreover, Ali Akbar Mousavi Khoini, the MPwho led the demands for
6 iSee Human Rights Watch, “Like the Dead in Their Coffins, “pp. 27, 40, and Iran Threatens Revolutionary court Trials for
“Incitement,” Human Rights Watch news release, August 3, 1999, lo2 l.htm.
62 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with former parliamentarian (name withheld), February 12, 2007.
63
[ Ibid.] Human Rights Watch telephone interview with former parliamentarian (name withheld), February 12, 2007
64 . .
Ibid., and Human Rights Watch, Like the Dead in Their Coffins, p. 17.
21 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
visiting and closing the unauthorized detention centers, himself Eater spent more
than 130 days in Section 209 after being arrested in June 2006 for attending a
peacefuL protest forwomen's rights (see below). Much of that time was spent in
soLitary confinement. 65
Judging from the statements of former detainees who spoke to Human Rights Watch,
the Ministry of Information, which runs Evin 209 and is responsibLe for aLL those
detained and interrogated there, appears unmoved by appeaLs to Iran's laws and
internationaL obLigations. The actions and statements of the Ministry's personneL
(some of Latter are reproduced in Chapter V, beLow) indicate that they consider
themseLves above the Law, where they are accountable neither to the country's legal
codes nor to its citizens.
6 See “Iran: Police Assault Women's Rights Demonstrators,” Human Rights Watch news reLease, June 15, 2006,
https://www.hrw.org/engtish/docs/2006/o6/15/iran 13548.htm.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 22
IV. Targets of an Expanding Crackdown
The experiences of all detainees from the various civil society sectors featured in this
report have in common deprivation of the rights to freedom of speech, assembly and
association that led to their arbitrary arrest, violence accompanying arrest, torture
and ill-treatment in detention, and prosecution. All spent time spent in Evin 209.
Experiences in detention are described in the next chapter.
Most of the individuals featured in this report are no longer being detained. Court
authorities release detainees on bait without providing set trial dates or issue
suspended sentences in order to keep those detained under the constant threat of
re-arrest and renewed detention. These practices grant the government the
appearance of leniency in allowing activists to remain outside of prison. Yet freedom
in these instances is conditional, and the government always has the option to
threaten setting trial dates or activating suspended sentences in order to keep
activists in line.
The Women's Movement
In recent years, women's rights activists in Iran have been among the most organized
groups working toward improving the human rights situation of women, men, and
children in Iran. Over the past two years their activities have largely been in the form
of national campaigns, such as the One Million Signatures Campaign (a project to
raise generaL awareness about discriminatory laws against women and working to
change those laws), 66 the Campaign to End Stoning Forever, as well as smaller-scale
projects such as the campaign to allow women's attendance at national soccer
matches. Government authorities under the Ahmadinejad administration have not
responded well to the work of women's rights activists and have carried out their
own campaigns to silence and intimidate the movement's supporters.
Notwithstanding the constitutional protection of the right to peaceful assembly, the
Iranian government has variously attempted to deny this right to women activists by
66 Website of the One MitLion Signatures campaign, (accessed September 19, 2007).
23 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
refusing to issue permits, threatening organizers ahead of scheduled events, and
disrupting demonstrations and arresting attendees. A woman's rights activist told
Human Rights Watch,
There is a legislative directive about getting permits for
demonstrations, but it's used arbitrarily. Conservative groups that
gather in front of embassies don't need permits and don't have their
gatherings disrupted. But groups that are seen as critical of the
government, even when they have permits, are harassed. They close
our NGOs, and they don't give us permits to hold seminars in public
buildings. Sometimes they will give us a permit for a public gathering
and then revoke it at the last minute. Before our scheduled
demonstration ofJune 12, 2006, agents from the Ministry of
Information made threatening phone calls to organizers and regular
folks who had been receiving text message announcements and
warned them not to attend. We had to issue several public statements
that the gathering would be peaceful, but on the day of the event, the
police and security forces weren't even letting people stand together in
groups of two or three. 67
The wave of major crackdowns on the women's movement can be traced to the
summer of 2006. A pivotal event, the June 12 demonstration mentioned by the
activist quoted here, is detailed below.
The June 12, 2006 Demonstration and its Aftermath
A broad coalition of activists put out a call for a June12 peaceful demonstration in
Seventh Tir Square in Tehran to ask for changes to laws that discriminate against
women. The demonstrators had not obtained a permit, arguing that the government
denied permits on political grounds and that Article 27 of the Constitution
guaranteed their right to peaceful assembly. 68 That day prior to the start of the
demonstration at Seventh Tir Square, police and security forces arrived to prevent
67 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with women's rights activist (name withheld), August 14, 2007
68 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with women's rights activist (name withheLd), October 30, 2007
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 24
participants from joining the event, and forcibly disbanded the crowds that were
gathering. 69 In her blog, journalist and women's rights activist Asieh Amini, who was
attending the protest, described how police and security forces attacked the
demonstrators:
They said, “Get up.” We said, “We're not doing anything, we're just
sitting here.” They said, “Get up!” We said, “Sitting in a park isn't a
crime!” They said, “We're telling you nicely to get up or else...” And
that was all the time we had for conversation. We didn't have anything
to say to each other and both sides knewthis. Then they hit us,
meaning, “We're not joking!” And those of us sitting and standing said,
“Why?!” They kicked us out of the park, with force and beatings. We
started walking around the park calmly and peacefully. They kicked us
out and beat us. Someone yelled, “Shame on you; I'm your mother.”
The response was, “I don't have a shrew like you for a mother!” and
she pushed her so hard that the crowd yelled in protest. We left—they
took us—to the other side of the park. We picked up the signs we had
made that said “change anti-women laws” and “We want the rights of
a full human being.” We started chanting, “We are women, humans,
but we have no rights” and “Oh woman, oh presence of life...” This
time they started hitting us from all sides. And they weren't just men.
There were women with chadors who yelled, “Don't argue with the
police,” and then when there were arguments, insults and kicks would
ensue from beneath those chadors. 7 °
On June 14, a spokesperson for the Judiciary confirmed that the security forces had
arrested 42 women and 28 men on charges of “participation in an illegal
assembly.” 71 All of these were detained in Evin 209. Authorities released from pretrial
detention all but one of the 7° detainees by July i8 (Ali Akbar Mousavi Khoini, the
parliamentarian mentioned above, was the only prisoner who was not released. He
69 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with women's rights activist (name withheld), August 14, 2007.
70 Asieh Amini, “The Sound of Women's Freedom is Very close,” post to “Varesh” (blog), June 12, 2006,
http://varesh. blogfa. com/post-213.aspx (accessed July 18, 2007).
71 “Iran: Police Assault Women's Rights Demonstrators,” Human Rights Watch News Release, June 15, 2006,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/o6/ 15/iran 13548.htm
25 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
spent an additional 130 days in Evin 209, much of that time in solitary confinement,
before authorities released him in October).72 However, the charges against the
detainees remained outstanding, and the judiciary proceeded to prosecute some of
the demonstration's organizers.
The Sixth Branch of the Revolutionary Court set March 4, 2007, as the date to try five
prominent women's rights activists who had played a rote in planning the
demonstration: Noushin Ahmadi Khorasani, Parvin Ardalan, Shah la Entesari, Fariba
Davoudi Mohajer, and Sussan Tahmasebi. On the day of the March 4 hearing,
supporters of the women gathered peacefully outside the courthouse in protest of
the continuing harassment of the activists. Security forces violently broke up the
gathering, arrested 33 of the demonstrators, including the four women who had
shown up for their court date, and transferred them to Evin 209.
By March 8, authorities had released alt but two of the women, Shadi Sadr and
Mahbubeh Abbasgholizadeh, who remained in [ yin 209 until their release on March
19, having spent the period March 6-is in solitary con finement 74 (authorities also
placed Shah la Entesari in solitary confinement, from the first day of her arrest on
March 4).75 All were released on bail ranging from the equivalent of US$50,000 to
$200,000.76 The March 4 trial was abandoned, but as the following sections
document, the government prosecuted and convicted many women's rights activists
on security charges.
On April i, 2007, Mahboubeh Hosseinzadeh and Nahid Keshavarz, who had been
among the 33 arrested in March, were arrested by security forces along with two
72 “Mousavi Khoini Freed,” Iranian Student News Agency, October 22, 2006 (accessed August io, 2007).
“Iran: Release Women's Rights Advocates,” Human Rights Watch news release, March 9, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o3/o7/iran15452.htm. One of the women, Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, was outside Iran at the
time of the hearings.
“ “Shadi Sadr and Mahboubeh Abasgholizadeh Released Today,” Meydean, March 19, 2007,
http://www.meydaan.com/ English/showarticle.aspxi'arid=214&cid=52 (accessed August 17, 2007).
“Eight Women Released, 24 Women on Hunger Strike, One in Solitary confinement,” Meydaan, March 6, 2007,
http://www.meydaan.com/ English/news.aspx?nid=211 (accessed July 17, 2007).
76 “Brief Interview with Parastoo Dokouhakie After Release,” Meydaan, March 7,2007,
http://www.meydaan.com/ English/news.aspx?nid=229”$200,000 bail for Mahboubeh Abbasgholizadeh and Shadi Sadr,”
Meydaan, March i6, http://www.meydaan.com/English/news.aspx?nid=281 (both accessed July 17, 2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 26
other women and a man as they prepared to collect signatures in Laleh Park in
support of the One Million Signatures Campaign. After a hearing at a branch of the
Revolutionary Court, officials released the other three detainees on April 3, but they
transferred Hosseinzadeh and Keshavarz to Evin Prison—this time to the women's
general ward, not Section 209—on unknown charges pursuant to a judicially
authorized temporary detention order. 77 They were released 13 days after their
arrest. 78 It is likely that the charges against them remain outstanding.
On April 13, Asieh Amini, Shahla Entesari, Farideh Entesari, Nahid Entesari, Rezvan
Moghaddam, and Azadeh Forghani responded to a summons. Officials interrogated
them about their participation in the March 4 peaceful protest in front of the
courthouse, and the court charged them with “illegally assembling to act against
national security,” disobeying the police,” and “disturbing the general order.”
Azadeh Forghani received a two-year suspended sentence, and Shah Ia Entesari
received a three-year sentence, two-and-a-half years of which are suspended for five
years. 7 9
On April 17, the Special Security branch of Teh ran's Public Prosecutor's office issued
additional summonses against other women who had participated in the March 4
gathering: Parvin Ardalan, Noushin Ahmadi, Maryam Mirza, Elnaz Ansari, Nasreen
Afzali, and Zara Amjadian. 8 ° That same day, the Sixth Branch of the Revolutionary
Court in Iran also handed down sentences fortwo of the women who had been
arrested during the June 12, 2006 demonstration in Seventh Tir Square: Soosan
Tahmasebi received a sentence of two years in prison, one—and-a-half years of which
was suspended. The court sentenced Fariba Mohajer Davoodi in absentia to four
years in prison, one year of which is suspended. 81 Mohajer Davoodi was in the United
77 ”Iran: Release Women's Rights Activists,” Human Rights Watch news reLease, ApriL 7, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o4/o7/iran15668.htm.
78 “Two Iranian Women Activists Released; ii Others Summoned to Revolutionary court,” cam paign website for the One
Million Signatures campaign, April 18, 2007, . php?article6 (accessed August io, 2007).
“Unexpected Sentence for Delaram Ali, Women's Rights Defender,” website of the One Million Signatures for change
Campaign, July 3, 2007, http://weforchange.info/english/s pip. php?articleio8, (accessed July io, 2007).
So “11 Women's Rights Activists Summoned to Court,” Cooya Newsletter, April 17, 2007,
(accessed April 19, 2007).
8i, . . ,
Heavy Sentences for Faruba Davoudu Mohajer and Sussanlahmasebu, IranianLaborNewsAgency, Apruli8, 2007.
27 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
States visiting family at the time of her trial, and she has remained in the United
States after the court handed down its sentence. 82
On July 2, Delaram Au, a 24-year-old sociology student and member of the Campaign
for One Million Signatures, responded to a summons from Branch 15 of the
Revolutionary Court by inquiring why she had been called to appear. Apparently in
punishment for her challenging inquiry, the court handed down a sentence of two-
and—a-half years in prison and io lashes for participating in the peaceful gathering
ofJune 12, 2006.” 83 On November 4, an appeals court in Tehran upheld her
conviction on charges of on charges of “acting against national security” and
“advertising against the system” and reduced her sentence by only four months. 84
Union and Labor Activists
Over the last several years, Iranian workers have challenged government-controlled
labor organizations by setting up independent unions in a range of industries
throughout the country. The rise and popularity of independent labor unions among
workers has alarmed the government, which has attempted to curtail the movement
by arresting labor activists and disrupting public gatherings -- but not by addressing
workers' grievances. The poor state of the domestic economy and its impact on
Iran's nearly 20-million-strong labor force have meant that workers continue to be
drawn toward independent organizing.
In response, the Iranian government has increasingly harassed and arbitrarily
arrested members of the Iranian labor force who have spoken out and organized for
improving the situation of workers in Iran. Authorities have detained independent
labor leaders and ordinary workers in [ yin 209, where they have treated them as
security prisoners and denied them access to lawyers or family visits. The continuing
persecution of labor union leader Mansour Ossanlu and a March 2007 crackdown on
82 Human Rights Watch interview with Fariba Davoudi Mohajer, Washington DC, March 8, 2007.
83 “Unexpected Sentence for Delaram All, Women's Rights Defender,” One Million Signatures for Change Campaign, July 3,
2007, http://www.weforchange.info/engLish/spip.php?articleio8, (accessed July io, 2007)
84 “Delaram ALl to Receive Lashings and Serve Prison Term of Two Years and Six Month,” One Million Signatures for Change
Campaign, November 4, 2007, http://www.we4change.info/english/s pip.ph p?articlei6o (accessed November 5, 2007) and
“Shahrudi Can Revoke the Conviction: Interview with Delaram Ali's Lawyer, Shirin Ebadi, “ Roozonline, November 5, 2007,
, (Accessed November 5, 2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 28
protesting teachers throughout the country stand out as indicators of labor's
increased persecution under the Ahmadinejad administration. Both are detailed
below.
Mansour Ossanlu
Mansour Ossanlu leads the executive committee of the Syndicate of Workers of
Vahed Bus Company, an independent union. Ossanlu's first of several arrests
occurred on December 22, 2005. At that time, Ossanlu and the union had called on
bus drivers to refuse passengers' fares in order to protest working conditions. On
December 22 police arrested him without a warrant at his home and transferred him
to Evin 209.85 In order to prevent a strike that workers were planning to stage on
January 28, 2006 in protest of Ossanlu's continued detention, security forces also
preemptively detained hundreds of drivers and several union organizers. 86 On
January 26, security and Information forces also arrested the union's board of
directors. They held all of the detainees in Evin prison Section 209 until various
dates in March but never officially charged them, pursuant to Article 32 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, entitling security forces to indefinitely detain people without
charge for investigation of violations of the Security Laws, and never granted them
access to their lawyers. 87 Ossanlu remained in Evin 209 until his release on August 6,
2006.88
Authorities again arrested Ossanlu without charge on November 19, 2006, and
detained him in Evin 209 until December . This time, during the three weeks of his
detention, he spent ii. days in solitary confinement. 8
8 ”Iran: Release Workers Arrested for Strike,” Human Rights Watch news release, February i, 2006,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/ol/31/iranl258l.htm
86 Ibid
87 Ibid
88 .
Ossanlu Freed on Bail, BBCPersianNewsService, August 9, 2006,
http://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2006/o8/o6o8o9_mv-osanloo.shtml, (accessed Juty 18, 2007).
89 Ibid.
29 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
After his first arrest in December 2005, authorities set a bait of the equivatent of
US$i o,ooo. ° After his second arrest, he was forced to pay an addition at bait of
US$30,000.
In an interview after his December retease, Ossantu described how security agents
abused him at the time of his arrest:
After [ being] arrest [ ed] and white in the car of the security peopte, I
received dozens of btows on my head, face, and body. They squeezed
my neck with a handkerchief untit I thought I woutd suffocate. A
person named [ name redacted], who was a captain in the security
apparatus in the anti-narcotic section (I recognized him from an
identity card I had seen a year previousty), was in charge of these
operations against me. They tore my coat and putted it over my head.
They kept pounding me over the head with fists that had targe agate
rings white saying, “pack your bags and teave this ptace.” Att these
were to create fear and trepidation in me so that I woutd resign from
the syndicate. 91
On Juty 10, 2007, ptainctothes officers once again beat and arrested Ossantu as he
was getting off of a bus near his home. 92 After Ossantu's Juty 2007 detention, Hassan
Hadad, the security deputy at the Tehran Prosecution Office, denied that Ossantu
was arrested for workers' movement activities and ctaimed that he was detained for
“distributing teaflets against the order.” 93
On October 30, an appettate court in Tehran upheld a February 24, 2007 ruting by
Branch 14 of the Revotutionary Court that had sentenced Ossantu to a five-year
suspended prison term on charges of “acting against national security” and
90 “Ossanlu Freed on BaiL,” BBCPersian News Service.
91 “Interview with Mansur Ossantu, Head of Greater Tehran United Bus corn pany Union,” Iran Workers' Bulletin, ApriL 2007,
. htni (accessed July 23, 2007).
92
Ossanlu Arrested on Vahed cornpany Bus, EtemadMeIiNewspaper JuLy i , 2007,
www.roozna.corn/Negaresh_site/FuLLyStory/?Id-41835 (accessed JuLy 20, 2007).
“Ossantu Accused of ‘distributing Leaflets against the order,” BBCPersian Service, August 12, 2007,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/ iran/story/2007/o8/o7o812_ka-hddad.shtrnt (accessed August 13, 2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 30
“propaganda against the system.” 94 After the ruling of the appellate court, the
authorities transferred Ossanlu from Evin 209, where they were holding him since his
July arrest, to the general holding units of Evin prison. To date he remains there.
March 2007 Teachers Protest
In March, teachers in numerous cities throughout Iran organized demonstrations to
call for equity in pay and benefits with other governmental employees. On March 3,
2007, teachers in Tehran staged a peaceful gathering in Tehran in front of the Iranian
parliament in order to protest governmental neglect of the wage and benefits
situation of teachers. The demonstrations in front of the parliament continued for
two weeks until March 14, when riot police and security forces arrested hundreds of
the protesting teachers. 96 Arrests continued through mid-April. 9 7 Dozens of the
teachers arrested in this sweep were detained in Evin 209. Many remained in pretrial
detention in Evin 209 for up to 60 days, without any formal charge against them. 98
In an open letterto the head of Iran's Judiciary on April 26, the wives of four of the
imprisoned teachers, Ali Akbar Baghani, Mohammad Taghi Fallahi, Seyyed
Mahmoud Bagheri, and Ali Safar Montejabi, expressed their concern over the
treatment of their husbands and the violation of their rights:
On March 20, a member of parliament quoted you as having said that
participation in legal gatherings and asking for teachers' rights is the
right of the people and a manifestation of democracy. Yet despite your
order to free them, nine of them have spent their [ Iranian] New Year's
vacation in prison, and incredibly, the wave of arresting teachers has
continued in the new year.... Honorable Ayatollah Shahrudi we are
“Five Year Sentence for Ossanlu confirmed,” BBC Persian News Service, October30, 2007,
. co.uk/persian/iran/story/2007/ lo/o7 lo3o_ka-osanlou.shtml (accessed October 31, 2007)
Ibid.
96 “Iran: Release Detained Teachers,” Human Rights Watch news release, April 14, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o4/ 14/iran 15693.htm.
“Iran: Release Detained Teachers,” Human Rights Watch news release, April 14, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o4/ 14/iran 15693.htm.
98 “Some of the Teachers Who Have until Now Paid a Heavy Price for their Cry for Justice,” website of the Trade Association of
Tehran-Iran Teachers, July 30, 2007, 1.aspx (accessed July 31, 2007).
31 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
citizens ofthis country, and we are Muslims too. Some of our
husbands are veterans of the Holy Defense [ 198os Iran-Iraq war] and
the revolution. Our husbands are teachers. We ask your Excellency to
order that their legal rights be respected. We and our children have the
right to know where our loved ones are being held, the conditions of
their detention, and the charges against them. Our husbands have not
even been granted the rights of ordinary prisoners. 99
The authorities eventually released all of the teachers on bail of the equivalent of
US$30,000—huge sums for teachers who had been protesting for a living wage. 10 °
In June and July branches of Revolutionary Courts throughout Iran sentenced
protesting teachers on charges such as “disrupting the general order” and
“gathering and organizing to disrupt the national security of the country.” 101 In
August, a branch of the Revolutionary Court in Tehran sentenced Ali Reza Hashemi,
the superintendent of the Iranian Teachers Organization, to a three-year suspended
prison sentence on charges of “provoking teachers to gather and organizing to
disrupt the national security of the country.” 102 The government has also punished
other teachers by transforming them to teaching positions in other cities or
suspending them from service. 103
Students
Students, recent graduates, and individuals with ties to legally registered student
and alumni activist organizations have been facing the same pattern of
governmental attack as those endured by women's rights activists and workers.
Tracing the persecution of students since July 2005, one month before Ahmadinejad
“Families of Detained Teachers Seek Justice from Mr. Shahrudi: ‘We Have No News about our Husbands' Situation,”
website of the Trade Association of Tehran-Iran Teachers, April 27, 2007,
(accessed August i, 2007).
100 “Some of the Teachers Who Have until Now Paid a Heavy Price for their cry for Justice,” website of the Trade Association of
Tehran-Iran Teachers, July 30, 2007, http: //ksmt3.blogfa. com/post-2o1.as px (accessed July 31, 2007).
101 “Will these charge cause the Teachers to Stop Their Demands?” website of the Teachers Trade Association of Iran, August
15, 2007, http://ksmt3.blogfa.com/post/219 (accessed August 16, 2007).
102 Ibid.
103 Ibid.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 32
took office, Human Rights Watch documented in October 2006 the cases of 35
student activists whom the Judiciary sentenced to prison terms or fined for political
activity that the government characterized as “acting against national security.” 104
Human Rights Watch has also documented persecution of student activists on
similar charges prior to the Ahmadinejad administration, most notably following the
1999 student protests. 105
On August 19, 2006, authorities arrested two recent university graduates, Abolfaz l
Jahandar and Kheirollah Derakhshandi. 106 Nearly a month later, on September 18,
authorities arrested university instructor and activist Kayvon Ansari outside his
home. 107 Agents of the Ministry of Information detained all of the men without charge
and interrogated them in Evin 209. In February 2007 the Sixth Branch of the
Revolutionary Court sentenced each of them to between two and three years of
imprisonment on charges of “acting against national security,” “meeting and
colluding to undermine national security,” and “insulting officials.” On April 4, 2007,
the three appealed their cases to Branch 32 of Teh ran's Appellate Court. 108 On
September 13, the appellate court ordered the release of Kayvon Ansari, but the
cases ofJahandar and Derakhshandi are still pending appeals. 109
As they did with workers and women's rights activists, authorities intensified their
harassment of students and student-affiliated activists in the spring and summer of
2007. From May through July, Ministry of Information officials arrested over 20
104 Human Rights Watch, Iran — Denyingthe Right to Education, October 19, 2006,
https://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/mena/iranioo6/.
105 Human Rights Watch has previously described illegal detention facilities in Iran in Human Rights Watch, “Like the Dead in
Their Cofflns' Torture, Detention, andthe Crushing of Dissent in Iran, “vol. 16, no. 2(E), June 2004, pp. 31-43,
https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/irano6o4/index.htm.
10ó Iran: Arbitrary Arrest/Fear for Safety/Possible Prisoners of conscience,” Amnesty International, October 3, 2006,
131 162oo6 (accessed March i, 2007). Amnesty also noted in this report that
on July 9, 2006, authorities arrested independent human rights activist Kayvon Rail without charges and transferred him to
Evin prison.
107 Ibid.
loB “The cases of Three Student Activists Kayvon Ansari, Saeed Derakhshandi, and Abolfazl Jahandar Sent to Appellate
court,” Gooya Newsletter, . php (accessed April 6, 2007).
109 “Dr. Kayvon Ansari is Free,” Advaar Student News Service, September 13, 2007,
ews.us/university/5792.aspx (accessed September 14, 2007)
33 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
students and activists on charges under the Security Laws, including “acting against
national security” and “colluding against the order.” 11 °
They also arrested eight student editors and activists for allegedly “insulting state
leaders,” “inciting public opinion,” and “printing inflammatory and derogatory
materials” in student publications at Amir Kabir University.hh l Article 514 of the
Islamic Penal Code sets a punishment of six months to two years of imprisonment for
anyone who insults Ayatollah Khomeini or the person currently occupyingthe
position of Supreme Leader. 112 Article 698 of the Islamic Penal Code sets a sentence
of two months to two years 0 74 lashes for “printing lies in order to incite public
opinion.” 113 According to a student activist at the university who spoke to Human
Rights Watch, students had immediately stated that they had no part in the
publications, which appeared on April 30, 2007:
As soon as the publications appeared, the editors of the four papers,
Rivar, SarKhat, Sahar, and At/ye/i, announced that the copies were
faked and denied that they had any role in producing them. They went
to the office of the Executive Administrator of the University, Alireza
Rahayee, to ask for an investigation into the matter, but university
security forcefully prevented them from doing so. In the following days,
the students denied their connection to the publications in a number
of gatherings. 4
The government went forward with issuing arrest and search warrants for the eight
students. 115 Three of them—Majid Tavakoli, Ahmad Chasaban, and Ehsan Mansouri—
were eventually prosecuted (the other five were released),h1 6 and on October 3, 2007,
110 “Iran: Jailed Students Abused to Obtain Forced confessions,” Human Rights Watch news release, July 27, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o7/27/iran l65 l2.htm.
111 1bid.
112 Islamic Penal code of Iran, Article 514.
113 Islamic Penal code of Iran, Article 698.
114 .
Human Rights Watch email correspondence with student activist (name withheld), July 25, 2007.
Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with student activist (name withheld), August 17, 2007.
116 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with student activist (name withheld), August 17, 2007, and
“Letter From Five of the Freed Students to the Organization for the Defense of the Prisoners Rights, the Islamic commission for
“YOU CAN DETAiN ANYONE FOR ANYTHiNG” 34
Branch 6 of the Revolutionary Court sentenced them to three, two-and-a-half, and
two years of imprisonment, respectively.
On JuLy 9, 2007, six students from Amir Kabir University staged a peaceful sit-in in
commemoration of the anniversary of student protests in 1999 that the government
had violently suppressed.11 8 They were also expressing their objection to the
continued detention of their classmates held in connection with the allegedly
inflammatory publications. According to reports from activists, police and
plainclothes officers forcefully disrupted the demonstration, arresting the six and
transferring them to Evin 209.119
The six protesting students were members of the Central Council of the Office to
Foster Unity, the main reformist student organization in Iran. 1 2 ° Later on the same
morning of their arrests, authorities arrived at the Office of the Alumni Association of
Iran, which is associated with the Office to Foster Unity. Plainclothes officers fired
bullets into the air before they forcefully entered the premises and arrested io
students and activists there. 121
Sources in Iran who have been in touch with the families of the students and
activists detained on July19 told Human Rights Watch that the Ministry of
Information was holding them in solitary confinement and pressuring them to
confess to acts they have not committed, such as being connected to forces outside
the country and planning to implement a “soft revolution” in Iran. These reports
indicate that authorities may be attempting to build charges of “espionage” and
Human Rights, and the Organization for the Defenders of Human Rights,” Amir Kabir 1JniversityNewsIetter August 19, 2007,
http://autnews.info/archives/1386, 05,0004510 (accessed August 20, 2007).
“The Handing Down of Heavy Sentences for Three Polytechnic Students,” Website of Advaar Tahkeem Vabdat, October 3,
2007, http://www.advarnews.us/university/59o7.aspx (accessed October io, 2007).
118 The Iranian Judiciary's closure of a reformist newspaper triggered student protests on the Tehran University campus on July
8, 1999 ( 18th of Tir in the Iranian calendar). After a peaceful student demonstration, police and plainclothes security forces
raided a dormitory, beating students and trapping many in their rooms. Protests then erupted beyond the university, growing
to a weeklong event. More than 25,000 people eventually participated in the protests, making it the largest political
demonstration since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
119 “Iran: Jailed Students Abused to Obtain Forced confessions,” Human Rights Watch news release, July 27, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2 007/o7/27/iran l6 s l2.htm
120 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with student activist (name withheld), July 25, 2007
121 Ibid.
35 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
“acting against national security” against the detainees, which can carry heavy
prison sentences. The cases fit the broader pattern of persecuting independent
social and political activists whom the government perceives as critics. 122
The government has released all of the students and activists arrested in May and
July of 2007, with the exception of Majid Tavakoli, Ahmad Ghasaban, and Ehsan
Mansouri, whose prosecution and conviction is mentioned above.
Independent journaLists, Scholars, and Activists
Many of the people detained since the inauguration of the Ahmadinejad
administration are associated with broadly defined movements, such as student
groups, women's rights campaigns, or independent labor organizations. Yet the
government also has targeted independent scholars, journalists, and activists who
do not directly affiliate themselves with any of these movements, arbitrarily arresting
and detaining them in Evin 209 and subsequently accusing them on familiar charges
of being “spies,” having “relationships with foreigners,” “receiving funds from
foreigners,” and “acting against national security.”
Ayatollah Kazemi Boroujerdi
The authorities have targeted Islamic clerics who are critical of the government's
policies. On October 8, 2006, authorities arrested Ayatollah Kazemi Boroujerdi at his
house in Tehran and transferred him to Evin 209.123 Boroujerdi espouses an
interpretation of Islam that calls for the separation of religion and politics.124 On
October in, two days after police arrested Boroujerdi, the semi-official Kayhan
newspaper ran an article entitled, “Propagating Islam with the Assistance of the BBC
and CIA,” accusing the cleric of working as an agent of foreign institutions. 125 In June
2007 Boroujerdi appeared before the Special Clerical Court, but the authorities have
122 . .
Human Rights Watch email correspondence with student activist (name withheld), July 25, 2007.
123 “Iran Arrests controversial cleric,” BBCNews Online, October 8, 2006,
(accessed July 17, 2007).
124 Ibid.
125 “Further Information on Arbitrary Arrest! Fear for Safety! Possible Prisoners of Conscience,” Amnesty InternationaL, October
13, 2006, http: web.amnesty.org!library!index!ENGMDE1312o2oo6?open&of=ENG-IRN (accessed July 17, 2007).
“YOU CAN DETAiN ANYONE FORANYTHiNG” 36
not clarified the exact nature of his charges and his sentence.12 6 (Ayatollah Khomeini
established the Special Clerical Courts in 1987 to try clerics accused of committing
crimes. 127 These courts are overseen directly by the Supreme Leader rather than the
Judiciary; critics have claimed that is the government uses it to punish clerics it
views as challenging the ruling order.12 8 ) Boroujerdi is imprisoned in Section 209 of
Evin Prison.129
A/i Farahbakhsh, Ha/e l i Esfandiarl, and Klan Tajbakhsh
The cases of journalist Ali Farahbakhsh as well as Iran ian-American scholars Haleh
Esfandiari and Kian Tajbakhsh exemplify a pattern of detention and interrogation
that has become commonplace in Iran during the two years of Ahmadinejad's
administration.
On November 26, 2006, the security forces in Tehran detained Ali Farahbakhsh, a
journalist and economist, one week after he had returned from a conference for
journalists held in India. Farahbakhsh, who has no known history of political or
social activism, was an independent researcher of economics and had previously
worked as the editor of the economic section of the newspaper Sarmaye/ 3 ° The fact
that Farahbakhsh was not engaged in any political writing or activities prior to his
arrest made his case particularly puzzling.
Farahbakhsh had spent the week prior to his detention in daily interrogation
sessions that lasted until late at night, when authorities would take him back home.
Farahbakhsh's family told Human Rights Watch that during the first week of
interrogations when agents from the Ministry of In formation allowed him to return
126 Golnaz Esfandiari, “Iran: Reports of Death Sentence Spark concern over Ayatollah's Fate,” Radio Free Europe, July 3, 2007.
https://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/ 2007/o7/39ceo27c-2184-46f9-992a-e75 lf500d35c.html (accessed July 18, 2007).
t27 Wilifried Buchta, Who Rules Iran: The Structure of Powerin the Islamic Republic of Iran(Washington, DC: Washington
Institute for Near East Policy, 2001), p. 19.
128
Ibid, p. 97.
129 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Ayatollah Boroujerdi follower (name withheld), September 23, 2007.
130 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with journalist Omid Memarian, February 20, 2007, and “Ali Farahbaksh
Sentenced to Three Years in Jail,” BBC Persian News Service, May i , 2007,
http://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2007/o5/o7o515_ka-farahbakhsh.shtrnl (accessed July18, 2007).
37 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
home at the end of the day, they pressured him to sign confessions admitting to the
charges of “espionage” that they wouLd Later bring against h im.fh
The authorities did not announce any formal charges during the interrogations or
upon his subsequent arrest and transfer to Evin prison, where he spent 44 days in
solitary confinement in Section 209. In interviews with the press and multipLe Letters
to AyatoLlah Shahrudi, the head of Iran's Judiciary, Farahbakhsh's famiLy expressed
their concern about his deteriorating heaLth and Lack of proper medicaL care in
prison. 132 On February 4, 2007, over two months after Farahbakhsh's arrest, his
lawyer, Sayyed Mahmoud Alizadeh Tabatabayee, said in reports to the Iranian Labor
News Agency that the government had charged his cLient with “espionage,” but had
denied him the opportunity to examine Farahbakhsh's case file. Tabatabayee met
his cLient for the first time on the first day of the March triaL.
On March 26, Branch Six of Iran's Revolutionary Court sentenced Farahbakhsh to a
three-year prison term on charges of “espionage” and “taking money from
foreigners. 133 It appears that he may have been charged under Article o8 of the
IsLamic PenaL Code, which states that “whoever colLaborates in any way with a group
or hostile foreign sources against the Islamic RepubLic of Iran” may be sentenced to
one to ten years in prison. 134 The Law does not specificalLy define what counts as
collaboration or what constitutes working against the government.
After 318 days in prison, 45 ofwhich were spent in solitary confinement, the
authorities reLeased Farahbaksh on September 2 6.13s
HaLeh Esfandiari, a 67-year old dual Iranian and American citizen who heads the
MiddLe East program at the Woodrow WiLson International Center for SchoLars in
131 . .
Iran: Activists Barred from TraveLing Abroad, Human Rights Watch news release, February 8, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o2/o8/iran15283.htm.
132 Iranian Association of Journalists, “Second Letter from the Family of Farahbakhsh to the Head of the Judiciary,” May i ,
2007, (accessed May 17, 2007).
133 . . . .
Ali Farahbaksh Sentenced to Three Years in Jail, BBC Persian News Service.
134 IsLamic Penal code of Iran, Article o8.
135 . . .
Journalist Ali Farahbakhsh Freed from Prison, Gooya Newsletter, September 27, 2007,
https://news.gooya.com/politics/archives/2oo7/1o/o63733.php (accessed September 27, 2007).
“YOU CAN DE TAiN ANYONE FOR ANYTHiNG” 38
Washington, DC, traveled to Iran in December 2006 to visit her ailing 93-year-old
mother. Prior to her planned departure from Iran on December 30, armed and
masked men stopped her taxi and seized both of her passports. Iranian authorities
did not return her passports and instead subjected her to repeated and protracted
interrogation sessions.13 6
On May 8, officials at the Ministry of Information arrested Esfandiari without warrant
and later accused her of “furthering the interests of foreign powers,” “espionage,”
“planning the soft overthrow of the government,” and “acting against national
security. 137 They transferred her to Evin, where they placed her in solitary
confinement in Section 209 and denied her access to her lawyer and family visits. 138
Esfandiari's case received wide international media attention, and human rights
organizations around the world protested her detention. 139 On August 21. the
authorities released her on US$300,000 bail. 14 ° On September 2, Ministry of
Information agents returned Esfandiari's passport, and she returned to the United
States on September 7,141 However, the government's case against Esfandiari
remains open.
According to statements by both Esfandiari's family and her employers at the
Woodrow Wilson Center, Esfandiari's interrogators had pressured her to implicate
136 “Iran: End Harassment of Dual Nationals,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 31, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o5/31/iran l6o25.htm.
137 “Iran: cancel Televised ‘confessions,” Human Rights Watch news release, July i8, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o7/18/iran l64 l4.htm.
138 Ibid.
139 Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the committee of concerned Scientists, and the Nobel Women's Initiative
were among the groups that called for the release of Haleh Esfandiari. Further details can be found on the website of the
campaign to Free Haleh Esfandiari, http://www.freehaleh.org/ (accessed August 17, 2007). A group of women senators from
the United States wrote a letter asking the UN to pressure Iran into releasing Haleh Esfandiari. See “Women Senators call on
the UN to Press Iran for Immediate Release of Haleh Esfandiari and Parinaz Azima,” website of Senator Hillary Rodham clinton,
May 18, 2007, http://www.senate.gov/—clinton/news/statements/record.cfm?id=274751 (accessed September 19, 2007).
Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi also called on the UN Human Rights council to work for her release. See “Iran's
Ebadi complains to UN Over Detained US-Iranian,” Agence France-Presse, August 6, 2007,
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/o7o8o6/world/iran_usjustice_rights_37 (accessed September 19, 2007).
140 “court Official Says that Haleh Esfandiari Freed, Most Likely the Detention of Kian Tajbakhsh will be changed to Release on
Bail in Next Few Days,” Iranian Student News Agency, August 21, 2007, https://www.isna.ir/Main/News iew.aspx?ID=News-9835o8,
(accessed August 21, 2007).
141 Robin Wright, “Freed by Iran, Scholar Reunites with her Family,” Washington Post, September 7, 2007,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/o9/o6/AR2007o9o6o2375.html?noredirect=on (accessed September 19,
2007); and Nazila Fathi, “Freed Scholar Leaves Iran, Another Still Held,” New York Times, September 3, 2007,
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/o9/o3/world/middleeast/o3cnd-tehran.html (accessed September 19, 2007).
39 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
herself and the Woodrow Wilson Center “in activities in which it had no part.” 142
Since her release, she has not provided much commentary on her experience, other
than to note that solitary confinement was hard for someone her age. 143
Agents from the Ministry of Information arrested Kian Tajbakhsh at his home on May
11, 2007, on the same charges under the Security Laws of “furthering the interests of
foreign powers,” “espionage,” “planning the soft overthrow of the government,” and
“acting against national security. 144 The government apparently focused on
Tajbakhsh because of his ties with foreign institutions, namely the Soros Foundation,
for whom he worked as a consultant. An urban planner and scholar, Tajbakhsh had
also worked with a number of Iranian organizations and ministries. 145
On the day of his arrest, agents of the Ministry of Information transferred Tajbakhsh
to the solitary confinement cells of Evin 209.146 They released him on September 20
on $ioo,ooo bail. 147 The charges against him remain outstanding, and he remains in
Iran.
On Julyi8 and 19, Channel One on Iranian Television broadcast the “confessions” of
Esfandiari and Tajbakhsh in a program called “In the Name of Democracy.” The
government's airing of the show while the two remained in largely incommunicado
detention without access to their lawyers raised concerns about how the government
might later use their statements against them. 148
142 “Statement on the arrest of Haleh Esfandiari, director of the Woodrow Wilson Center's Middle East Program,” May 21, 2007,
website of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars,
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/index. cfm?fuseaction=topics.item&news_id=2367o4&topic_id=1426May (accessed May 21,
2007)
143 “Esfandiari: I was not ILL-treated in Detention,” BBC Persian News Service,
http://www.bbc.com/persian/iran/story/2007/o9/o7o9o9_me_halehesfandiari_dc.shtml (accessed October 3, 2007).
144 “Iran: Cancel Televised ‘Confessions,” Human Rights Watch news release, July 18, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o7/18/iran l64 l4.htm.
145 “Soros Responds to Charges Against Dr. Kian Tajbakhsh,” website of the Open Society Institute, May 29, 2007,
http://www.soros.org/newsroom/news/response_2oo7o529 (accessed May 29, 2007).
146 “Iran: Another Iranian American Scholar Detained,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 24, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o5/24/iran15993.htm.
147 “Iran Frees US Iranian from Prison,” BBC News Online, September 20, 2007,
(accessed September 20, 2007).
148 “Iran: Cancel Televised ‘Confessions,” Human Rights Watch news release, July18, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/o7/18/iran l64 l4.htm.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 40
Authorities detained another Iranian-American, A u Shaken, a peace activist, on May
8, 2007, as he was Leaving Iran. 149 InitiaLLy, the government denied that they had
detained him; three weeks after his detention, on May 29, the Judiciary's spokesman,
ALireza Jamshidi, said, “Shaken is not in detention, and there are no charges against
him.” 1 5 ° On June io, however, Mohammad A u Hosseini, the spokesman for Iran's
Foreign Ministry, confirmed that the Judiciary had arrested Shaken, but did not
address the charges against him. 151 On September 21, three days before authorities
reLeased ALi Shaken, Kaveh Shaken reported to Human Rights Watch that the
government had brought no charges against his father or even provided an
expLanation for his arrest. 152
149 “Iran: Another Iranian American Scholar Detained,” Human Rights Watch news reLease, May 24, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/20 07/o5/24/iran15993.htm.
150 “Iran: End Harassment of Dual Nationals,” Human Rights Watch news reLease, May 31, 2007,
http://hrw.org/english/docs/20 07/o5/31/iran l6o25.htm.
“Iran confirms Arrest of Ali Shaken,” BBC Persian News Service, June ii, 2007,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/ iran/story/2007/o6/o7o6 lo_an-shakeri.shtml (accessed July 13, 2007).
152 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Kaveh Shaken, September 21, 2007.
41 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
V. Ill-treatment of Detained Activists at Evin 209
“Security” detainees held in Evin 209 often face the prospect of ill-treatment during
interrogation and detention. Prolonged interrogation while blindfolded and without
counsel, Lack of access to phone calls or visits with family members, and
confinement in solitary cells are among the routine experiences of detainees. In
some instances, Ministry of Information personnel subject detainees to sleep
deprivation, threats, and other forms of physical and psychological ill-treatment.
Itt-treatment during Interrogation
In aJuly24, 2007 open letterto Ayatollah Shahrudi, head of the Judiciary, the
families of detained students Majid Tavakoli, Ahmad Ghasaban, and Ehsan
Mansouri wrote that prison officials were physically and psychologically mistreating
those at Evin 209 to coerce them into making self-incriminating statements and to
implicate other students. Based on conversations with their sons and the statements
of five students released on bail on July i8, the families alleged that authorities had
subjected their children to 24-hour interrogation sessions, sleep deprivation, and
threats against them and their families. The families also said that security agents
had confined the detainees in cells with dangerous convicted prisoners, beaten
them with cables and fists, and forced them to remain standing for long periods of
time. 153
A student activist imprisoned in July 2007 reported to Human Rights Watch how
interrogators treated him and fellow students:
I was interrogated every single day. I had three interrogators but others
had more. One of my friends was interrogated by seven different
people at the same time. In my case, sometimes one would interrogate
me, other times two would show up, and sometimes all three would be
in there. Their whole aim was to get me to confess to things in a way
153 “The Corn plaint Letter of the Families of Majid Tavakoti, Ahmad Ghasaban, and Eshan Mansouri,” Advaar News , Am/i Kab/ 1 r
Un/versityNewsietter, July i i, 2007, http: //www.advarn ews. us/university/5426. as px (accessed August 24, 2007) and H urnan
Rights Watch email correspondence with student activist (name withheld), July 25, 2007.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FORANYTHING” 42
that carried the heaviest penalties. For example, I had once
participated in a peaceful gathering on campus with a couple of other
people, and they tried to get me to say that I had “disrupted the
general order” by doing that and thereby had “endangered national
security.” They used all kinds of pressures to get me and the others to
say these things. They would insult us and our family in the most
vulgarways. Or they would threaten to beat us or throw us in the cells
of dangerous criminals like Al-Qaeda members. They would threaten
rape with soda bottles or hot eggs. They also would give us false news
about our loved ones and brought forged documents to scare us. They
told one guy that his dad had been fired because of him and showed
him a piece of paper on official looking letterhead. Or they'd say, “Your
mother is in the critical care unit of the hospital and she's dying,” and
they wouLd bring fake medicaL files. They'd try to demean us in various
ways. We would have to take off our pants and underwear and lay on
the ground, and then they would say sexually degrading things to us.
There were also physical pressures. They would keep us in
interrogation for seven or eight hours without letting us eat or use the
restroom. They would also blast loud noises into our cells when we
weren't in interrogation.
They also hit us. They punched my back so hard the first day that I had
to take strong painkillers the whole time I was in detention.
Sometimes they would make me do repetitive movements or stand
with one leg bent. If I put my leg down, they would pull down my pants
and underwear, and then when I would try to pull them back up, they
would kick me in the face. 154
Journalist Jila Baniyaghoub was among the 3 3 women arrested on March 4, 2007. Her
writings document the interrogation practices she experienced at Evin 209:
The interrogations weren't at a specific time. They would begin first
thing in the morning and continue until the middle of the night and
154 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with student activist (name withheld), August 17, 2007.
43 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
sometimes until the next morning. They dedicated the first days to
interrogating the very young girls, which had made us hopeful that
they would release them sooner. But this was a vain hope. They hadn't
released many people in these few days. When the guard opened the
cell door and called my name loudly, I was totally asleep. It seems that
he had called me a few times and I hadn't heard. I'd had my head
under the cover because it was so cold, so I shook myself and pushed
the cover aside. I was really sleepy and couldn't open my eyes. I
looked at the female guard with difficulty. She said “Get up. Your
expert is ready. You have to go to interrogation.” By “expert,” she
meant interrogator, but the interrogators in Evin's security unit called
themselves experts, and that's what the prisoners called them too. The
hands of the clock showed 12:30 [ a.m.]. I said to myself, “The
interrogator doesn't want us to sleep, and he/she doesn't want to
sleep either.” The guard said, “Put on the blindfolds.” With my half-
open eyes, I picked up one of the blindfolds that were in the corner of
the cell so that I could cover my eyes when leaving the women's
un its. 155
Baniyaghoub goes on to describe her first interrogation session, where, blindfolded,
her interrogator told her to write in depth about all of her “political, social, and
cultural activities” while blindfolded. She says that when she pointed out that the
Citizens Rights Law enacted by the Iran's head of Judiciary, Ayatollah Shahrudi,
prohibit the questioning of prisoners while blindfolded, the interrogator interrupted
her, stating that “I know what Mr. Shah rudi has said, but this is the prison of the
Ministry of Information and has its own special rules.” 156
Another women's rights activist described her experience of being questioned
blindfolded, facing a wall, punished when she tried to object, and pressured to sign
a false confession:
155 Jita Baniyaghoub, “What Happened to us in 209 Evin (Part Two),” Gooya Newsletter, June 8, 2007,
https://khabar.gooya.com/cotuninists/archives/2007/o6/o6o2l7print.php, (accessed June 8, 2007).
i 6 Ibid.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 44
My interrogations lasted anywhere from one to seven hours. I objected
to being interrogated in the middle of the night, and my interrogator
said, “I'm only interrogating you at night because I want to let you go
sooner.” I was blindfolded, and he told me to sit down on the chair
facing the wall. I turned the chair around and lifted my blindfolds when
he left the room. When he came back and saw me, he was really angry
and yelled at me to put on my blindfold and turn around. I wrote letters
of objection about our treatment—a lot of the women did—but they
ignored us. One of my interrogators got so mad about this that he tore
up the paper and threw the pieces on my head. For the first couple of
days, we hadn't been able to make phone calls. Once we'd been
allowed to make some calls, the interrogators tried to use them
against us. They'd threaten to cut off our phone access when we didn't
make statements they wanted us to make. Sometimes we'd be in the
middle of a conversation with a family member, and they would cut off
the line in the middle. 157
Solitary Confinement
Ministry of Information agents were in charge of the detention and interrogation of
the students and activists arrested in May and July 2007.158 A student activist
detained during these sweeps described his detention and interrogation experience
in Evin 209 to Human Rights Watch:
They put me in solitary confinement from the first night. The cell was
about 3 by 4 meters. It was carpeted, had a sink, and a single
lamplight that was always on. There was a small window that was
always open, but it had bars, and they had welded a metal sheet with
holes across the window so not much air could come through. My cell
didn't get much light because of the metal sheet either, but I could still
tell whether it was night or day. The cell was the only place I could take
off my blindfolds. I complained to the Ministry of Information guards
157 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with women's rights activist (name withheld), August 14, 2007.
158 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with student activist (name withheld), August 17, 2007.
45 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
and interrogators that keeping me blindfolded was in violation the
Citizens Rights Laws. They would either ignore me or make fun of me.
For example, when they wanted to take me to interrogation, they would
give me the blindfolds and say, “Here, put on these violations of your
Citizens Rights.” If I said that there were certain rules that they had to
follow in detention centers, they would make fun of me and say, “This
isn't a detention center; it is purgatory.” I asked about access to a
lawyer or calling a lawyer, but I spent my entire time in detention in a
solitary cell, without being able to contact anybody. 159
The security forces at Evin held at least seven of the teachers who took part in the
March 2007 demonstrations in solitary confinement for periods ranging from i6 to
60 days. 16 ° One of the four whose wives wrote in objection to their detention (see
above), Moham mad Bagheri, spent 3 3 days in solitary confinement.
As noted above, A u Farahbaksh spent 45 of his 318 days in prison in solitary
confinement. Kian Tajbakhsh was in solitary confinement from the day of his arrest,
May ii, 2007, until his release on bail on September 20, 2007. Haleh Esfandiari was
in solitary confinement in Evin 209 without access to her lawyer for almost four
months.
A woman activist arrested on March 4 described how the police and security forces
blindfolded them on arrival at Evin 209, and how one women's rights protestor was
taken immediately into solitary confinement:
The police and security forces arrested us and took us to the police
detention center on Vozara Street. They asked some of the women a few
questions, and they told us to gather our stuff because we were being
released. We were all really happy and got on the bus thinking we would
be freed, but then they took us to Evin, straight to 209. That was a really
159 Ibid.
i6o “Some of the Teachers Who Have until Now Paid a Heavy Price for their cry for Justice,” website of the Trade Association of
Tehran-Iran Teachers, July 30, 2007, http: //ksmt3.btogfa. com/ post-2o1.as px (accessed July 31, 2007).
161 Ibid.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 46
terrible moment. We didn't know what we were being charged with or
what was going to happen to us. The guards blindfolded us at the
entrance of 209. Almost everyone objected at once to this, but they
ignored us. I think to scare us for speaking out, they took one of us to
solitary confinement right away.b 6 2
This woman emphasized to Human Rights Watch, however, that compared to what
has been alleged about the Information Ministry agents' treatment of students and
other activists in the detention facility, the agents treated the women detainees
relatively well.
162 Human Rights Watch online messenger correspondence with women's rights activist (name withheld), August 15, 2007
47 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
VI. Exploiting Heightened Iranian-US Tensions
The Iranian government has Long applied the broadly conceived security laws to
accuse civil society activists of collusion with foreign powers. Specifically, it has
used the hostile relationship between the United States and Iran as an excuse to
suppress peaceful expressions of dissent and accuse activists of receiving funds
from the US government. After peaceful student demonstrations in 1999, for example,
the government broadcast “confessions” of detained student leaders who claimed
on television that “we have received financial assistance from America on three or
four occasions to organize student movements. 1 6 3
The Ahmadinejad administration has made particular use of widely applicable
charges such as “receiving funds from foreigners” to persecute civil society activists
of all stripes. At the same time, US President George W. Bush has played into this
strategy by opening promoting the use of US funds for “regime change” in Iran. For
instance, on February 14, 2006, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called on the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee to substantially increase its existing democracy
funding for Iran and announced that “the United States will actively confront the
aggressive policies of the Iranian regime. At the same time, we will work to support
the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom and democracy in their country.” 164
The Iranian government in turn has used rhetoric that pairs support for democracy in
Iran with an expressed desire to confront the Iranian government to accuse
independent Iranian civil society activists of being the agents of foreign agendas.
Prominent Iranian activists, decrying the adverse impact on Iranian civil society, have
criticized the US government's allocation of funds. In a May 2007 opinion piece in
the International Herald Tribune, Iranian Nobel laureate and human rights activist
Shirin Ebadi attributed recent arrests in Iran both to the country's internal politics
and to US foreign policy:
163 “Iran Threatens Revolutionary Court Trials for “Incitement,” Human Rights Watch news release, August 3, 1999,
lonhtm.
164 “Rice Signals Shift in Iran Policy,” BBCNews Onilne, (accessed
September 19, 2007).
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 48
The recent arrests, including the detention of Hossein Mousavian, a former
nuclear negotiator and a close aid to former president and Losing 2005
presidential candidate Akbar Hashimi Rafsanjani, should be viewed as
Ahmadinejad's retaliation against the more moderate faction. But the most
important reason has to do with President George W. Bush's policy toward
Iran. Last year, the administration requested and received $y' million from
Congress to “bring” democracy to Iran. 1 65
Well-known human rights activist Emad Baghi and political dissident Akbar Ganji
have similarly criticized US policy :” In an open letter to United Nations Secretary-
General Ban Ki-moon, Ganji pointed out the ways that the Iranian government has
exploited US funding of Iranians in order to intensify its crackdown on activists:
Exploiting the danger posed by the US, the Iranian regime has put
military-security forces in charge of the government, shut down all
independent domestic media, and is imprisoning human rights
activists on the pretext that they are all agents of a foreign enemy. The
Bush administration, for its part, by approving a fund for democracy
assistance in Iran, which has in fact being (sic) largely spent on official
institutions and media affiliated with the US government, had made it
easy for the Iranian regime to describe its opponents as mercenaries
of the US and to crush them with impunity.1 6 7
Shirin Ebadi and Muhammad Sahimi, “The Follies of Bush's Iran Policy,” International Herald Tribune, May 30, 2007,
http://www.iht.com/artictes/2oo7/o5/3o/opinion/edebadi.php (accessed September 23, 2007).
i66 ,,
Scott Macleod, Did the U.S. Incite Iran s crackdown, Time, June 5, 2007,
http://content.time.com/time/wortd/articte/o,8599,162959o,00.html (accessed September 23, 2007) and Akbar Ganji, “Iran's
Future: an Open Letter,” Open Democracy, September 24, 2007.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/articLe/democracy_power/iran_democracy/akbar_ganji/ (accessed September 24, 2007).
Website of the State Prisons and Security and corrective Measures Organization, www. prisons.ir (accessed September 21,
2007).
l 6 7Akbar Ganji, “Iran's Future: an Open Letter,” Open Democracy, September 24, 2007.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/articLe/democracy_power/iran_democracy/akbar_ganji/ (accessed September 24, 2007).
49 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
VII. Recommendations
The government of Iran should:
ArbitraryArrests and Treatment in Detention
• Release alt individuals currently deprived of their Liberty for peacefulLy
exercising their rights to free expression, association, and assembly;
• Ensure that all persons deprived of their liberty receive family visits, and inform
families about the location and status of their family members in detention;
• Abolish the use of prolonged solitary confinement;
• Investigate and respond promptly to all complaints of torture and ill-treatment;
• Discipline or prosecute as appropriate officials at all leveLs of the Iranian
Information Ministry responsible for the mistreatment of detainees at Evin 209
detention center;
• Bring Evin 209 under the supervision of the State Prisons and Security
Corrective Measures Organization or shut it down.
Legal Reform
• Amend or aboLish the vague security laws under the Islamic PenaL Code,
entitled “Offenses against the National and International Security of the
Country” (the “Security Laws”) and other legislation under the Islamic Penal
Code that permits the government to arbitrarily suppress and punish
individuals for peaceful political expression, in breach of its international legal
obligations, on grounds that “national security” is being endangered, including
the following provisions:
o Article 498 of the Security Laws, which criminalizes the establishment of
any group that aims to “disrupt national security”; 168
o Article 500, which sets a sentence of three months to one year of
imprisonment for anyone found guilty of “in any way advertising against
the order of the IsLamic Republic of Iran or advertising for the benefit of
groups or institutions against the order”;
i68 IsLamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, Ratified May 9, 1996, art. 498
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 50
o Article 6io, which designates “gathering or colluding against the domestic
or international security of the nation or commissioning such acts” as a
crime punishable from two to five years of imprisonment; 169
o Article 6i8, which criminalizes “disrupting the order and comfort and calm
of the general public or preventing people from work” and allows for a
sentence of 3 months to one year, and up to 74 lashes;170
o Article 513 of the Islamic Penal Code, which criminalizes any “insults” to
any of the “Islamic sanctities” or holy figures in Islam and carries a
punishment of one to five years, and in some instances may carry a death
penalty;
o Article 514, which criminalizes any “insults” directed at the first Leader of
the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini or at the current Leader
may be sentenced to six months to two years in prison.
• Define both “national security” and the breaches against it in narrow terms that
do not unduly infringe on internationally guaranteed rights of free expression,
association and assembly;
• Excise from the Islamic Penal Code the laws that criminatize “insults” against
religious figures and government leaders;
• Change provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure that allow the right to
counsel to be denied in the investigative phase of pre-trial detention. The
government should guarantee the right of security detainees to meet in private
with legal counsel throughout the period of their detention and trial;
• Take steps to uphold the Citizens Rights Laws, enacted by head ofJudiciary
Ayatollah Shahrudi on 2004, in Iran's detention centers. Unlike other laws with
a security caveat, the Citizens Rights Laws are intended to be applicable in all
circumstances.
The Government of the United States should:
Engage with Iranian civil society groups to support projects which they
believe will not provide an easy pretext for the Iranian government to repress
their activities.
169 Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, Ratified May 9, 1996, art. 6io.
170 Islamic Penal code, Book Five, State Administered Punishments and Deterrents, Ratified May 9, 1996, art. 618.
5 1 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH JANUARY 2008
VIII. Acknowledgements
This report was researched and written by a researcher in Human Rights Watch's
Middle East and North Africa Division. Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of the
Middle East and North Africa division, provided editorial review. The report was also
reviewed by James Ross, legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch, and Ian
Gorvin, senior program officer. Hadi Ghaemi, former Iran and UAE researcher at
Human Rights Watch, provided thoughtful comments on early drafts of th is report.
AssefAshraf, senior associate with the Middle East and North Africa division,
prepared the report for publication. Production assistance was also provided by
Grace Choi and Fitzroy Hepkins.
Human Rights Watch would like to thank the individuals in and outside Iran who
agreed to be interviewed for this report. This report would not have been possible
without their contributions.
Human Rights Watch is deeply grateful to the Newman's Own Foundation for
supporting our work on Iran.
“YOU CAN DETAIN ANYONE FOR ANYTHING” 52
