It was December 2001 when the Islamic Consultative Assembly in Iran passed a law that obligated the government and the organization of prisons, correctional and rehabilitation facilities to sell prisons within cities in order to provide conditions for transferring prisons outside of cities. According to this law, titled “The Law of Transferring Prisons and Correctional and Rehabilitation Facilities Outside of Cities,” the organization of prisons was required to transfer existing prisons within cities (excluding detention centers) to the Ministry of Roads and Urban Development and receive suitable land in exchange for the construction of new prisons outside of cities.

Perhaps it can be boldly said that the main motivation for supporters of transferring prisons outside of cities in Iran is this very law that has been passed. However, examining the statements of judicial authorities and the prison organization, and especially the situation of prisons in Iran, shows that one of the main reasons for transferring prisons outside of cities is the lack of capacity in the existing prisons in the country compared to the number of prisoners.

Gholamali Mohammadi, the head of the Prison Organization, had said in July of last year (2022) regarding the overcrowding of prisoners in prisons: “In the Islamic Republic of Iran, we have a higher number of prisoners in our prisons compared to the global average.” He also confirmed the phenomenon of “floor sleeping” in prisons in September of this year – which occurs due to the high number of prisoners and overcrowding in prisons – and explicitly stated that this phenomenon exists in prisons where “the number of beds is not proportional to the number of prisoners.”

Reports show that the majority of prisons in Iran are at least twice their capacity, with inmates being placed in their own cells. Naturally, in the judicial system of the Islamic Republic, the easiest way to increase prison capacity is to build new prisons, with over two thousand legal criminals. On the other hand, since cities, especially major cities in Iran, do not have the necessary capacity to build new prisons, the alternative option for increasing prison capacity is to build large prisons with multiple capacities outside of cities.

As an example, the construction project of Mashhad Central Prison with a capacity of 10,000 people outside the city of Mashhad, also known as the “largest prison project in the Middle East”, is itself evidence for this claim. Regardless of whether a prison with a capacity of 10,000 people is the largest in the Middle East or not, the noteworthy point here is that the increase in prison capacity under construction outside the city of Mashhad, compared to the current central prison (Vakilabad Prison) with a capacity of 3,000 people, shows that the issue is more about increasing prison capacity rather than emptying urban areas of prisons.

However, the majority of supporters of the plan to transfer prisons outside of cities believe that urban areas in Iran – especially major cities – are heavily populated and facing issues with overcrowding and building density. They argue that transferring prisons outside of cities – particularly large prisons in major cities – and converting them into parks or other public facilities would have a significant impact on reducing population density and improving urban areas.

On the other hand, according to supporters of the plan to transfer prisons outside of cities, the removal of prisons from urban areas will improve security conditions in areas where prisons are located, especially in cases of riots or prisoner escapes, causing less harm to other citizens.

What do the opponents say?

Although the claims of supporters and advocates of the policy of transferring prisons outside of cities in Iran may seem somewhat acceptable in terms of improving urban infrastructure for citizens and ensuring local security, the criticisms raised by opponents of this plan bring up important points in this regard.

The necessity of constant supervision by the judicial authorities, especially judges and prosecutors, requires that their access to prisoners be carried out as quickly as possible and continuous monitoring is made possible, as a result of the long distance between prisons and judicial centers (due to the transfer of prisoners outside the cities) does not get lost.

This issue has particularly arisen in cases of temporary detention orders issued by the courts, making it difficult for judicial authorities to monitor and access the detainees, especially when they are transferred to prisons outside of cities. For example, when temporary detention orders are converted to bail orders or when bail is not immediately available and the detainee’s family needs time to provide it, the detainee must remain in the detention center. This transfer of prisons outside of cities can significantly delay the release and freedom of detainees, creating serious limitations. In such situations, the lack of quick access to the detainee can delay their release on bail for up to two days.

This issue is also true in fair legal proceedings and makes it difficult to fully and fairly enforce laws and court rules. In cases of summoning prisoners (especially in temporary detentions), the speed of access to the accused plays an important role in judicial proceedings and long distances practically make it difficult to access the accused, creating difficult conditions for their defense in the hearing (due to fatigue caused by the long journey from prison to the court).

The right to defense for prisoners and communication with their families is one of the issues that will face serious threats if prisons are transferred to remote areas outside of cities. The exercise of the right to defense, especially access to a defense lawyer and the possibility of meeting between the detainee and their lawyer, requires that – especially in cases of temporary detention – this access be provided immediately and in some cases, instantly. It is clear that in the event of the transfer of prisons to remote areas outside of cities, the exercise of this right for detainees will be seriously disrupted. The issue of distance and access to the prison will also have a direct impact on the right of prisoners to communicate with their families (especially in cases of temporary detention), as it is undeniable that public transportation services are not available in remote areas outside of cities, making it a major challenge for both the prisoner and their family to travel to the prison.

In addition to the negative impact of transferring prisons outside of cities on the fundamental rights of prisoners and detainees, providing suitable conditions in such prisons is a serious concern. Prisons, as places of confinement for a significant population, should have appropriate infrastructure, especially in terms of providing water, electricity, telephone, and fuel resources. It is clear that any deficiencies in providing such resources will lead to a crisis in the internal situation of prisons and will violate the basic and human rights of prisoners.

On the other hand, in addition to the difficulty of providing the necessary infrastructure resources for transferring prisons outside of cities, the access of prisoners and prison officials to basic public services is also limited by the transfer of prisons to remote areas outside of cities. For example, quick access to professional medical facilities outside of prison is one of the main problems that the transfer of prisons outside of cities will create for prisoners. The conditions of prisons and prisoners require that the location of the prison be determined in a way that allows for quick access to specialized medical centers for prisoners.

The lack of sufficient financial resources and necessary infrastructure is a subject that has been approved by the prison authorities. Mahmoud Ziaei Farad, the deputy for development, management, and human resources of the prison organization, had criticized the lack of sufficient resources for transferring prisons outside of cities in July of last year (2022). He had said, “The law for transferring prisons outside of cities has not met the expectations of the officials of the prison organization and the judicial system. The operation of transferring prisons outside of cities relies on government and public funds, but these funds are not meeting the needs and carrying out this process.”

On the other hand, transferring prisons outside of cities will affect the availability of necessary human resources for prisons, including security, law enforcement, and especially judicial forces, and will reduce the readiness and tolerance level of these forces towards prisoners.

The significant distance between prisons and cities, as well as in judicial systems where the violation of prisoners’ rights is a common practice and considered a strategy by intelligence and security agencies against political prisoners, increases the risk of such abuses and harassment against prisoners and reduces the possibility of monitoring by monitoring institutions and people’s welfare associations on prisons.

The examination of statements made by prison officials and the judiciary shows that what matters most to these two important institutions is the capacity of prisons, not their readiness to provide proper services to prisoners and efforts to reintegrate them into society. Therefore, it seems that this is the main reason and motivation for transferring prisons outside of cities. Because it is clear that considering the lack of infrastructure in Iran, at least from a human rights perspective, transferring prisons outside of cities makes it difficult for prisoners to access basic facilities and services.