One of the topics that is always discussed in the political discourse in Iran is the topic of “political crimes” and related discussions. The question of what constitutes a political crime and why it has gained such importance in the political culture of the 20th century is a lengthy and detailed discussion, but in this writing, we will try to discuss the topic of “political crime” and the reasons for the current Iranian government’s lack of attention and interest in it.

To shed light on the subject of discussion, it is necessary to first define “crime” and then, consequently, present the concept of “political crime” and its elements. Ultimately, we must answer the question of why political crime has always been one of the red lines and special cases in ruling ideologies, and why its discussion not only receives attention from the government, but also always cleverly avoids addressing public opinions both domestically and internationally.

In summary, it can be said that a crime is “an act that is defined by law and has a legal punishment.” This definition is based on the well-known principle of “legality of crimes and punishments,” which states that no crime or punishment exists unless it has been previously deemed a crime by law and a punishment has been determined for it. According to this principle, crimes are divided into “general” and “specific” categories.

General crimes are offenses that arise based on common rules and the general jurisdiction of courts, while specific crimes are subject to separate and specific laws and are dealt with in specialized courts; such as political crimes, military crimes, tax crimes, and customs crimes.

Political crimes are actions that aim to promote patriotism, defend specific ideals, and oppose the ruling system, and are usually considered honorable. The definition of political crimes varies from a criminal perspective, and political criminals engage in various behaviors to achieve their goals. Some groups act against government institutions, while others attack individuals in an attempt to undermine the government. The first group has no resemblance to criminals and, according to Gizoo, their actions are a result of a struggle between governments rather than a conflict between people.

Levi Broul believes that the term “political crimes” is not sufficient for these complete crimes, as violations of religious laws such as apostasy, blasphemy, and disrespect for sacred things hold great importance in some societies, and some social crimes, such as strikes, do not have the same rights as political crimes and are similar to them; therefore, it is better to use the term “moral crimes” for all of these crimes.

Zilieg believes that the difference between a political criminal and others is that their motivation for action is accompanied by a sense of duty to commit it, meaning they feel obligated to carry out that action.

Of course, some individuals may engage in political crimes for personal and selfish reasons, and for this reason, some jurists advocate for harsher punishments for these individuals. On the other hand, nowadays, some political crimes have taken on an international dimension and include extremely inhumane acts such as terrorism and violence.

From a legal perspective, there are two perspectives for defining political crimes.

Visual perception: In this perception, the subject and the result of the action are discussed, and if the crime harms the government, it is a political crime.

Ortolan believed that political crime must answer to the following three questions:

Who has directly suffered from the crime? What kind of rights have been lost from the government? What benefit does the government have in suppressing criminals?

The Copenhagen International Conference is titled that political crimes are crimes committed against the organization and government policies, as well as the legal rights provided for citizens.

B: Mental insight: Mental discipline causes political criminals to separate from political criminals with high goals from political criminals with personal goals and interests. In mental insight, the scope of political crimes has increased and two categories of crimes, composite and related to it, have been added.

Compound crime: It is a crime that is inherently public and harms the private interests of individuals, but is committed with political motivation, such as intentionally causing harm to the life of an official.

Related or associated crime to political crime: It is a crime that, in terms of its constituent elements, is a public crime, but is committed for the purpose of facilitating a political crime or securing its interests, such as the escape of political prisoners.

The benefits of identifying political crimes can be examined from two perspectives:

First: International Criminal Law

Second: Domestic criminal rights

The most important benefit of these crimes from an international perspective is the principle of non-refoulement of political criminals to their respective country, as well as granting them citizenship and asylum. The benefits of recognizing political crimes in domestic criminal law include absolute cases such as handling such crimes in judicial courts, public hearings, trials with a jury, and not imposing criminal penalties on political crimes based on their past. Furthermore, the criminal penalties for these crimes are lighter and they are allowed privileges such as reading books, watching television, not wearing prison clothes, and the like. In addition, dealing with political criminals is different from dealing with ordinary criminals, and considering factors such as reduction, suspension, and amnesty is much easier for them than for other criminals. And of course, the time for restoring the status of political criminals is shorter than that of ordinary criminals.

After the revolution and the drafting of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in Article 168, reference was made to political crimes alongside media crimes in the following manner: “The investigation of political and media crimes is public and takes place in the presence of a fair tribunal in the court. The law determines the selection of the conditions and powers of the fair tribunal and defines political crimes according to Islamic standards.” As it seems, this article explicitly focuses on “political crimes” and created the illusion among political activists that the new government has paid attention to at least legislating on the issue of “political crimes,” which was one of the important demands of political activists at that time. However, events in the following years showed that “political crimes” have no place in the legislation.

On 8 Khordad month of the year 1380, the Islamic Consultative Assembly passed a bill regarding political crimes, which faced 18 objections from the Guardian Council. Despite the insistence of the Assembly, the bill was sent to the Expediency Discernment Council for approval. The Guardian Council deemed both articles and clauses, as well as their sub-clauses, to be in violation of Articles 4, 24, 26, 27, and 168 of the Constitution.

In this plan, in Article 1, political crime is defined as follows: “Whenever an action is motivated by criticism of the performance of the government or for the purpose of gaining or maintaining power, without intending to undermine the principles and fundamental framework of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is considered a political crime.”

The principles and fundamental framework of the Islamic Republic of Iran consist of the official religion and faith of the country, the absolute guardianship of the jurist, Islam, and republicanism.

In Article 2, the types of political crimes have been classified as follows:

”

“Article 2 – The following crimes shall be considered political crimes if they correspond to the definition provided in Article 1:”

1- Insulting, making false accusations, and spreading lies against the heads of the three branches of government, the head of the Expediency Discernment Council, the vice presidents, ministers, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, the Guardian Council, and members of the Guardian Council.

2- Insulting a foreign country’s president or political representative.

Crimes listed in the law on the activities of political parties, associations, and trade unions, as well as recognized Islamic associations or religious minorities.

Chapter 10, Section 5 of the Islamic Penal Code pertains to crimes related to negligence of government officials and employees.

5- Crimes specified in the laws of the elections of the Assembly of Experts, the Presidency, the Parliament, and the Islamic City and Village Councils.

Chapter – Crimes Punishable by Hadd, Retribution and Blood Money, Crimes against Internal or External Security, Violent Crimes, Kidnapping, Smuggling, Initiating and Assisting in these Crimes, Political Crimes are not considered.

Furthermore, according to Article 4, “The trial of political crimes in the Salih Court (Criminal Court of the Central Province) is conducted publicly and with the presence of a jury. Preliminary investigations of these crimes are carried out in the central county courthouse of the province.”

Tabasreh – The regulations related to the arbitration committee are the same as those stipulated in the 2003 Arbitration Law and its implementing regulations.”

In addition, in Article 9 of this plan, privileges have been considered for perpetrators of political crimes, which include:

Suspects and convicts of political crimes, in addition to having the rights provided for ordinary suspects and convicts under the laws and regulations, also benefit from the following privileges:

1- The adequacy of the detention and imprisonment facilities for ordinary criminals.

2- Prohibition of forcing to wear prison clothes or performing forced labor during detention or imprisonment.

3- Prohibition of wearing bracelets

4- Prohibition of Repeating the Punishment by the Supervisor

5- Non-refundable nature of political criminals.

6- Prohibition of individual detention and imprisonment, except in cases where the court deems it necessary or for the purpose of completing necessary investigations.

7- The right to have continuous meetings and correspondence with relatives and acquaintances during the period of imprisonment.

8- The right to access books, publications, radio and television during the period of imprisonment.

This plan was put into the implementation phase at that time, but it did not come to fruition until recently when the political crime plan was once again approved by the ninth parliament after many twists and turns.

It must be acknowledged that the interests of the government lie in the absence of defining political crimes, and it is based on this lack of definition that government officials repeatedly declare that there are no “political prisoners” in the Islamic Republic. This is because as long as the principles and foundations of the law do not define political crimes and punishments in accordance with legal principles, there is no “political criminal” and therefore no “political prisoner”. On the other hand, the prevailing mindset in the government is that the best way to deal with opponents and protesters is to place them in a wide range of security charges such as “waging war”, “acting against national security”, etc. This allows for intense action against these individuals on one hand, and on the other hand, it allows the government to defend the idea that there are no political criminals or prisoners in the Islamic Republic in both domestic and international forums.