They say everything started with the release of a video; a video in which an officer of the Islamic Republic’s law enforcement forces in “Bidzard” of Shiraz is attacked by a suspect with a cold weapon and as a result of the injuries, loses his life. The main question here was why the police officer did not use his weapon to defend himself against this attack, even though he was not far from the suspect and could easily aim at his feet, but refrained from doing so and paid the price with his life?

The result of the response to this question is a bill that has now been presented to the parliament by the government of Ebrahim Raisi, called “Amendment Bill on the Use of Weapons by Armed Forces”. According to its creators and supporters, the purpose of this bill is to prevent the repetition of the Shiraz incident and to support the police forces against criminals and looters; a claim that, however, does not match the content of the proposed bill by the government.

As an example, although the representatives in favor of this bill, along with domestic media in Iran, consider this issue (ensuring the safety of police officers against violent criminals) as the main reason for drafting the amendment bill, the contents of the bill do not align with this claim and the effort to expand the license to use firearms shows hidden intentions that go beyond just ensuring the safety of police forces. This is because the focus of the amendment bill is not only on the police, but also on expanding the legal license to security personnel and even all individuals who have a license to carry weapons, and it is not clear how this will lead to ensuring the safety of police officers against violent criminals.

On the other hand, the expansion of legal permission for the use of weapons from “armed forces personnel” to “other individuals authorized by law to carry weapons” creates concerns that, if the law is passed, the power of “private militias” will increase and the right to life of citizens will be at risk with the slightest indication of attack; especially since the past record of these forces shows their disregard for the law, and the passing of this bill would essentially mean complete freedom for private militias to use weapons.

Recent statements by Ismail Kowsari, one of the security commanders of the Revolutionary Guards and current representative of Tehran in the Islamic Consultative Assembly, have not only failed to alleviate concerns, but have actually increased them. Kowsari, who was in charge of the security base of the Revolutionary Guards in Tehran during the nationwide protests of November 2019, had stated in the final days of June 2021 that in defense of the bill to amend the law on the use of weapons, “the security of security forces and police is a priority, and then the security of society.” This statement alone is enough to show that the concerns raised about the possibility of serious violations of citizens’ rights due to the expansion of legal permits for the use of weapons by plainclothes officers are not unfounded; especially since for these officers, their own security is more important than the security of citizens.

The authors of the proposed bill have also taken a strange action by granting permission to use weapons to control protests and demonstrations beyond the law enforcement forces and have included “security agents” in this permission. This expansion of legal permission is in contrast to the basic principles of citizenship rights and police teachings, as police officers are supposed to be present in protest gatherings in their uniform to make it easier for the protesters to identify them and thus ensure the security of both the protesters and the police in case of any incidents. Instead, a group of unidentified individuals under the title of “security agents” can use weapons at any time during a protest and afterwards, they will not be held accountable, especially considering their anonymity.

The simultaneous submission of the bill by the government to the parliament, along with an increase in security crackdowns against citizens and the possibility of expanding social protests in Iran, and the insistence of the revolutionary parliament on a quick review and approval of this bill is itself alarming enough and to some extent reveals the true intention behind this bill.

On the other hand, since the law on the use of weapons by the police and other military and security forces and its amendment directly threatens one of the most fundamental and basic human rights, the right to life, any changes without considering its consequences can lead to a human tragedy; especially in a country where security forces are not bound by the law and do not care about public opinion and the views of society. In such circumstances, and considering the destructive history of security forces in Iran, especially the personal uniforms that have not been restricted in the use of weapons, the “amendment” of the law on the use of weapons will have irreparable legal consequences on the body of citizens’ rights.

The peace line in this issue’s special case will examine this bill and its effects on citizens’ civil rights if approved.