A look at the expansion of the death penalty in Iran.

Until the 18th century, we find executions and deprivation of life using various tools and methods in desirable and accepted societies. Through historical examination, it is observable that there was no serious dispute or discussion among intellectuals and jurists about its rejection and abolition. During that time, execution was considered as a proportional reaction to criminals, which had the most deterrent effect and was the most severe form of society’s animosity towards criminals. It was a necessary measure for maintaining order in societies and an integral part of criminal laws. In different countries, depending on different social and criminological approaches, it was considered for the most severe crimes. In the mid-18th century, we witnessed theoretical and practical efforts to eliminate this punishment. It can be said that discussions about the abolition of execution were based on theories and proposals, and were published in books.

Crimes and punishments.

The year 1764 AD marked the beginning of a new era. Beccaria believed that the death penalty should be abolished because the deterrent effect of life imprisonment is much greater than that of execution. In addition, execution is irreversible and if a mistake is made during the trial and a reduction in punishment is necessary, it becomes impossible to carry out the execution. (1) After that, many supporters and opponents debated on this issue, but ultimately the approach of abolishing and limiting the death penalty achieved more victories compared to its opponents. In the 18th and 19th centuries, many countries eliminated the death penalty or restricted the number of crimes punishable by death, and the conditions for issuing death sentences in courts became stricter. The approaches to abolishing the death penalty also gained attention in international forums, and international organizations and human rights institutions played effective roles in this regard. For example, the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted in 1989 by the

Today, two hundred years have passed since these efforts and it can be said that more than half of the world’s countries have abolished the death penalty in their laws, while the remaining countries have kept it in practice and removed it from the category of punishments issued by courts. According to the 2021 report by Amnesty International, only eighteen countries have carried out death sentences this year, including China, Iran, Egypt, Yemen, South Sudan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Botswana, Oman, North Korea, Vietnam, Japan, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States.

During this time, as we witness the trend of abolishing and limiting the death penalty in the world, according to statistics, we must recognize and compare the Islamic Republic of Iran as a leader in increasing the scope and number of executions.

According to Amnesty International’s report, from 2017 until now, Iran has had the highest number of executions in the world. In its annual report for 2019, the organization announced that 657 people were executed worldwide, with Iran holding the second highest number for consecutive years. The report also states that Iran, along with Saudi Arabia and Iraq, were responsible for 81% of these executions.

In 2020, Amnesty International reported a decrease in the global execution rate to 483 individuals. (3) Since Iran was not included in this decrease, its role has increased and it accounts for half of this statistic in that year. Additionally, the 2021 report by this organization (4) has noted an increase in executions in Iran. In their reports, this organization has consistently emphasized that the number of executions in Iran is higher than reported and access to accurate statistics is difficult. This shows that there is no hope for improvement in the current state of capital punishment in Iran.

By examining laws and judicial approaches, it can also be seen that Iran has not only limited and toughened the issuance of death sentences in line with international approaches over time, but has also shown a tendency to expand the deprivation of citizens’ lives through judicial rulings. In the 1304 Penal Code, the death penalty was prescribed for intentional murder, but after the Islamic Revolution and the updating of penal laws, in addition to murder, it was also approved for other crimes and its scope expanded; because according to the lawmakers after the revolution, there was no room for considering human rights principles and arguments against the death penalty, given the emphasis on Islamic jurisprudence which had prescribed the death penalty for many offenses. In the laws passed after the Islamic Revolution of Iran, various crimes, such as adultery with relatives and specific individuals such as a father’s wife, non-Muslim adultery with a Muslim, forced adultery, adultery by a married person (committed by a married man and woman), sodomy (homosex

Among these cases, issuing verdicts of tyranny, fighting and corruption on earth are among the cases that have gone beyond the boundaries of legal definitions in judicial laws and procedures, and in many cases, the possibility of issuing them as personal opinions and in line with the suppression of political opponents has been granted to the judicial power and courts.

By examining the overall approach, it can be understood that the mindset of legislators when predicting the death penalty is not based on any theories of punishment and criminology that can be examined. Neither does the increase in the number of executions indicate achieving the goal of deterring society and preventing crimes, nor does it reveal any rehabilitative policies or individualization of punishments. Additionally, the increasing statistics of virtual campaigns and activities of civil institutions and public demands for the reduction and abolition of executions cannot make us hopeful about the hidden benefits and public demands behind executions. Furthermore, in the process of passing laws on punishment after the revolution, none of the theoretical, philosophical, and human rights approaches have been taken into consideration, and only a specific approach of Islamic jurisprudence has been focused on, which has led to the prediction of death penalties in various cases. It should be noted that there is no unified approach in the current law regarding executions in different cases. For example, the 2013 Punishment Law only

From a specific case study, it can be understood that although in many cases lawmakers are also seeking ways to escape execution, by examining the decrease in the issuance of sentences such as stoning in recent years, it can be seen that courts and judges are using alternative methods of punishment in multiple cases. Furthermore, although today both legal experts and public opinion do not support execution, especially in political cases, they are trying to change laws, approaches, and procedures of the judiciary. In addition, international reports and pressures on the government to reduce the number of executions in Iran are increasing. However, it seems that the elimination of the death penalty and paying attention to the arguments and opinions of opponents of execution and the conflicting views among legal experts in Iran, similar to what has led to a reconsideration of sentences and criminal titles in other countries, seems impossible in the Iranian Penal Code due to its compulsory nature and the need to align laws with non-feasible jurisprudence. Moreover, the Iranian government’s

Notes:

1- Bakaria, Caesar, The Book of Crimes and Punishments, Ardabili, Mohammad Ali, Mizan Publishing, Tehran: 1377.

2- Report on Death and Execution Laws in 2019.

International Amnesty website.

April 21, 2020.

3- Report on Death and Execution Laws in 2020.

International Amnesty website.

April 21, 2021.

4. Report on Death and Execution Laws in 2021.

International Amnesty website.

May 24, 2022.