Responsiveness of officials to the people demonstrates the demands of citizens at the forefront of governance and introduces leaders as servants of the people in action. Through the principle of accountability, not only can the demands of citizens be obtained in a desirable manner, but the legitimacy of the political system will also significantly face popular support and approval.

Accountability, which in the culture of political science is associated with terms such as responsibility, trust, and questioning, is one of the most commonly used terms in managerial, social, and political fields. Therefore, the principle of accountability, as a completely social concept, refers to both trust-based relationships between managers and people, and responsible behaviors of individuals towards each other.

Accountability in the political arena is considered one of the main tools for fighting inefficiency and corruption, as it informs citizens about the performance of government officials and the processes involved in politics, allowing people to judge and respond appropriately to government actions. Accountability is not only applicable to rulers, but citizens also have a responsibility to be accountable for their own actions. When citizens are accountable for their behavior and take responsibility for their actions, public participation and efforts to improve society are advanced in a more desirable manner.

By increasing the level of public awareness, expectations from government institutions and the governing system expand. Government actions and decisions – whether in benefits or damages – affect the entire society. Therefore, monitoring government actions not only directly impacts the political development of the people, but also promotes the quality and coordination of both the people and government institutions, and provides the necessary political legitimacy that every political system desires. Monitoring government actions also expands the level of cooperation between the people and the government, giving the government the opportunity to take actions and decisions that satisfy the demands of the public. In fact, the principle of accountability makes both the people and the government more responsible and cooperative; otherwise, democracy turns into autocracy and tyranny. The authority of the government is moderated and controlled through appropriate tools – such as modern media spaces – by the right to accountability of citizens from the government.

Lack of transparency in political affairs, suppression of freedom of criticism and expression, absence of civil society, failure to decentralize government actions, lack of access to free flow of information and news, and most importantly, lack of trust and confidence between the ruling class and the people, not only deprives citizens of the ability to judge and respond appropriately to government actions, but has also diminished the political legitimacy of the Iranian regime in recent years – even at the international level. In fact, by closing all appropriate channels of communication to respond to the needs, demands, and criticisms of citizens, the government has blatantly violated one of the fundamental principles of human rights and citizenship, which is the participation of citizens in determining the fate of society. Such conditions have led to an increase in public opposition to the ruling political system through various means, including violating social laws, protests and demonstrations that have often resulted in violence, destruction of public property, and the killing and injuring of citizens and government forces.

In recent years, the violation of the principle of accountability by the government has led to an increase in the number of critics and protesters who have been arrested, imprisoned, sentenced to death, tortured, and abused within government circles. Alongside the failure to provide adequate public services that meet the basic needs of society, there has been a severe economic recession, widespread poverty and unemployment, financial and moral corruption among government employees, and so on – regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, or religion – which have caused outcry and severely undermined the political system of society.

One of the obvious violations of the principle of accountability in recent events is the behavior of the government towards citizens seeking justice and critics of the political, social, and economic conditions of the country. Although the main reason for the spread of civil disobedience, violation of social laws, and distrust of the system’s policies is the government’s refusal and inefficiency in being accountable to its citizens, the legislator has considered the rights of the “accused” in criminal laws and especially in criminal procedure laws to prevent arbitrary treatment of the accused individual. Yet, we are still witnessing inhumane behavior, violence, and torture in detention centers and prisons. Even if the individual is recognized as a criminal, the preservation of human dignity requires that they be fairly convicted and punished only to the extent determined by the law. The extent to which individuals in society are familiar with the rights of the accused is another issue that emphasizes the need for the expansion of educational spaces to increase awareness of citizenship rights.

Before mentioning some of the rights of the accused in the Iranian Criminal Code, it is necessary to note that according to Article 37 of the Constitution, the principle of innocence is upheld and no one is considered guilty under the law unless their crime is proven in a fair court. This principle is in place to protect the rights of all citizens, including those who are accused. In criminal proceedings, the primary rights of the accused include:

The right to have a lawyer during the stage of being under supervision (Article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code).

The right to contact family and be informed about the individual’s situation (Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Code)

The right to medical examination (Article 51 of the Criminal Procedure Code) means that, upon the request of the person under supervision or one of their close relatives, one of the physicians designated by the prosecutor will perform an examination on the person under supervision. The physician’s certificate will be recorded and kept in the case file. This is important because if the accused later claims to have been physically abused by the authorities during or after their arrest, the certificate can be presented to the judge for consideration.

The right to be informed of the defendant’s defense rights in writing (Article 52 of the Criminal Procedure Code) is for the purpose that whenever the defendant is under supervision, judicial officers are obliged to inform the defendant of the rights stated in this law and provide it to him in writing, receive the receipt and attach it to the case. It should be noted that the officers are obliged to have all the statements of the defendant written down and have him sign and fingerprint them. However, it should be noted that the defendant has the right to remain silent (Article 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code) and not sign any text; especially if the text is pre-written or includes acceptance of certain charges.

And finally, the defendant’s defense rights are in the preliminary investigation stage in the court, meaning that if the prosecutor finds the evidence and initial reports justifiable, the case will be referred to the investigator for preliminary investigations. The investigator must also determine the appropriate measures for the defendant based on the committed crime, such as bail or guarantee, and in some cases, issue a temporary detention order.

It is clear that lack of transparency and accountability in the actions and decisions of law enforcement officials and related institutions, the unidentified interrogators and the process of completing case files, forced confessions and unsubstantiated and ambiguous accusations – especially in crimes that are labeled as a threat to internal or external security – have created the grounds and conditions for torture and inhumane treatment in detention centers and prisons. The absence of the principle of accountability on the part of the government not only undermines belief in criticism and acceptance of criticism, but also makes defending the people’s sovereignty in the current system unacceptable for citizens.

Notes:

• Smith D, Wolf J. 2006, Judicial Review: A Short Guide to Claims in the Administrative Court. Journal of House of Commons Library.

• The book “Political Freedom: Associations, Political, Purposes and the Law” was written by Davis H. in 2000 and published by Routledge in London.

• Ronaldineli D.1981, Government Decentralization in Comparative Perspective Sciences. Journal of Political Science.