There is no Farsi text provided to translate. Please provide the text for an accurate translation.
Mohammad Moghimi

The death sentence for Mr. Mohammad Ali Taheri has been issued based on Article 286 of the Islamic Penal Code, approved in 2013. This article states: “Anyone who extensively commits a crime against the physical integrity of individuals, crimes against internal or external security of the country, spreading lies, disrupting the country’s economic system, arson and destruction, spreading dangerous toxic and microbial substances, or establishing centers of corruption and obscenity or assisting in them in a way that causes severe disruption to the public order of the country, insecurity, or major harm to the physical integrity of individuals or public and private property, or leads to the spread of corruption or obscenity on a large scale, shall be considered a corrupter on earth and sentenced to death.” First, the legal basis and sources of this sentence must be examined, and then it must be determined whether Mr. Taheri can be punished based on Article 286 of the aforementioned law.

The mentioned verse refers to the crime of corruption on earth and lists its examples. There is a difference between the titles of “warrior” and “corrupter on earth”. Some believe that there is a general and absolute relationship between the two, meaning that every warrior is also a corrupter on earth, but not every corrupter on earth is a warrior. Others believe that both are one act (warring against God and the Prophet and attempting to create corruption on earth). In verse 33 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, which is the basis for the jurisprudence and legislation of the crime of warring, warring and corruption on earth are mentioned together. The writer believes that the titles of warring and corruption on earth are at least considered as a crime (not a sin). Therefore, its examples cannot be extended to disrupting the country’s economic system, spreading widespread lies, crimes against internal or external security of the country, etc. (examples mentioned in Article

On the other hand, the issue of implementing limits or suspending them during the absence of the infallibles is a subject of disagreement among jurists. Supporters of implementing limits believe that a just and comprehensive jurist can implement limits during the absence of the infallibles. Opponents attribute the establishment of limits to the infallible Imam and their designated representatives, and do not consider it permissible to implement them during the absence of the infallible Imam. Some scholars have suggested a compromise between these two views, stating that the common ground between them is that only a just and trustworthy jurist is authorized to implement religious limits. Therefore, none of the jurists have issued a fatwa allowing delegation and permission to implement limits. As a result, the decision to implement religious limits is currently facing difficulties among most judges.

Regardless of previous circumstances, the execution order for Mr. Taheri was issued based on Article 286 of the Islamic Penal Code, which was approved approximately three years after his arrest in 2013. This article pertains to the charge of “corruption on earth”, which prior to the amendments made in 2013, was considered equivalent to the charge of “waging war against God” and cannot be applied to Mr. Taheri’s actions. This issue is in conflict with the legal principles of “prohibition of retroactive application of laws” and “the principle of legality of crimes and punishments”. According to this fundamental principle of criminal law, criminal laws do not apply retroactively (except for laws that lead to a reduction in punishment).

Furthermore, in the implementation of punishment for combatants in the Holy Quran and Islamic penal law, there is room for discretion. This means that a judge can choose from among execution, crucifixion, amputation of the right hand and left foot, and banishment. Kandoukav in jurisprudential texts and sources shows that execution is not a fundamental punishment in Islam; rather, it is an exception. As stated in Lam’at al-Dimashqiyyah: “…if a combatant has killed someone, they will be punished with qisas or hadd…”.

In the Holy Quran, the sanctity of human life is emphasized in numerous verses. For example, in verse 32 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, saving one life is considered equivalent to saving all of humanity, and taking one life is equivalent to taking the lives of all humanity. This demonstrates the respect for human life in Islamic law. From a human rights perspective, the right to life is the source of all human rights. Therefore, the death penalty is in conflict with the right to life, which is the source of all human rights.

Therefore, the execution sentence of Mr. Mohammad Ali Taheri is against religion and the law. It is expected that in the final stage, this violation will be overturned and the grounds for his release will be provided.