Fair trial, a hope that becomes a legend/ The cupbearer of reunion
This is a caption[/caption]
این یک عنوان است.
This is a caption.
Saqi Laqa’i
In international covenants that Iran has committed to, and even in the constitution and civil laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran, fair trial is a fundamental human right and one of the guarantees is the presence of an independent lawyer in the trial process. According to Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – to which Iran is bound as a signatory – everyone is equal before the courts and tribunals and is entitled to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial court, in accordance with the law. Every accused person has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law, and to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of their defense and communication with their chosen lawyer; and to defend themselves in person or through their chosen lawyer in court.
Without the presence of independent lawyers alongside the defendants in all stages of the trial, the suspicion of disrupting justice always exists; because the defendants are not necessarily aware of their rights and even if they are aware of their rights, in complex and special trial conditions, where the defendants are under psychological pressure, they need the accompaniment of a lawyer.
Respecting the rights of the people, including the accused and the plaintiff, is recognized in the criminal procedure law. According to this, the right to choose a lawyer (appointed lawyer) and, if not eligible for selection, the right to have a lawyer (assigned lawyer) is granted. According to Article 348, in cases of crimes punishable by death, life imprisonment, amputation, and intentional crimes against physical integrity with a full or more than one-third of the full penalty, as well as fourth-degree and higher disciplinary punishments, and also political and media crimes within the jurisdiction of a criminal court, the trial cannot be held without the presence of the accused’s lawyer. This paragraph highlights the importance of the role of a lawyer in fair trials and protecting the rights of the accused, which the legislator has emphasized and paid attention to. However, in the footnote of Article 48 of the same law, it states that in crimes against internal or external security and organized crimes that fall under Article
This provision does not specify what qualifications a lawyer should have to be approved by the head of the judiciary, and on what basis the highest judicial authority should determine the competence of a lawyer for handling security cases. This issue leaves the decision-making power in the hands of the head of the judiciary, allowing for subjective treatment. This is especially concerning since twenty lawyers have been recommended for this purpose, some of whom have previously served as judges in security cases and have gained notoriety for issuing politically motivated harsh sentences in these cases.
Furthermore, despite this provision, not only the independence of lawyers is questioned, but also the defendants will not be able to choose a free lawyer and will be forced to choose from among those who have been rejected for the umpteenth time, and this time from the highest judicial filter. There is a suspicion that instead of defending the accused, they may pursue the interests of the judicial system in the process of litigation and in court.
As the recent head of the judiciary expressed in his statement about this matter,
It says.
Sometimes, some lawyers use tricks to make the defendant escape from trial or make false statements. This may also happen in other crimes, but the issue is that security crimes are related to the rights of the public and it is in the interest of the public to prevent the defendant from escaping trial and punishment by depriving the people of their rights.
In fact, the head of the judiciary has practically questioned the independence of the judiciary and the independent role of lawyers in achieving justice, and has undermined the credibility and impartiality of the courts for security defendants, which has a widespread scope due to baseless accusations against political, civil, and journalist activists.
In the investigation of judicial cases, many political and security defendants are prevented from having their lawyers present, despite the emphasis of the law on the presence of a lawyer in the trial process. For example, in most security cases, the meeting between the lawyer and the defendant is prevented before the trial, and the power of attorney is obtained by handing over the power of attorney to prison officials. (2) The process of handling the cases of security defendants shows that their courts are often formed as a group and in the shortest possible time, and the defendants do not have the right to defend themselves. Their lawyers are only allowed to read the case minutes a few minutes before the trial. (3) In some cases, the judge does not even allow their lawyers to speak and has treated them in a derogatory manner. (4)
Unfortunately, this recurring pattern shows the violation of human rights in the courts and judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. But what is the role of lawyers in the process of handling security and political cases outside of Iran? To compare, I will give an example of one of the most secure cases in the world, the case of one of the suspects of the September 11 attacks, in one of the criticized judicial systems.
Rashid Williams, a lawyer for the US Department of Defense, is responsible for defending Ammar al-Baluchi as a member of a legal team. Ammar al-Baluchi, a Pakistani citizen, is one of the five suspects accused of involvement in the September 11 attacks, currently held in Guantanamo Bay prison. He has been sentenced to death for his alleged involvement in the attacks and now, seventeen years later, a legal team in the US is still working to save him from execution. In a video interview with the Broumand Foundation, he says that in addition to defending his client, he is also working to raise public awareness about him in the US and the world, and to protest and inform about Mr. al-Baluchi’s history of torture. (5) The five-member legal team for Mr. al-Baluchi says that in this case and in military courts, torture is widely used against the defendants. Rashid Williams says, “We are certain that
According to Mr. Albaluchi’s lawyer, in the organization of military court lawyers, of which Mr. Williams is a member, the goal is to ensure the rule of law and fair trial. He says, “As a lawyer, it is my duty to raise public awareness about this case and address the issues that we believe are preventing Ammar Albaluchi from receiving a fair trial. Ultimately, the prosecutor’s request in this case is for five people to be killed for their alleged crimes. When we talk about a judicial trial where the outcome is the life or death of a person, the case must be handled at the highest level and with the best quality, and sensitive issues must also be addressed, because it is a matter of life and death for a human being.”
Mr. Williams understands the importance of creating a fair legal process from the potential outcomes of the efforts in the legal process of this case, and therefore believes that the decisions of judges are of great importance. He has not faced any direct danger in working on this important security case so far and has no worries about his life, safety, or even his job. He says that he even receives money from the Department of Defense and the US Army to represent this case in order to do his job in the best possible way.
Compare this to the situation that lawyers have in Iran. In Iran, the majority of lawyers do not take on security and political cases due to the lack of security. Those who do have the courage to take on these cases must risk facing legal and security consequences. In recent years, a significant number of lawyers have been prosecuted or faced accusations such as “propaganda against the system” or “conspiracy against the system” for taking on political or security cases, or even for their own media activities. They have faced legal and security repercussions and have even been sentenced to prison.
Independence of lawyers was compromised with the latest amendment in the process of obtaining a lawyer’s license (6) and the interference of the chief of judiciary and the chief of the revolutionary court in approving the lawyer’s work permit. Now, with the addition of Article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in security and political cases, the meaning of lawyer’s representation and independence will practically be lost, and as a result, any hope for a fair trial will be completely washed away.
Notes:
-
Head of Judiciary: Sometimes some lawyers cause the accused to escape from trial.
ISNA
June 11th, 2018
-
For more information, refer to a biography: Shahram Ahmadi.
Bonyad-e Broomand
Bonyad-e Broomand translates to “Broomand Foundation” in English.
-
یک سرباز
For more information, refer to a biography: Kaveh (Khaled) Vissi, a soldier.
The foundation of success.
-
For more information, refer to a biography: Amjad Salehi.
Bonyad-e Broomand
Bonyad-e Broomand translates to “Broomand Foundation” in English.
-
یک نویسنده و فیلمساز
Conversation with Rashid Williams, a writer and filmmaker.
The foundation of prosperity
April 2, 2018
-
The Law on Obtaining a Judicial Power of Attorney
The website of the Central Bar Association of Attorneys.
Tags
Monthly Peace Line Magazine peace line Saqi Laqa'i