It has been a few days since the news of the death sentence for “Sharifeh Mohammadi” has caused great sadness and anger in the Iranian society. This sentence was issued by the first branch of the Revolutionary Court in Rasht, with the charge of “rebellion”.

“Examining the legal aspects of this ruling is challenging for any jurist committed to the principles of human rights, as all the procedures and processes that led to the issuance of such an unjust ruling by the judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran are in conflict with the fundamental and foundational principles of law accepted in the civilized world.”

From the behaviors outside the legal framework of judicial authorities in the process of arrest and interrogation of the accused, to handling the charges in the deviant institution known as the “Islamic Revolutionary Court”, and from denying the accused access to a lawyer during preliminary investigations and court proceedings, to lack of transparency and accurate information regarding the proceedings, all indicate the use of authoritarian tools by the judiciary and legislative institutions to impose their oppressive will.

The handling of the incident and the regrettable outcome of issuing the execution sentence for Sharifeh Mohammadi does not comply with any human rights standards. The criminal title of rebellion, which seems to be her main charge and is attributed to her based on her membership in the “Coordination Committee to Help Create Workers’ Organizations” years ago, regardless of the accuracy of this attribution – which has been subject to numerous doubts and criticisms – is based on Article 287 of the Islamic Penal Code, which states: “A group that takes up arms against the foundations of the Islamic Republic of Iran is considered a rebel and its members will be sentenced to execution if they use weapons.”

This is a jurisprudential ruling extracted from the dark depths of history, which has been covered with an unjust legal garment. It is very harsh and lacks criminal standards and the establishment of penal laws. Regardless of the fact that the principle of predicting execution as punishment for this crime is not acceptable, this punishment is imposed even on someone who was a simple member of the groups mentioned by the legislator and did not commit any armed actions. This situation seems to have been exemplified in the case of Sharifeh Mohammadi. However, it should be noted that the coordination committee for helping to create labor organizations is in no way considered a group that has rebelled against the Islamic Republic of Iran and apparently the Revolutionary Court of Rasht has attributed Sharifeh Mohammadi to Kurdish armed groups in order to justify its unjust ruling.

As previously mentioned in an article titled “Execution: Deterrent or Intimidation” published in issue 139 of the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh” (1), the nature of the extreme punishment of execution for crimes such as rebellion results in the inability to utilize legal facilities such as postponement of punishment, suspension of punishment, reduction of punishment, and other legal options. This makes this harsh and irreversible punishment, with its strictness and inflexibility, difficult to implement.

In the case of Sharifeh Mohammadi, aside from the unjust accusation against her, the interrogation and trial process leading to such a verdict is also full of violations of human rights principles and standards. The deprivation of Sharifeh Mohammadi’s right to access a lawyer (2) is one of the most significant examples of these violations. This deprivation not only goes against various international standards, including articles (b) and (d) of Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, but also violates the rules established in the legal system of the Islamic Republic, including Article 35 of the Constitution, which states: “In all courts, the parties have the right to choose a lawyer for themselves, and if they are unable to choose a lawyer, facilities must be provided for them to appoint one,” and Article 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which states: “The accused must be informed of the charges and evidence against them as soon as possible, and must

The interrogations conducted after the arrest of Sharifeh Mohammadi, according to her statement, were accompanied by physical and psychological torture, which is in violation of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that may lead to the degradation of their human dignity.” Or Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

Currently, and at the time of writing this text, the case of Sharifeh Mohammadi has been sent to the Supreme Court of the country for consideration of her appeal against the death sentence. It is hoped that the court’s review will lead to the annulment of this unjust sentence, which includes numerous formal and substantive flaws. However, there is no doubt that the death sentence issued by the first branch of the Revolutionary Court in Rasht is another black mark on the record of the rejected judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran and will be recognized as an example of systematic and widespread human rights violations.

Notes:

1- Haqi, Ehsan, “Execution; Deterrence or Intimidation”, Peace Line Monthly Magazine, 13th year: November 1401, issue 138, pp. 45-44.

2. For further study on the right to access a lawyer, refer to:

Rights, kindness, “The right to use a lawyer in international laws compared to laws in Iran”, Monthly Peace Line, Year 13: December 1401, Issue 140, pp. 7-6.