Conversation with Mani Tehrani

Sometimes we imagine that we have reached a world where public torture of humans is intertwined with history or even mythology, and at the same time, a reminder like the whip on the backs of the workers of the Agh Darreh gold mine in West Azerbaijan, Iran, disturbs our naive thoughts. A worker who is working in a center of wealth production, which is not a job but a death sentence, must endure the lashings in exchange for his meager monthly wages. Instead of receiving his rightful pay, he must endure pain and have his human dignity crushed, so that he may forget that he has any rights. At the very least, his right, which is mentioned in all human rights, religious, ideological, earthly and extraterrestrial texts, after the right to life, is his human dignity and the sanctity of his soul. Even the executioners who carry out the sentence of the black whip cover their faces with a black mask; because deep down, they know that humiliating and

We have discussed the human dignity, its nuances and theoretical foundations with “Mohammad Moghimi”, a lawyer in Tehran, which you are reading.

Does the concept of human dignity have a universal definition in the world? And if so, what is the legal framework for respecting it?

The principles of human dignity can be categorized into three branches: moral, human rights, and religious.

The purpose of my question is from a human rights perspective.

These three sections are not unrelated. For example, in Iranian universities, when discussing human rights and human dignity, reference is also made to religious sources. Now, some may not accept religious sources.

Having acceptance or not is not the issue, but rather a contradiction arises and, for example, groups like ISIS consider their actions to be based on the same religious sources as their teachings.

For this reason, some do not accept references to religious sources. I also believe that scientific issues should not be confused with religious and spiritual matters.

Is compatibility between religious resources and human rights possible?

Compatibility is possible. However, extremist ideologies such as ISIS create damage to this compatibility. In general, blending scientific and legal issues with religious matters is challenging because religion is open to interpretation and each group can have a different interpretation. Religion is based on faith and belief, while science is based on experience, discovery, and observation.

From a human rights perspective, is there a universal definition of the world or is the definition of human dignity different in America compared to Africa?

“If there is no unity, it is very close to each other. Of course, in the field of humanities and here in human rights, any expert can offer new theories and add something to the current definition. Human being is to us a human, with dignity and respect.”

What is the difference between a political criminal and a common criminal?

In my articles and interviews about the political crime bill, I have explained in detail that we should not have political crimes in principle. Instead, in today’s world, we should define and respect the fundamental rights of citizens instead of political crimes. If this is done, there will be no need to define political crimes. For example, criticism, protest, and peaceful gatherings are among the fundamental rights of citizens, and in a peaceful power rotation system, there is no need to use violence.

The current government of Iran, especially its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, says that the measure of democracy is not just black and white, and points to the protests in America and Britain and the arrest and imprisonment of some protesters as a defense of its actions.

Yes, democracy is not black and white, but if democracy exists, it allows for peaceful protests by citizens. They can criticize, draw cartoons, and participate in protest gatherings. In such conditions, neither citizens nor the government have any reason or justification to use weapons or violence. If these democratic conditions exist and someone still resorts to using weapons to protest, they should be treated like any other criminal. This means that even when we say that wearing prison clothes is humiliating and should not be used, or that books and newspapers should not be available to prisoners, these rights should be respected for all prisoners, even murderers and criminals. These are the basic conditions for respecting human dignity and fair trials. In some countries, a murder suspect appears in court dressed in a suit, tie, and formal attire. No citizen should be discriminated against. If someone peacefully criticizes and protests, they are not a criminal, and if someone commits a crime, they should be treated like any other criminal. The crime should

In Iran, from time to time, individuals known as “vagabonds and thugs” are arrested and paraded on the streets to be humiliated as a lesson for others. Is this legal? What is its impact? What do other countries do with criminals and why does this number continue to increase in Iran?

First of all, there is no such punishment in the law; therefore, it is not legal. There is a principle called the principle of legality of crimes and punishments, which means that the crime and punishment must be specified in the law and it is not a matter of personal taste. The motivation and goal of the executor does not justify bypassing the law and exercising personal taste. The purpose of punishment in the law is rehabilitation, while these actions only exacerbate the crime. Even if throwing a criminal into a furnace and parading them in the city for humiliation was specified in the law, it would still be a wrong law. Humiliation and insult cause irreparable psychological damage to the individual, while the law should strive to bring the criminal back into the embrace of society and a healthy and normal life. This approach only creates a sense of revenge. No human is born a criminal. Environmental factors play a significant role in pushing individuals towards criminal behavior. Studies in criminology show that in many

In the world, there are powerful labor unions; what can they do about the beating of miners in Iran? Is supporting in these situations their inherent duty or considered interference in the country’s internal affairs?

In cases of human rights violations, one of the executive guarantees for combating them is public opinion support. Public opinion, both domestically and internationally, plays a crucial role and has a significant impact. In these cases, proper communication must be carried out in order for public opinion to show a reaction.

In Iran, private information and even false accusations of political defendants are published, while the identities of economic defendants are often mentioned in the media using abbreviations. This is justified by the argument that mentioning names is illegal until the end of the trial and the issuance of a verdict, and even after the verdict, the judge has the final say and media scrutiny and questioning of the court’s decision is considered a crime. Where does this lack of transparency come from and what does the law say about it?

According to the law, the names of all suspects should not be mentioned in the media until a final verdict – meaning a final verdict in the court of appeal – is issued. This is because until a final verdict is issued, the person is not considered guilty and there is a possibility of acquittal or change of verdict. In the case of political suspects, the names of the suspects are generally not published by domestic media. In many cases, these names are published by foreign media or on social media.

In many cases, the media and Kayhan newspaper have revealed the identities of the suspects.

Yes, that’s right, it’s against the law. However, according to the law, after the verdict is finalized, lawyers have the right to give their opinions about the verdict and publish them in the media.

After the issuance of the verdict, these opinions are about Sohrab’s post-death drug and have no effect. In the world, what is the process and how much can journalists and lawyers legally influence the process of issuing a verdict? And is it possible to clarify and have an impact on current laws in Iran?

After the issuance of the verdict, it is believed that this action helps to enlighten public opinion. It is the right of the people to be informed about the process that led to the issuance of this verdict. Transparency is one of the necessities of a democratic society and one of the desirable items of governance. One of the guarantees of transparency is holding public trials, which is also mentioned in our country’s constitution. In political and media crimes, the court must be held publicly and with the presence of a fair jury.

Why is there no enforcement guarantee in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? And what is the solution to overcome this deficiency?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – as its name suggests – is simply a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. If a country violates the provisions of this declaration, it will face international consequences and it is not free of charge. For example, human rights commissions or special rapporteurs of the United Nations will investigate, declare, condemn, and follow up on cases of violations in that country. Of course, international law and human rights are evolving and their enforcement is also evolving; meaning that improving the human rights situation is a gradual process and the nature of its enforcement is also different. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the fundamental rights of countries are considered, and by fundamental rights we mean the same as the constitutions of countries, which vary depending on the level of democracy in those countries, and their enforcement is also subject to the same matter. Sometimes some international powers also politically exploit the issue of human rights. For example, they discriminate in dealing with two countries, Iran and Saudi Arabia

In my opinion, do you think human rights sanctions help improve the human rights situation in the country or are they themselves a violation of the rights of ordinary people?

Yes, I strongly criticize the economic sanctions. They violate the basic rights and daily lives of citizens. People who are economically weak will not have the opportunity to engage in civil activities and their human rights will worsen every day, not improve.

According to reports, suicide and street conflicts have significantly increased in Iran. Is mental well-being also a part of human rights in society? Is the reason for this situation economic sanctions or the weakness of the judicial system in the country?

I cannot confirm or reject these reports as an individual. However, these issues have different roots, some of which are societal. Economic issues and poverty are also not irrelevant. The weakness of the judicial system in these matters is mostly limited to the methods of punishment. For example, if an individual commits a crime, they are sent to prison and then they come out even more criminal and enter society. It could be said that the problem lies within the management of prisons.

Who is primarily responsible for the enforcement of human rights in Iran?

It depends on which aspect of human rights we consider. Human rights encompass a wide range. Human rights even include the right to housing and food. Some parts of it are dependent on the resources and wealth of the country. Governments are responsible, but based on these same variables that I mentioned, it is possible for a country to have a good situation in terms of respecting some human rights and a bad situation in other areas. Many human rights issues also have an ethical aspect.

Where are the centers for strengthening the enforcement of human rights guarantees in Iran?

A human rights lawyer should inform the public through writing articles, conducting research, and raising awareness.

Regarding the observance of human dignity in punishment, today many countries consider the death penalty to be inhumane. At the same time, Iran claims that it executes drug traffickers in order to prevent the growth of addiction and the buying and selling of drugs, while its prisons are three times over capacity and can no longer accommodate more inmates. What is your opinion?

There has always been a debate between opponents and supporters of execution. However, the overall trend in the world is towards abolishing the death penalty. Currently, in Europe and some states in America, the death penalty does not exist. In Iran, a portion of executions have religious roots. The religiously prescribed punishment, which is very exceptional, and retribution, which is a completely personal decision. But when it comes to drug crimes, we are faced with the right to life. This right to life is debatable both in terms of human rights and religion. In the Quran (the holy book of Muslims), it is written that if you save one person from death, it is as if you have saved all of humanity from death. However, the root of the drug problem must be addressed. As we can see, these executions have only led to an increase in the number of addicts and drug traffickers in the country. Therefore, execution is not the solution, it is just masking the problem

Thank you for the opportunity you have given us.