|
 About
Age — Nationality Iran Religion Non-Believer Civil status — Education — Occupation — Rank/Position — Affiliation revolutionary leftist
Case Date of execution January 25, 1983 Location Evin Prison, Tehran, Iran Mode of execution shooting Charges Acting against state's security; Actively opposing the Islamic Republic; Armed rebellion against the Islamic Republic; Membership of anti-regime guerilla group; Participating in clashes with revolutionary guards and or Bassij brothers; Plotting to overthrow the Islamic Republic; Possession of arms About this Case
The execution of Mr. Jahangir Ahmad Goltapeh, a member of the Ettehadieh Komonist-ha, along with 21 others, was reported in the Jomhuri Eslami daily on January 27, 1983. The report quotes the public relations of the Islamic Revolution’s Public Prosecutor’s Office in Tehran. The information about his charges and defenses was published in the same newspaper on January 10, 1983.
This execution was also reported in an addendum to the Mojahed magazine (No 261), published by Mojahedin Khalq Organization in 1985. The list includes 12028 individuals, affiliated with various opposition groups, who were executed or killed during clashes with the Islamic Republic security forces from June 1981 to the publication date of the magazine.
The Ettehadieh Komonist-ha (the Union of Communists of Iran) was created by exiled opponents of the Pahlavi regime who mostly belonged to the Student Confederation. They followed the teachings of Mao Tse-Tung and did not believe in guerilla warfare. The group became marked by ideological divides during the periods preceding and following the 1979 revolution which caused it to split into several factions. One of the most important rifts was triggered by the decision by a number of members to take up arms and take over a city in Iran. The uprising plan, devised in the midst of an active and violent anti-communist campaign by the revolutionary Islamic government, split the Union in two factions: one supporting the armed movement and the other opposing it.
In the winter of 1982, armed members of the Union hid in a forest in the North of Iran (Jangal in Farsi) outside the city of Amol. This group, also known as the Sarbedaran-e Jangal, was involved in several clashes with the Revolutionary guards and ultimately, on January 26, attacked the city of Amol hoping to generate a general uprising. The attempt to seize Amol failed. It is reported that a number of the group’s members, revolutionary guards, and civilians were killed during the Amol clash. Subsequently, members of the Union, including those who opposed the Amol uprising, were arrested and tried for belonging to the organization and for having participated in the Amol clash
Arrest and detention
The circumstances of this defendant’s arrest and detention are not known.
Trial
Based on this report, Mr. Ahmad Goltapeh, along with 28 to 29 others, was tried between January 9th and 15th, 1983. The trial took place at the 1st division of the Islamic Revolutionary Public Prosecutor’s Office in Tehran and with Ayatollah Mohammadi Gilani as the residing judge.
Charges
Mr. Ahmad Goltapeh’s indictment was read to him by Asadollah Lajevardi, Tehran’s Public Prosecutor. The text of this indictment is as follows: “being active in “counter-revolutionary grouplets from 1980 until September 1982, being a member of the Union of Communists of Iran (Sarbedaran) and staying in the forests of Amol for 6 months in order to conduct military action against the divine government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Moreover, he was charged with “directly participating in the armed clashes on November 13 in the forest where one revolutionary guard was martyred, directly participating in Razkeh clashes,…directly participating in attacking Amol on January 26, 1982 and killing tens of Hezbollah Ummah (community) -he used a G3 in this clash and was the head of the team- and wounding several revolutionary guards and Gendarmerie forces as well as unarmed civilians which in some cases led to their martyrdom…directly participating in the clashes of February 9, 1982 in Gaznehsarah where he was wounded in the head.” The Islamic Revolution’s Public Prosecutor’s Office in Tehran declared that Mr. Ahmad Goltapeh’s culpability was “indisputable”. Therefore, the Public Prosecutor asked for the “maximum penalty possible.”
Evidence of guilt
There is no mention of documented evidence against Mr. Ahmad Goltapeh. The report states that he admitted to having stolen food while in the forest and having taken part in clashes with the security forces that resulted in the death of one revolutionary guard and the injury of a doctor.
Defense
According to the report, Mr Ahmad Goltapeh did not defend himself, however, he pointed to the fact that: “When we were in the forest, our leaders used to tell us that the pamphlets of Sarbedaran were sold and bought for 300 tumans and people were waiting for us to attack the city.”
Judgment
The 1st division of the Islamic Revolutionary Public Prosecutor’s Office in Tehran sentenced Mr. Ahmad Goltapeh to death. The sentence was carried out at 9 pm.
|
|
Human rights violations in this caseThe legal context
Read about the courts, the judges, and the procedure. The courts
Special courts, known as the Islamic Revolutionary Tribunals, were set up after the February 1979 revolution. Their jurisdiction encompasses a wide array of offences ranging from association with or support of the former regime, promotion of foreign influence, and enmity with the revolution to possession, use or sales of narcotic drugs, murder, and profiteering. In the 1980s, a penal court, presided over by one judge, was created to handle some of the offenses punishable by death, such as theft or adultery. These tribunals’ decisions must be confirmed by a chamber of the Supreme Judicial Council.
The judges
Prosecutors and judges are not necessarily jurists. By 1981, the judiciary was purged of judges trained in law schools. They were replaced by seminary graduates and students, as well as by political appointees (an estimated 2000 by 1989). Since by law judges are only required to have a high school diploma and must be faithful to the Islamic Republic’s tenets, new recruits often have little formal training in the law and are chosen because of their political affiliation.
The procedure
The procedures of these ecclesiastical tribunals fail to meet the minimum guarantees for fair trial as established by international human rights instruments and by sha’ria (the Islamic system of law). In addition to executions ordered by revolutionary tribunals, extra-judicial executions are carried out, targeting dissidents and opposition leaders. In some cases, both inside and outside of Iran, these executions have been traced back to Iranian officials. It is, however, not known if in these particular cases trials are held in absentia.
Sources (Among others): Amnesty International, Law and Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, February 1980; Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights, The Justice System of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1992; E/CN.4/1989/26 p.14; UNCHR, Resolution 1984/54 , Abolition of Torture - Iran - 1; 28 November 1984; Report on the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Special Representative of the Commission, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, 28 January 1987. Amnesty International, A SHOCKED WORLD WATCHES IN DISBELIEF, VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, 1987-1990. Memoirs of Ayatollah Khalkhali, religious judge and former head of revolutionary tribunals (2001), and Ayatollah Montazeri, dismissed successor to Ayatollah Khomeini (2001). UNCH, E/CN.4/1994/50, Final report on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/62 of 10 March 1993 and Economic and Social Council decision 1993/273. E/CN.4/1994/50, 2 February 1994.
 read...
 close... Detentions, interrogations, and trials: 1981-1988
Read about the conditions in which individuals were detained, tried and sentenced. Pre-trial detentions
The accused were held, sometimes without being charged, for months or years in overcrowded prisons. During their detention, prisoners of conscience, and in particular supporters of political opposition groups or members of religious or ethnic minorities, were routinely subject to physical and psychological torture. Interrogators used torture, authorized by the post-revolutionary law of Ta’zir (Discretionary Punishment Law), to obtain confessions of guilt or to induce repentance. The line between trial and interrogation was often blurred by the fact that the same individual would function as prosecutor, interrogator and judge.
Trials
Executed detainees may or may not have been tried formally. Prisoners of conscience were often tried through a summary process that might have lasted only a few minutes. When disclosed, charges facing the defendants were often vague or based on coerced confessions. Defendants had no access to attorneys, and they might not have been allowed to defend themselves.
Appeal processes
Convicts could not appeal their sentence and were often executed shortly after their conviction. Their execution was not necessarily announced.
read...
close... Based on the available information, the following human rights have been violated in this case:
The right to liberty and security of the person. The right not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 9.1.
The right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including the right to change and manifest one's religion or belief. UDHR, Article 18; ICCPR, Article 18.1, ICCPR, Article 18.2; Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, Article 1 and Article 6.
In its general comment 22 (48) of 20 July 1993, the United Nation’s Human Rights Committee observed that the freedom to "have or to adopt" a religion or belief necessarily entailed the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views, as well as the right to retain one's religion or belief. Article 18, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights bars coercion that would impair the right to have or adopt a religion or belief, including the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers to adhere to religious beliefs and congregations, to recant their religion or belief or to convert.
The right to freedom of opinion and expression, including the right to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. UDHR, Article 19; ICCPR, Article 19.1 and ICCPR, Article 19.2.
The right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of one's interests. UDHR, Article 20; ICCPR, Article 22.1.
The right to due process
The right to be presumed innocent until found guilty by a competent and impartial tribunal in accordance with law. ICCPR, Article 14.1 and Article 14.2.
Pre-trial detention rights
The right to know promptly and in detail the nature and cause of the charges against one. UDHR, Article 9(2); ICCPR, Article 9.2 and Article 14.3.a
The right to counsel of one's own choosing or the right to legal aid. The right to communicate with one's attorney in confidence ICCPR, Article 14.3.b and Article 14.3.d; Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, Article 1, Article 2 Article 5, Article 6, Article 8.
The right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defense case. ICCPR, Article 14.3.b.
The right not to be compelled to testify against oneself or to confess to guilt. ICCPR, Article 14.3.g.
The right not to be subjected to torture and to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. ICCPR, Article 7; Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment, Article 1 and Article 2.
Trial rights
The right to a fair and public trial without undue delay. ICCPR, Article 14.1, Article 14.3.c.
The right to defense through an attorney or legal aid. The right to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against one, and the right to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on one’s behalf under the same conditions as prosecution witnesses. ICCPR, Article 14.3.d and Article 14.3.e.
The right to have the decision rendered in public. ICCPR, Article 14.1.
The right not to be tried or punished again for an offence for which one has already been convicted or acquitted. ICCPR, Article 14.7.
Judgment rights
Capital punishment
The inherent right to life, of which no one shall be arbitrarily deprived. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 6.1; Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty, Article 1.1, Article 1.2.
The right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment. ICCPR, Article 7; Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment, Article 1 and Article 2.
|
