|
 About
Age 16 Nationality Iran Religion Presumed Muslim Civil status Single Education — Occupation — Rank/Position — Affiliation —
Case Date of execution July 19, 2005 Location Mashad, Iran Mode of execution hanging Charges Homosexual rape About this Case
The news of the execution of two juveniles named Mahmud Asgari, 16, and Ayaz Marhuni, 18, was published by the Iranian Student News Agency (ISNA, July 19, 2005) which mentioned their names as M. A. and A. M. On the same date, the Quds newspaper provided a detailed account of the arrest and alleged crimes. The case was raised by Human Rights Watch, in a letter dated July 27, 2005 to the Iranian president and head of the judiciary. On July 26, 2005, the Advocate website also published this news, referring to the executions as violations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Various other human rights groups have also expressed their objections to the executions. A year later, a report regarding this case was released by Simon Forbes, a UK-based gay rights activist (see Iranian Queer Organization website). This report, “Mashhad: Place of Martyrdom,” which analyzes various documents including evidence collected by the editor of Huriyah: A Queer Muslim Magazine, denies the veracity of the rape allegation. The report relies on interviews with unidentified individuals in Mashhad familiar with the case, as well as different newspaper stories.
Human Rights Watch argues that the executions of Mr. Asgari and Mr. Marhuni were in violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed before the age of eighteen. These treaties also prohibit the use of torture along with cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishments. Iran has ratified both treaties. Although the exact number of juvenile execution in Iran is unknown, human rights activists estimate that 12 juveniles were executed last year. According to the Human Rights Watch report, before the two youths were put to death, each also received 228 lashes for theft, disturbing public order, and consuming alcohol.
The two teenagers were ethnic Arabs from south west Iran whose families had relocated to Mashhad after the breakout of the Iran-Iraq War. They were known to be a gay couple (Mr. Forbes’ report).
Arrest and detention
The circumstances of arrest and detention for Mr. Mahmud Asgari are unknown. ISNA quoted the defendant saying that his arrest took place 14 months before his execution (about June 2004).
Trial
No information is available on the defendant’s trial.
Charges
The main charge against Mr. Mahmud Asgari was the rape of a 13- year-old boy. He was also charged with “robbery, disturbing public order, and consuming alcohol.”
The validity of the criminal charges brought against this defendant cannot be ascertained in the absence of the basic guarantees of a fair trial. Each year, Iranian authorities sentence to death hundreds of alleged common criminals, following judicial processes that fail to meet international standards. The exact number of people convicted based on trumped-up charges is unknown.
Evidence of guilt
The report of this execution does not contain information regarding the evidence provided against the defendant. According to ISNA, the defendant confessed to his crime in court.
International human rights organizations have repeatedly condemned the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its systematic use of severe torture and solitary confinement to obtain confessions from detainees and have questioned the authenticity of confessions obtained under duress.
Defense
No specific information is available on Mr. Asgari’s defense. The ISNA report quoted one of the defendants stating that they did not know that such action was punishable by death.
The Advocate quoted the lawyer for Mahmoud Asgari saying that Iran’s Supreme Court upheld the verdict and allowed the execution despite his objections based on the age of his client. He added that Iranian courts are supposed to commute death sentences handed to juveniles to five years in jail and that the judiciary has trampled on its own laws.
Mr. Forbes’ report challenges the “rape” accusation and claims that the teenagers, including the 13-year old boy presented as a rape victim, were involved in consensual sex. He refers to the ISNA report quoting one of the teenagers who stated that “we did not know committing such act is punishable by death.” Considering the fact that public executions for rape are common in Iran, it is likely that the teenagers had confessed to consensual homosexual sex, rather than rape.
The report also finds discrepancies between the gathered testimonies and the official news coverage of the story regarding the date and circumstances of the arrest of Mr. Marhuni and Mr. Asgari. For example, an official newspaper refers to an arrest that took place 16 months before the execution, whereas based on the statement of the teenagers themselves they were arrested 14 months before their execution. The report attributes the execution to the fact that the 13-year old was the son of a high ranking official.
Judgment
According to the ISNA report, Branch 19 of the Public Court issued the judgment and the Supreme Court confirmed it. The Court condemned Mr. Mahmud Asgari to imprisonment, lashes, and public execution. He was hanged in public after receiving 228 lashes on July 19, 2005.
|
|
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... 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 not to be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honor and reputation.
UDHR, Article 12, ICCPR, Article 17.1. The right to freedom of opinion and expression.
UDHR, Article 19; ICCPR, Article 19.1 and ICCPR, Article 19.2. The right to equality before the law and the right to equal protection of the law.
UDHR, Article 7; ICCPR, Article 26.
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 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.
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. -
The right of a person not to be subjected to the capital punishment for an offence committed before the age of eighteen. The right not to be deprived of life while pregnant.
ICCPR, Article 6.5; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37.a.
|
