|
 About
Age — Nationality Iran Religion Presumed Muslim Civil status — Education — Occupation — Rank/Position — Affiliation pro-democracy
Case Date of execution July 31, 1980 Location Evin Prison, Tehran, Iran Mode of execution shooting Charges Plotting to overthrow the Islamic Republic About this Case
The execution of Mr. Mohammad Ali Asangosha and 10 others was reported in the Jomhuri Eslami daily (July 31, 1980). He was reportedly involved in planning a coup d’etat, known as Noje, which was never carried out.
On July 7, 1980, the Islamic Republic of Iran authorities announced the discovery and dismantling of a civil and military network which had planned a coup d’etat to overthrow the regime. Following this discovery, more than sixty officers and civilians were executed in several cities of Iran in less than a month. Most of the officers were still active in the army and had not been purged in the first wave of purges which took place within the file and ranks of the army after the fall of the monarchy.
Two months later, the organization NEGHAB, in a communiqué, claimed responsibility for this attempted ‘uprising.’ The organization attested that “the path of Mossadegh is that of the people” and today “Bakhtiar is its authentic leader.”
“We have risen up to put an end to this curse (the Islamic regime) and to entrust the affairs of our land to the faithful disciple of Mossadegh—Shapour Bakhtiar.” (Iran: In Defense of Human Rights, National Movement of the Iranian Resistance, Paris, 1983)
Nureddin Kianuri, Secretary General of the Tudeh Party (the Iranian pro-Soviet communist party) mentions the coup d’etat in an article dated May 2, 2000 (www.rahetudeh.com). Kianuri stresses the fact that the military branch of the Tudeh, which cooperated with the Islamic Republic's authorities, discovered and "neutralized" the above mentioned organization as well as other groups that planned a coup against the newly established regime.
Arrest and detention
No information is available on the circumstances of this defendant’s arrest and detention.
Trial
The circumstances of the defendant’s trial are unknown.
Charges
Besides participation in plotting a potential coup d’etat, no charges were specified for this defendant. In a 07/19/1980 indictment (published in the Enqelab Eslami and Jomhuri Eslami dailies, July 20, 1980), the Public Prosecutor said the following regarding some other participants of this failed coup d’etat: “These enthusiasts of the Shah’s rotten, filthy, and reactionary regime, these supporters of the blood-thirsty American imperialism, had in mind to bring ‘American social democracy’ as a gift to the liberated people of Iran. They had in mind to re-asses the opinion of our heroic nation about the return of the royal system through a referendum […].”
He added: “This conspiracy is not a single incident and these conspirators cannot be considered ordinary convicts. These are criminals who have undermined the newly-found truth, honor, and dignity of a liberated umma [community of Muslim people]. Considering that and by consulting the holly verses of the Koran regarding the punishment of the ‘rebel’ against the Islamic sovereign, it is imperative that the convicts receive their punishment according to the Shari'a law.”
The validity of the criminal charges brought against this defendant cannot be ascertained in the absence of the basic guarantees of a fair trial.
Evidence of guilt
The report of this execution provides no information about the evidence of guilt presented against the defendant.
Defense
No information is available on the defendant’s defense.
Judgment
The Islamic Revolutionary Tribunal of the Army sentenced Mr. Asangosha to death. He was executed at dawn.
|
|
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: 1979-1980
Read about the conditions in which individuals were detained, tried and sentenced. Pre-trial detentions
The charges upon which the accused were arraigned were often extremely broad. Defendants generally had no access to legal counsel nor to their file and the evidence against them prior to the trial.
Trials
Witnesses might be called, or the statement of persons with relevant information read into the court’s record. Accusation witnesses could come forward the day of the trial to give evidence against the accused, but in most cases, defense witnesses were not allowed in court. There was no automatic right of a defendant to cross-examine witnesses or to know the source of the evidence against him. The defendant had an opportunity to state his side of the matter and attempt to refute what was said against him, but the final decision was solely up to the discretion of the religious judge.
Appeal processes
The judgments of the Revolutionary Courts were not subject to appeal. The convicts were generally executed within a few hours of the judgment.
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 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 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, and 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.
|
