|
 About
Age 30 Nationality Iran Religion Atheist Civil status Married Education high school diploma Occupation university student Rank/Position — Institution revolutionary leftist
Case Date of execution September 1988 Location Iran Mode of execution hanging Charges Unknown charge About this Case
Mr. Sattar Babanejad is one of the victims in the mass killings of political prisoners in 1988. The majority of the executed prisoners were members of the Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO). In addition to members of those Marxist-Leninist organizations oppose to the Islamic Republic, activists of organizations that were not against the Islamic Republic were also among the victims of these mass killings.
The information about Mr. Sattar Babanejad is taken from the book The Tudeh Martyrs by The Tudeh Party of Iran Publications. He was born in Ardebil. He was a student majoring in Civil Engineering and worked in a private company.
The Tudeh Party of Iran was created in 1941. The Tudeh Party ideology was Marxist-Leninist and it supported the former Soviet Union's policies. The Party played a major role in Iran's political scene until it was banned for the second time following the August 19, 1953 coup. After the 1979 Revolution, the Party declared Ayatollah Khomeini and the Islamic Republic regime revolutionaries and anti-imperialists and actively supported the new government. Although the Party never opposed the Islamic Republic, it became the target of government attacks in 1982 when most of the Party's leaders and members were imprisoned.
Arrest and detention
The circumstances of this defendant’s arrest and detention are unknown. Mr. Sattar Babanejad was arrested in 1982. His was detained at Evin and Gohardasht prisons. He had some visits with his family; but, there is no information about these visits. According to the above source, in 1987, they transferred some prisoners from Evin to Gohardasht Prison. These prisoners had completed their sentence but had not been released. In order to put more pressure on them, they were beaten. At this time, he fought back against the guard and was beaten. As a result, with the danger of losing his vision, he was transferred to the hospital. His mother was informed of this the next time she came to visit.
Trial
According to the above book, the first trial of this defendant was held at Evin prison during the fall of 1984. They ruled he could go free if he repented but he refused. There is no more specific information of this or any such trials that condemned thousands of political prisoners to their death in a few months period. According to the available information, the Iranian authorities did not try the victims of the 1988 mass execution in a court with in the presence of a defense lawyer. The prisoners who were executed in 1988 had been questioned by a three-member special committee, composed of a religious judge, a representative of the Intelligence Ministry, and the Tehran Prosecutor. The committee questioned the leftist prisoners about their beliefs and their faith in God and religion.
The relatives of the political prisoners executed in 1988 refute the legality of the judicial process that resulted in thousands of executions throughout Iran. In their 1988 open letter to then- Minister of Justice Dr. Habibi, they argue that the official secrecy surrounding these executions is proof of their illegality. They note that an overwhelming majority of these prisoners had been tried and sentenced to prison terms, which they were either serving or had already completed serving at the time they were retried and sentenced to death.
Charges
No charge was publicly levelled against the defendant. In their letters to the Minister of Justice (1988), and to the UN Special Rapporteur visiting Iran (February 2003), the families of the victims refer to the authorities' accusations against the prisoners – accusations that may have led to their execution. These accusations include being "counter-revolutionary, anti-religion, and anti-Islam," as well as being "associated with military action or with various [opposition] groups based near the borders."
An edict of the Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ruhollah Khomeini, reproduced in the memoirs of Ayatollah Montazeri, his designated successor, corroborates the reported claims regarding the charges against the executed prisoners. In this edict, Ayatollah Khomeini refers to the PMOI's members as "hypocrites" who do not believe in Islam and "wage war against God" and decrees that prisoners who still approve of the positions taken by this organization are also "waging war against God" and should be sentenced to death.
Evidence of guilt
The report of this execution contains no evidence provided against the defendant.
Defense
In their open letter, the families of the prisoners note that defendants were not given the opportunity to defend themselves in court. Against the assertion that prisoners were associated with guerrillas’ operating near the borders, the families submit the isolation of their relatives from the outside during their detention: "Our children lived in most difficult conditions. Visits were limited to 10 minutes behind a glass divider through a telephone every two weeks. We witnessed, over the past seven years, that they were denied access to anything that would have allowed them to establish contacts outside their prisons' walls." Under such conditions the families reject the claim of the authorities that these prisoners were able to engage with the political groups outside Iran.
It is possible that the prisoners who were members of other organizations were also charged for being "anti religious" and were condemned for insisting on their beliefs.
Judgment
No specific information is available about the defendant’s execution. Mr. Sattar Babanejad was hanged during the mass killings of political prisoners in September, 1988.
|
|
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... July 1988-January 1989: mass execution of political prisoners
Read about the conditions in which individuals were detained, tried and sentenced. Between July 1988 and January 1989, thousands of political prisoners throughout Iran were summarily executed in the Islamic Republic's prisons.
Exceptional procedure
Following a July 1988 order by Ayatollah Khomeini, several three-man commissions comprised of representatives of the Islamic Revolutionary Courts, the Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office and the Ministry of Intelligence were formed in Tehran and the Provinces. Over a six-month period, these three-man commissions subjected thousands of political prisoners (from various leftist religious and secular groups), most of whom had already been tried and convicted, to formalized interrogation sessions.
Inquisition-style trials
The interrogations or inquisition-style trials were designed to discover the prisoners' political and religious views. They sometimes lasted a few brief minutes and bore little resemblance to any judicial proceedings aimed at establishing the guilt or innocence of a defendant charged with a criminal offence under the law.
The commissions did not inform prisoners that these interrogations were retrials that could lead to their executions. Defendants had no access to legal counsel and were not given the opportunity to defend themselves or to appeal the commission’s decision. Those who where deemed “unrepentant” were sentenced to death. The sentence was generally carried out immediately after the proceedings. The executions were not announced publicly and families were informed of the executions weeks after they took place.
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, 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.
Judgment rights
The right to appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction.
ICCPR, Article 14.5. The right to seek pardon or commutation of sentence.
ICCPR, Article 6.4. 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.
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 1Article 2%viol_ctcidp_2%.
|
