Azerbaijan, Baku, 4 August / Trend , T.Jafarov /
Interview of Trend Persian desk with a member of the Central Board of the Human Rights Protection Committee of Iran, General Secretary of the Committee for Free Elections, a lawyer of the first degree Mohammad Seyfzadeh.
Trend : A trial was held in the Tehran city court over 100 political activists of the Iranian opposition (reformist camp). How do you, as a member of the Central Board of the Human Rights Protection Committee of Iran, can assess the conduct of the trial?
Mohammad Seyfzadeh: The defendants were arrested in connection with the events that took place after the presidential election. They are accused of committing a "color revolution". Their arrest occurred in violation of the provisions of articles 112, 119 and 124 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Under those provisions, they had to be notified, they should be called and made a warning. According to article 36 of the Constitution and article 2 of the Law on Islamic punishments, the crime and the punishment for it should be reflected in the law. This means that a person may be accused only for the crime, which is defined by law and may be punished in case of evidence against him. These people are accused of a crime called "color revolution". The crimes referred to as the "color revolution" does not exist in our Law on Islamic Punishments and other laws. Giving criminal overtones to their actions is prohibited, even if it is in favor of the accused, it is prohibited.
Q: How do you evaluate the process of questioning the accused and investigation of their case?
A: The investigation on the cause of the accused was also held contrary to the provisions of the law. According to their lawyer, lawyers' participation was not ensured in the initial investigation, interrogation and trial. On the other hand, even if they committed a crime, the charges made against them are political. According to article 165 of the Constitution, in all cases except three, the trials must be open. According to article 168 of the Constitution, as well as the first item of the article 20 of the Laws of Revolutionary and Supreme Court, the processes in relation to politics and the press should be held in the Court of Justice (Supreme Court), with the participation of members of the arbitral court in an open manner. As a result of conducting the court session on their case in a closed manner, the relevant provisions of the Constitution and other laws were violated. Also, the elected members of the arbitral court should not be representatives of state. In addition, the law prohibits distributing information on the radio and television and other media outlets about accused prior to the court session. According to article 188 of the Criminal Code, if the names and positions of defendants and victims are displayed, distributing their testimonies is inadmissible. According to law, to do this is allowed only after a court sentence. Violators of the provisions of the law can be accused of insulting and slander.
Q: Claims are made at press that the trial on the case of a member of the Central Council of the Assembly of Combatant Clergy Muhammad Ali Abtehi, who is a religious person, should be held in a special court for clerics. For this reason, the fact that the Supreme Court deals with it is considered illegal. What is your opinion on this?
A: I consider the existence of the Court for Clerics and the Revolutionary Court as unconstitutional. According to the article 159 of the Constitution, the law recognizes only the Supreme Court, and as a special court - the military court. Although Abtahi is a religious person, if he committed any crime, his case should be considered in the Supreme Court.
Q: How do you approach the confessions of accused persons?
A: Under Article 38 of the Constitution, torture is prohibited. If the recognition was obtained through torture, they have no legal effect. Torture is a crime and the law requires punishing those who commit torture. Evidences collected during the preliminary investigation and trial in an illegal manner can not be accepted as the evidence.
Do you have feedback? Contact our journalist at: [email protected]