08.2005 - Source: Freedom House

Security forces ("Freedom in the World 2005") [#41317],  [ID 8440]

"[...]Iranian security forces subjected hundreds of citizens to arbitrary arrest and incommunicado detention in 2004. Suspected dissidents are often held in unofficial, illegal detention centers, and allegations of torture are commonplace. Although legislation banning the use of torture in interrogations was approved by parliament and the Council of Guardians in May, allegations of torture persisted throughout the year. In August, according to local human rights groups, a prisoner who had been left hanging by his wrists had to have his hands amputated.[...]"

Document(s): Open document

04.2005 - Source: UK Home Office

Arbitrary arrest ("Country Report - April 2005") [#31980],  [ID 8441]

"[...]5.24 According to the Human Rights Watch World Report 1998 arbitrary arrest and detention had been and remained a feature within Iranian society. In 1997 large numbers of people arrested for suspected espionage or other political activity remained in detention without charge or trial, said to have been denied access to a lawyer of their choice or any other legal counsel. [8b](pg2) According to UNHCR senior Shi’a religious leaders and their followers had also been arrested and detained over recent years, some of whom are still detained or under house arrest. However, in March 1997 a decree to prohibit pre-trial detention of suspects, particularly the young, elderly, female or unwell, was issued by the Chief Justice Ayatollah Mohammed Yazdi. [3b] According the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade during 2003 arbitrary arrests and detentions continued. Hundreds remain in detention, often without charge or trial and without access to an attorney or contact with their families. In June 2003 up to 4000 people were arrested, and most later released, after pro-reform protests erupted in several cities. [69a][...]"

Document(s): Open document

28.02.2005 - Source: US Department of State

Arbitrary detention ("Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2004") [#29525],  [ID 8442]

"[...]e. Denial of Fair Public Trial
The Constitution provides that the judiciary is "an independent power"; however, in practice the court system was subject to government and religious influence. It served as the principal vehicle of the Government to restrict freedom and reform in the society. U.N. representatives, including the UNSR, the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, and independent human rights organizations noted the absence of procedural safeguards in criminal trials. Trials are supposed to be open to the public; however, frequently they are held in closed sessions without access to a lawyer; the right to appeal often is not honored.
[...]
In its 2003 report, the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted failures of due process in the court system caused by the absence of a "culture of counsel" and the previous concentration of authority in the hands of a judge who prosecuted, investigated, and decides cases. The Working Group called for active involvement of counsel in cases, from the custody and investigation phase through the trial and appeals phases. The Working Group welcomed the December 2002 reinstatement of prosecution services, after a 7-year suspension, but noted that this reform had thus far had been applied unevenly, with the judge still having major investigative responsibilities in many jurisdictions.
[...]
The legitimacy of the Special Clerical Court system continued to be a subject of debate. The clerical courts, which investigate offenses and crimes committed by clerics and which are overseen directly by the Supreme Leader, are not provided for in the Constitution and operated outside the domain of the judiciary. In particular, critics alleged that the clerical courts were used to prosecute clerics for expressing controversial ideas and for participating in activities outside the sphere of religion, such as journalism. The recommendations of the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention included a call to abolish both the Special Clerical Courts and the Revolutionary Courts, which were described as "responsible for many of the cases of arbitrary detention for crimes of opinion." [...]"

Document(s): Open document

15.09.2004 - Source: Schweizerische Flüchtlingshilfe

Repression of members and supporters of People's Mojahedin Organization marked by "extreme arbitrariness"; risk upon return, including arbitrary detention, prison terms and death penalty (expert opinion, in German) ("Iran: Vorgehen iranischer Behörden und Rückkehrgefährdung für Mitglieder, Aktivisten und/oder Sympathisanten der Volksmudjaheddin, Gutachten der SFH-Länderanalyse") [#26375],  [ID 8443]

Document(s): Open document

10.2002 - Source: UK Home Office

UK Home Office: Judicial means to determine the legality of detention do not exist ("Country Assessment - October 2002") [#9556],  [ID 8444]

"4.22. Although the Constitution prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, there is reportedly no legal time limit on incommunicado detention, nor any judicial means to determine the legality of detention. Suspects may be held for questioning in jails or in local Revolutionary Guards offices.

[...]

4.28. Arbitrary arrest and detention has been and remains a feature within Iranian society. In 1997 large numbers of people arrested for suspected espionage or other political activity remained in detention without charge or trial, said to have been denied access to a lawyer of their choice or any other legal counsel. Senior Shi'a religious leaders and their followers have also been arrested and detained over recent years, some of whom are still detained or under house arrest (see paragraphs 6.50-6.52 on Religious Dissidents). However, in March 1997 the decree to prohibit pre-trial detention of suspects, particularly the young, elderly, female or unwell, was issued by the Chief Justice (Ayatollah Mohammed Yazdi)."

Document(s): Open document