Judicial system of Iran

Judicial system of Iran قوه فضاییه جمهوری اسلامی ایران
The main building of Judicial system of Iran in Tehran.
Established	1979(modern) 1905(history)
Jurisdiction	Islamic Republic of Iran
Location	Tehran
Composition method	Supreme Leader selection with Judges approval
Authorized by	Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Judge term length	5 years
Chief Justice
Currently	Sadeq Larijani
Since	30 June 2009

A nationwide judicial system in Iran was first implemented and established by Abdolhossein Teymourtash under Reza Shah, with further changes during the second Pahlavi era.

After the 1979 overthrow of the Pahlavi Dynasty by the Islamic Revolution, the system was greatly changed. The legal code is now based on Shi'a Islamic law or sharia, although some aspects of civil law have been retained. According to the constitution of the Islamic Republic, the judiciary in Iran "is an independent power." The entire legal system - "from the Supreme Court to regional courts, all the way down to local and revolutionary courts" - is under the purview of the Ministry of Justice, but in addition to a Minister of Justice and head of the Supreme Court, there is also a separate appointed head of the judiciary. Parliamentary bills pertaining to the constitution are vetted by the Council of Guardians.

History

Islam

Iran

This article is part of the series: Politics and government of Iran

Constitution Constitution (1979) Constitution (1906) Leadership Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Assembly of Experts Speaker Mohammad-Reza Mahdavi Kani Executive President (List) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Vice President First (List): Mohammad-Reza Rahimi Others Cabinet 90th Government Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution Legislative Islamic Consultative Assembly Speaker Ali Larijani Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani Supreme Audit Court City and Village Councils Judicial Supreme Court Sadeq Larijani Attorney General Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejehei General Inspection Office Ministry of Justice Human rights Elections Elections in Iran Guardian Council Political parties Political parties in Iran Reformists Conservatives Foreign policy Foreign relations Ministry of Foreign Affairs Politics of Iran Iran in Africa

Other countries · Atlas Politics portal

According to one scholar, the administration of justice in Islamic Iran has been until recent times

a loosely sewn and frequently resewn patchwork of conflicting authority in which the different and sometimes conflicting sources for Islamic law - the jurists, the actual judges, and the non-Islamic law officials of the king - disputed with each other over the scope of their jurisdictions.... some aspects of the law always remained in the hands of the mullahs ... The village mullah was the natural arbiter in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance; and the exalted jurisconsult, in order to carry out the very function for which he was exalted, gave opinions on those matters of law on which he was consulted. In between the village mullah and the jurisconsult there were mullahs with courts which, while sometimes sanctioned by the royal government, depended for their power on the prestige of the presiding mullah judge as much or more than on the government's sanction

Since the sixteenth century AD Iran has been the only country in the world having Shi’ah Islam as its official religion, consequently the general principles of its legal system differed somewhat from those of other countries which followed Islamic law.

Among the ways law in Iran and the rest of the Muslim world differed from European law was in its lack of a single law code. "Thirteen centuries of Islamic - more particularly Shiah - tradition" called for jurists to base decisions on their legal training as it applied to the situation being judged. There was also no appeal in traditional Islamic law.

One jurists's `discovery` of the ruling of law for a specific case would not have been invalidated by some other jurist's discovery of a different ruling for that case; only God could choose between them, and until the Resurrection (or in the case of the Shiah, the return of the Twelfth Imam) God had left the matter to the jurists, and the first actual judgement was final, as otherwise there would have been an infinite regress of opinions without any final judgement. For the Shiah, ... resistance to a single written code was even stronger; the jurisconsult's right to describe the law in his own way was the very essence of the doctrine that had revived the jurisconsult school at the end of the 18th century."

As far as the judicial system is concerned, the changes were quite minor until the end of the nineteenth century.

20th century

Major events marking the judicial history of Iran during the modern era include the Constitutional Revolution of 1906, which gave the country its first Constitution and Bill of Rights, the fall of the Qajars and the rise of the Pahlavi Dynasty in the 1920s, when accession to a modern judicial organisation became one of Iran’s greatest challenges, and the Islamic Revolution.

"Regime of capitulations"

As European military and technological power began to be felt in 19th century Iran, Westerns insisted on special treatment in Iranian courts. This came in the form of treaties between most European governments and Iran requiring the presence at the trial of any European in Iran of a representative of that European's home country, who would countersign the decision of the Iranian court, and without whose countersignature the "decision of the Iranian court could have no effect." The Europeans insisted on this legal veto right - "called the regime of capitulations" - on the grounds that Iran had no written legal code so that "no one knew what laws foreigners would be judged by." Iran followed traditional Islamic practice of each judge giving his own interpretation of Islamic law for a given litigation, with no right of appeal.

Iranians in general opposed these capitulations, and secular Iranians such as Mohammed Mossadeq, wanted a establish a fixed written law they believed would not only end the capitulations but facilitate the building of a strong and unified state.

Reza Shah

Under the secularist reign of Reza Shah many changes were made in Iran's judicial system, and the establishment of a fixed written law with appeals courts was one of them. In March 1926, Minister of Judicial Affairs Ali-Akbar Davar dissolved Iran's entire judiciary, with the approval of the parliament, and initiating a wave of fundamental restructuring and overhauling reforms with the aid of French judicial experts. By April 1927 Iran had 600 newly-appointed judges in Tehran. Davar subsequently attempted to expand the new system into other cities of Iran through a programme involving training of 250 judges.

Reza Shah represented his legal reforms as "tentative experiments" and allowed the religious judges to keep their courts for matters such as inheritance. In 1936, however, the new system was made permanent and the religious courts were abolished. However, there were still sharia courts that ruled on issues of family and inheritance up to the Islamic Revolution (working alongside secular ones). Some aspects of sharia law were also retained in criminal law, for example blood money was still unofficially given in exchange for pardoning a murder death sentence outside the courts in some cases.

Islamic Republic

In 1979 the secular, westernizing Pahlavi Dynasty was overthrown and replaced by an Islamic Republic under the rule of Ayatollah Khomeini. While the revolution did not dismantle the Pahlavi judiciary in its entirety, it replaced secular-trained jurists "with seminary-educated ones, and codified more features of the sharia into state laws - especially the Law of Retribution." (see Qisas) Women judges were also removed (although they could still be lawyers or secondary judges in civil cases).

Structure of the judicial system

The 1979 Constitution of the Islamic Republic called for the judiciary to be "an independent power," and charges it with "investigating and passing judgement on grievances; ... supervising the proper enforcement of laws; ... uncovering crimes; prosecuting, punishing, and chastising criminals;" taking "suitable measures" to prevent crime and reform criminals. The head of the judiciary is to be a "just Mujtahid" appointed by the Supreme Leader and serve for "a period of five years." He is responsible for the "establishment of the organizational structure" of the judicial system; "drafting judiciary bills" for parliament; hiring, firing promoting and assigning judges. Judges cannot be dismissed without a trial.

Judicial authority is constitutionally vested in the Supreme Court and the four-member High Council of the Judiciary, according to Hunt Janin and Andre Kahlmeyer.

According to Article 160 of the constitution

The Minister of Justice owes responsibility in all matters concerning the relationship between the judiciary, on the one hand, and the executive and legislative branches, on the other hand. ... The head of the judiciary may delegate full authority to the Minister of Justice in financial and administrative areas and for employment of personnel other than judges.

The minister is to be chosen by the president from a list of candidates proposed by the head of the judiciary. The head of the supreme court and Prosecutor-General are also to be "just mujtahids" "nominated" by the head of the judiciary "in consultation with the judges of the Supreme Court" and serving for a period of five years.

Court structure

According to Luiza Maria Gontowska, the Iranian court structure includes Revolutionary Courts, Public Courts, Courts of Peace and Supreme Courts of Cassation. There are 70 branches of the Revolutionary Courts. Public courts consist of Civil (205), Special Civil (99), First class criminal (86) and Second Class Criminal (156). Courts of Peace are divided into Ordinary courts (124), and Independent Courts of Peace (125), and Supreme Courts of Cassation (22).

Operation

The courts of the Islamic Republic are based on an inquisitorial system, such as exists in France, rather than an adversarial system of the United Kingdom. The judge is the arbiter and has the power of a jury, and decides on the verdict (in serious cases, he is assisted by two other secondary judges). There is also a public prosecutor. However, according to Article 168 of Iran's constitution, in certain cases involving the media, a jury is allowed to be the arbiter. The judge holds absolute power. In practice, judges may be overwhelmed by cases, and not have the time to excogitate about each case. All judges are certified in Islamic law.^{[citation needed]}

Clerical courts

The rulings of the Special Clerical Court, which functions independently of the regular judicial framework and is accountable only to the Supreme Leader, are also final and cannot be appealed (at least through the normal appeals court system). The Special Clerical Court handles crimes allegedly committed by clerics, although it has also taken on cases involving lay people.^{[citation needed]}

Revolutionary courts

Islamic Revolutionary Courts that try certain categories of offenses, including crimes against national security, narcotics smuggling, and acts that are said to undermine the Islamic Republic.

Shortly after the overthrow of the monarchy, Revolutionary Tribunals were set up in the major towns, with two courts in the capital of Tehran - one each in the prison of Qasr and Evin, and one traveling tribunal for Hojjat al-Islam Sadegh Khalkhali, who was known for his stiff sentences (often execution). The courts presiding judges were clerics appointed by Khomeini himself. The decisions rendered by the Revolutionary courts initially were final and could not be appealed, and so bypassed what remained of the Justice Ministry and its appeal system. In 1989, a law was passed allowing an appeal to be made to the Supreme Court of Cassation. If the appeal was recognized, then the case would be given a retrial. Many Revolutionary Court judges today are not clerics however.

At least at first, the revolutionary courts differed from standard Western law courts by limiting trials to a few hours, sometimes minutes. Defendants could be found guilty on the basis of `popular repute.` The concept of defense attorney was dismissed as a `Western absurdity.` A charge that was widely applied against defendants but unfamiliar to some was `sowing corruption on earth` (mofsed-e-filarz). This covered a variety of offenses - "`insulting Islam and the clergy,` `opposing the Islamic Revolution,` `supporting the Pahlavis,` and `undermining Iran's independence` by helping the 1953 coup and giving capitulatory privileges to the imperial powers."

In recent years, the Revolutionary Courts operate more like normal courts, although they are still considered politically allied with the Supreme Leader rather than the regular, public courts which are neutral. Oftentimes, Revolutionary courts exist side by side with public courts. They also still try political and national security cases.

Prison system

Iran's prison system was "centralized and drastically expanded" by the Islamic Republic. Under the Shah prisons had been administered separately by SAVAK, the urban police, and the gendarmerie. The new regime entrusted their management "to a supervisory council of three clerics."

In Tehran, all four prisons where political dissidents were kept were expanded. Evin was enlarged "with two new blocks containing six wards and six hundred solitary cells" so it could accommodate "an additional 6000 inmates." Qezel Hesar was also expanded. Construction of the new Gohar Dasht prison had been started under the shah, it "was completed with hundreds of solitary cells and large wards housing more than 8000 inmates."

Despite all this new capacity, Iran's prisons "were seriously overcrowded by 1983". Komiteh prison, built for 500, had 1500 inmates; Evin Prison, built for 1200, had 15,000; Qezel Hesar, built for 10,000, had 15,000; and Gohar Dasht prison, built for 8000, had 16,000. Meanwhile, "Qasr, which had housed 1500, in 1978, had more than 6000."

At least for political prisoners prison life was considerably harsher in the Islamic Republic than under the Pahlavis according to those who had tasted both. "One who survived both writes that four months under [warden] Asadollah Ladjevardi took the toll of four years under SAVAK. Political prisoners were "incessantly bombarded with propaganda from all sides ... radio and closed-circuit television ... loudspeakers blaring into all cells even into solitary cells and `the coffins` [where some prisoners were kept] ... ideological sessions." Any reading material of a secular nature such as Western novelists, or even religious material that didn't agree ideologically with the Islamic Republic such as work by Ali Shariati was banned. At least in Evin prison the Persian Nowruz celebration was banned. In the prison literature of the Pahlavi era, the recurring words had been `boredom` and `monotony.` In that of the Islamic Republic, they were `fear`, `death`, `terror`, `horror,` and most frequent of all `nightmare` (kabos)." By the 2000's prison life was considerably better, although torture was still carried out on political inmates (even allegedly criminals). But after the controvertial 2009 elections, the situation for political prisoners has reportedly deteriorated.

Altough classical Sharia law does not mention imprisonment, prisons are widely used in Iran. Typically, it would be given as a discretionary punishment. In other cases, the defendant receives a sentence of exile, which would be carried out in a prison.

In 2005, with the prison capacity of 80,000, the actual number of prisoners was close to 160,000 people. .

Law

Iran Islamic Penal Laws Text in Farsi with link to Google translator

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B6kl5wXBSMumYTYxNTIxZjgtMGFkMS00YWY2LWI5OTEtOTUxMmY3ODA1Yzkx&hl=en

Criminal Law

After the election of the first Majles of the Islamic Republic, the Majles and the Guardian Council quickly codified important features of the sharia law by passing two landmark bills:

• Qanon-e Ta'zir (Discretionary Punishment Law). Ta'zir laws dealt not only with criminal law but this law gave judges the authority to execute and imprison those found guilty of crimes such as `declaring war on God` (equivalent to treason/terrorism) and `plotting with foreign powers.` It also gave them the power to sentence offenders to as many as 74 lashes to those who "`insult government officials,` `convene unlawful meetings,` sell alcoholic beverages, fix prices, hoard goods, kiss illicitly, fail to wear the proper hijab, and last but not least, `lie to the authorities.`"
• Qanon-e Qesas (Retribution Law) This law codified other aspects of the sharia. It subdivided crimes into hadd - those against God - and those against fellow beings, especially other families. Some punishments are mandatory; others, discretionary. "Based on the notion of lex talionis, the Qesas Law calls for `an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life', unless the victim or his/her family forgive the perpetrator.

In 1991-1994, Iran combined all of these laws into a unified "Islamic Penal Code".

Modification to sharia

According to one source, the new laws of the Islamic Republic "modify the sharia in three significant ways."

• They give the state the "ultimate say" over the death penalty by allowing a new High Court to review death sentences passed by lower magistrates." In contrast, sharia in "its pure form" had no appeals system and gave local judges final say. However, virtually all other countries using sharia law now have an appeals system. While in lesser sentences, the judges verdict would be final, in more serious crimes, the sentence could be appealed to the Provincial Appeals Court. In a capital crime, it would be appealed to the Supreme Court of Cassation. Sometimes criminals get multiple appeals that last for years, depending upon the evidence against them along with "reasonable doubt". Retrials can be ordered, typically in the same court that convicted the prisoner.

• Laws allow circumstantial evidence to be used in deciding a case "under the rubric of `the judge's reasoning.`"

• Third, the legal system has introduced long-term imprisonment - which was also traditionally not used in sharia law - under `discretionary punishment.` Traditionalist judges, however, "continue to prefer corporal punishments ..." in sentencing.. In 2008, the then Head of Judiciary Ayatollah Hashemi Shahroudi (considered a moderate) asked judges to carry out more corporal punishment and less imprisonment, because "long term imprisonment is expensive, is not effective, and prevents crimianls from reintegrating into society".

Criticism and human rights issues

Main article: Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran

Qesas

Qisas (the law of retaliation/retribution) is a class of crime involving personal injury. If a person has intentionally murdered or maimed another person, they victim (or victim's family) is entitled to retribution (a eye for an eye in the case of personal injury or a life for a life in the case of murder). However, the victim (victim's family) can forgive the perpetrator and have the punishment not carried out. If so, the perpetrator must pay blood money (diyya)to compensate for the injury/death. If the death/injury was unintentional, the perpetrator must pay diyya, he/she cannot receive qesas. The judge only convicts the perpetrator, he has no say in whether qesas will be applied or not (although he can try to influence the decision). It cannot be overturned upon appeal either. The age qesas is applied is 15 years of age, which has resulted in some controversy due to juvenile executions (that the authorities are powerless to stop). If forgiven, the perpetrator can also get a discretionary sentence as well (such as 15 years imprisonment on a murder charge).

Blood money (diyyeh) is usually fixed at a minimum amount, however it also can be determined by how important the victim was to his family and how much that affects his/her life. For example, a child would receive a standard amount of blood money, but a man with a large family would receive more. Men receive twice as much blood money as women do, although women can receive additional amounts for the same reasons stated above. In practice, judges often award women more blood money for various reasons, although that is not officially the policy to do so. Prior to 2004, non-Muslims received 1/2 of the blood money a Muslim received, although that was changed.

Qesas is considered by Islamic scholars to be extremely fair and just. For example, in western countries, the family of the victim has no say in the punishment that the perpetrator receives, yet in Islamic law, a murderer could be executed or forgiven depending upon the wishes of the family. A father who murders his child will not receive a qesas punishment (although he will still receive a discretionary punishment by a judge).

One secular critic claimed the Qesas (Qisas) Law of Iran as discriminating against women, non-Muslims, and the poor; as reviving horrific physical punishments; and assuming parts of the human body can be converted into money. Qesas punishments "threatens to create an army of handicapped victims. And it 'paves the way for judicial torture' by permitting the use of confessions."

A qesas case that was said to have brought attention following publicity by Amnesty International, was a 2011 sentence of blinding by an Iranian court against a man who had blinded a woman in Tehran. In 2004, Majid Movahedi poured several liters of sulphric acid on the face of Ameneh Bahrami, blinding and severely disfiguring her, after she had spurned his proposals of marriage. Movahedi was tried in 2008 and found guilty, and for his sentence arrangements were made for Bahrami to inject "twenty drops of acid" into each of Movahedi's eyes while Movahedi was under anesthesia in a Tehran hospital. After appeals the punishment was set to be carried out on 14 May 2011, but has been postponed, and later Bahrami forgave Movahedi, thus sparing him the punishment.

Hadd Crimes

Hadd crimes are considered to be "claims against God", and they are punishable by a mandatory, fixed sentence that was layed down in the Koran and Hadith. They are very rarely applied in practice, because they require a high standard of proof and "unrepentence" to be carried out. Two witnesses or a confession are required for a conviction. For adultery/sodomy, 4 witnesses are required. They are:

Waging War Against God (moharebeh): judge has option of 1) death penalty; 2) crucifixtion for three days; 3) amputation of right hand and left foot; 4) exile/imprisonment (this crime is for somebody who used a weapon to strike fear and spread disorder, for example through terrorism/violent armed crimes, often in gangs)(This charge has been used in Iran as a political charge/treason/disrupting stability of Islamic Republic)

Theft (sirqhat-e-haddi): 1st offense, amputation of the 4 right fingers; 2nd offense, amputation of the 5 left toes; 3rd offense, life imprisonment; 4th offense, death penalty.

Apostasy (irtaad): officially not a crime in Iran, but still punished because it is inspired by religious texts in serious cases. Death penalty for men, life imprisonment for women. (If person had converted and then became apostate, three days are given to repent, otherwise execution carried out).

Blasphemy (sabb-al-nabi): death penalty

Adultery (zina): Unmarried, 100 lashes; Unmarried 4th offense, death penalty; Married, death penalty/ 100 lashes if person is repentant; Rape, death penalty

Sodomy (lavat): Rape, death penalty for rapist; Consensual; 100 lashes for active partner, death penalty for passive partner unless repentant (prior to 2012, it was death penalty for both unless repentant).

Takhfiz (non-penetrative homosexuality): 100 lashes; 4th offense, death penalty

Lesbianism (mosahegheh): 100 lashes; 4th offense, death penalty

Pimping (ghavvadi): 100 lashes; 4th offense, death penalty

False Accusation of Sexual Crimes (ghazf): 80 lashes; 4th offense, death penalty

Drunkenness (maasti): 80 lashes; 4th offense death penalty (prior to 2008, 3rd offense) This also applies to drug users.

These sentences are not commonly implemented due to the high burden of proof required and most convictions are carried out through Iran's tazir code, which is derived from the pre-revolutionary legal code. Executions for adultery are rare, and amputation for theft/robbery is even rarer. There have been no reported crucifixtions in Iran.

Tazir/Deterrent Crimes

A tazir crime is a crime in Sharia law that receives a discretionary sentence by a judge. A deterrent crime is a tazir crime that has a punishment in Iran's Penal Code (mostly based on pre-Revolutionary French civil law). The punishment is thus determined by a judge, depending upon the penal code, and is dependent upon the severity of the crime committed. A judge can also give a sentence of up to 74 lashes for an individual crime (and possibly more if multiple crimes were committed at once). Imprisonment, fines, and other penalties can be implemented (the maximum being life imprisonment, usually for redictivists and serious criminals). The law is variable, and the judge decides depending upon each individual case. The vast majority of criminal cases in Iran are punished as "tazir", and generally they receive a lesser punishment than a hadd crime.

In addition, if a person's crimes were so severe and/or committed consistently enough that a judge/prosecutor believes that the criminal would continue committing them and harm more people in the process, they can sentence the person to death because they were considered to be "spreading corruption on the earth" (Mofsed-Fel-Arz). It can be applied for those who have committed an equivalent of a hadd crime, and although his/her crime does not meet the offical proof requirements, it is blatantly obvious that they have committed it and they are a danger to society. This applies to serious and often repeat "hooligans, murderers, armed criminals, smugglers, rapists, robbers, and all those who degrade society and spread corruption through their actions". It has also been applied to political crimes as well. It can even be applied to those who run "prostitution/pornographic rings and have websites encouraging corruption".

Iran's Anti-Narcotics Law specifies that a person who commits the following drug offenses would be sentenced to death. (usually but always applied on the second offense, and even then some are given life imprisonment) -Possession of 30 grams of heroin/cocaine/methamphetamine/morphine/LSD. The death penalty is commutted for first-time offenders if the amount is less than 100 grams and the criminal did not make a sale. -Possession of 5000 grams/5 kilograms of opium/marijuana/cannabis/prescription drugs/industrial chemical drugs/hemp juice. The death penalty is commutted for first-time offenders when the amount is less than 20000 grams/20 kilograms and the criminal did not make a sale. -Armed smuggling of any narcotics, or being part of or the head of a narcotics smuggling gang.

Iran has been noted for a progressive policy in the treating of drug users (see harm reduction). These include needle exchange programs and methadone treatments as a way of reducing the drug problem. Drug addicts would usually not prosecuted if they enter into one of these programs, with the goal being weaning people off the drugs. However, drug dealers are dealt with severely, with long prison sentences, corporal punishment, and even the death penalty in some cases. Iran currently is one of the most addicted countries in the world, with over 1.5-3.5 million addicts out of 75 million people.

Death penalty

main article: Capital Punishment in Iran

During the early, more tumultuous years of the Islamic Republic, a great number of political prisoners were executed. Between 1981 and 1985, 7,900 people were executed. In 1988, a mass execution of political prisoners was carried out.

Like 74 other countries in the world, Iran carries out capital punishment. As a State party to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Iran has undertaken not to execute anyone for an offence committed when they were under the age of 18, but continues to carry such executions out, and is one of only six nations in the world to do so. According to Article 6 of the ICCPR, "Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age.”

The legal methods of execution are hanging, firing squad, stoning, beheading, and throwing from a height. In practice, only hanging is used (in the past firing squads were more common). There is few records of beheading or throwing executions. Stoning was used rarely, but has been in practice removed as a punishment in recent years. In 2012, the penal code was amended to officially remove stoning as a punishment (although it could still technically be applied in unspecified circumstances). If the crime was serious, the execution could be carried out in public at the scene of the crime.

The Judiciary does not recognize the concept of sexual orientation, and thus from a legal standpoint there are no homosexuals or bisexuals - only heterosexuals "committing" homosexual acts.

From the beginning of the revolution until the mid-1980s transgender individuals were classified by the Judiciary as homosexual and thus subject to the same laws. The Judiciary began changing this policy and now classifies them as a distinct group with legal rights. Gender identity disorder is officially recognized in Iran today, and the Judiciary permits sexual reassignment surgery for those who can afford it. In the early 1960s, Ayatollah Khomeini had issued a ruling permitting gender reassignment, which has since been reconfirmed by Ayatollah Khamenei.

On 19 July 2005 two teenagers, Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni, aged 16 and 18, were publicly executed by hanging in Edalat (Justice) Square in the city of Mashhad. They had been convicted of sodomizing and raping a 13-year-old boy in 2004, and other charges included alcohol consumption, theft, and disturbing the peace. They were detained for 14 months in prison awaiting execution and sentenced to 228 lashes. Iranian officials complained that foreign and domestic media emphasized that the two were mere boys. “Instead of paying tribute to the action of the judiciary, the media are mentioning the age of the hanged criminals and creating a commotion that harms the interests of the state”. Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi condemned the hanging of Asgari and Marhoni as a violation of Iran's obligations under the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, which bans such executions.

=Gender inequality

One complaint that critics have of Iran's legal system (and sharia law in general) is that men receive twice as much blood money (diyyeh) as women do. While that is true in some circumstances, diyyeh also must be calculated by the importance of the person to their family or to society. For example, a 10 year old child would receive less diyyeh than a working mother of three children. In that same instance, women (and men) may receive more or less diyyeh depending upon their importance and their work, etc. The same is with inheritance and divorce money, while officially men receive twice as much, in practice that is not always the case.

Human rights activist and Nobel Prize winner Shirin Ebadi complains that the section of the penal code "devoted to blood money, diyyeh, holds that if a man suffers an injury that damages his testicles, he is entitled to compensation equal to a women's life," and this failure to make account for individual differences or cases is unfair. It means, according to Ebadi, that "if a professional woman with a PhD is run over in the street and killed, and an illiterate thug gets one of the testicles injured in a fight, the value of her life and his damaged testicle are equal." While this is not always accurate, she does point out a shortcoming of the system.

Ebadi has also protested that while "the Islamic Revolution had anointed the Muslim family the centerpiece of its ideology of nation" and envisions a "restoration of traditional and authentic values" through women playing the role of "Muslim mother" staying home to care for "her multiplying brood," at the same time its family law automatically grants fathers custody "in the event of divorce," and makes "polygamy as convenient as a second mortgage." However, polygamy is rare in Iran. In a divorce, if a father is deemed unfit, custody is given through the mother. Prior to the age of 7, children are also always given custody with the mother, and when they are older, they can choose to live with either parent.

Apostasy

While not officially a crime in Iran, in some cases people can be prosecuted for apostasy. Punishment is death for men and life imprisonment for women. It has been used for political crimes as well.

In November 2002, Hashem Aghajari, a university professor and veteran of the Iran-Iraq war, was convicted of apostasy and sentenced to death after making a speech telling Iranians not to "blindly follow" clerics. But after a storm of protests from the general populace, reformist politicians, and human rights advocates, the sentence was later commuted to three years imprisonment, and Aghajari was paroled within months. Apostasy convictions are sometimes meted out not only for openly renouncing the religion of one's birth, but also for criticizing clerical rule (as in the case of Aghajari), defaming Islam, conversion from Islam, attempting to lead others away from Islam, among other reasons. As such, the legal definition of apostasy is subject to the individual interpretation of the judge. The traditional definition of apostasy only applies to those who are born into one of the legally recognized religions - Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism. The Bahá'í Faith, for example, is not legally recognized, and the adherents of that religion are considered apostate by virtue. Also see religious minorities in Iran.

Reform

Many Iranians argue for necessary reform in the judicial system, primarily in the prison system (such as beatings and torture) and political prisoners.

Reformist politicians have made attempts in the past to challenge the death penalty, as well as to enforce the rule of law concerning the illegal use of torture in prisons. Journalists and human rights advocates in Iran who attempt to raise awareness of these issues often risk imprisonment and the death sentence themselves, such as in the case of Akbar Ganji. On 18 December 2003, President Mohammad Khatami stated, "I don't like the death penalty, although if there is one case where there should be an execution, the fairest case would be for Saddam. But I would never wish for that."

Due to the power and scope of the institutions of velayat-e-faqih (Guardianship of the Clergy), which includes the Council of Guardians and the Office of the Supreme Leader, as well as the Judiciary, elected institutions such as the Majlis and the Office of the President are often unable to challenge laws because they are constitutional.

List of Heads

Name		Born-Died	Entered office	Left office	Nominated by	Appointed by
1	Mohammad Beheshti	1928–1981	3 June 1979	28 June 1981(assassinated)	Mehdi Bazargan	Ruhollah Khomeini
2	Abdul-Karim Mousavi Ardebili	1926 -	28 June 1981	30 June 1989	Mohammad-Ali Rajai	Ruhollah Khomeini
3	Mohammad Yazdii	1932 -	28 June 1981	30 June 1999	Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani	Ali Khamenei
4	Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi	1948 -	30 June 1999	30 June 2009	Mohammad Khatami	Ali Khamenei
5	Sadeq Larijani	1960 -	30 June 2009	Incumbent	Mahmoud Ahmadinejad	Ali Khamenei

See also

• Blasphemy laws of Islamic Republic of Iran
• Censorship in Iran
• Evin Prison
• Labour and tax laws in Iran
• Legal systems of the world
• Prison 59
• Shahram Jazayeri-Arab
• Towhid Prison
• Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran

External links

• Profile of Judiciary System of Iran
• Islamic Republic of Iran Judiciary Public Relations Bureau
• The Judiciary of The Islamic Republic of Iran
• Iran's constitutional charter for the Judiciary
• Iranian American Bar Association, Detention Laws in Iran