The Institute for Monitoring Peace and Cultural Tolerance in School Education issued a report titled: “State Sponsored Child Abuse in Iran: Iran’s violations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child” .
In addition to many children rights violations, The report addressed the issue of child execution in Iran (Page 5):
http://www.edume.org/docs/articles/State_Sponsored_Child_Abuse_in_Iran%207.11.07.pdf
The following is part four of series of articles by D.W. Duke, attorney member of SCE Campaign studying the possibilities of taking action against Islamic Republic of Iran’s practice of child executions which is in direct violation of their obligations under the UN conventions and treaties that they have signed.
By: D.W. Duke
Part I Part II Part III“This extremely broad scope may prove to be one of the most effective tools for human rights proponents given that it addresses violations in any part of the world “
The United Nations has three mechanisms for processing complaints concerning human rights violations under the treaty 
system. Those three processes are individual complaints, state to state complaints and inquiries. In this article we will focus primarily upon the individual complaint process since this would be the most relevant to our readers. In addition to complaint processes under the treaties, there are complaint processes under the special procedures, the Human Rights Counsel Complaint Procedure and the Commission on the Status of Women.
Individual Communications under the applicable treaty
Individuals who claim that their rights have been violated pursuant to one of the following covenants or conventions may bring a communication before the appropriate committee where the State in question has recognized the competency of the Committee to hear the complaint. Complaints may also be brought by third parties on behalf of individuals provided the one whose rights have been violated has given his written consent or where it can be shown that he is incapable of giving his written consent.
The Committee on Civil and Political Rights may consider individual communications brought under the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. www.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr-one.htm
The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women may consider individual communications brought pursuant to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. www.ohchr.org/english/law/cedaw-one.htm
Individual communications may be brought where State Parties have filed the appropriate declaration under Article 22 of the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel and Inhuman or Degrading Punishment. www.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm
Individual communications my be brought where State Parties have filed the appropriate declaration under Article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. www.ohchr.org/english/law/cerd.htm
A complaint process will also be available under the Convention on Migrant Workers once ten State Parties have made the necessary declarations under Article 77. www.ohchr.org/english/law/cmw.htm
The following link provides an overview for bringing complaints by individual communications under the treaty system. www.ohchr.org/english/bod…vidual.htm
Individual Communications under Special Procedures
On March 15, 2006 the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution A/RES/60/251 which established the Human Rights Council (HRC). In June 18, 2007 the Human Rights Council adopted a text entitled “UN Human Rights Council: Institution Building” (Resolution 5/1) by which a new complaint procedure was established to address “consistent patterns of consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of all human rights and fundamental freedoms occurring in any part of the world under any circumstances.” This extremely broad scope may prove to be one of the most effective tools for human rights proponents given that it addresses violations in any part of the world (not just in member States) and in any circumstances (not just in war.)
Under this procedure two working groups, the Working Group on Communications and the Working Group on Situations were established to review communications and to bring to the attention of the Council consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Council then makes a determination of whether the alleged violation is sufficient to warrant action.
Communications under Resolution 5/1 are to be submitted to:
Treaties and Human Rights Council Branch
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Fax (41 22) 917 90 11
Email: CP@ohchr.org
The following link provides more detailed information concerning the complaint procedure under the HRC. www.ohchr.org/english/bod…laints.htm
From UN website:
Pursuant to Council resolution 5/1, the Complaint Procedure is being established to address consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of all human rights and all fundamental freedoms occurring in any part of the world and under any circumstances.
It retains its confidential nature, with a view to enhancing cooperation with the State concerned. The procedure, inter alia, is to be victims-oriented and conducted in a timely manner.
Two distinct working groups – the Working Group on Communications and the Working Group on Situations – are established with the mandate to examine the communications and to bring to the attention of the Council consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Manifestly ill-founded and anonymous communications are screened out by the Chairperson of the Working Group on Communications, together with the Secretariat, based on the admissibility criteria. Communications not rejected in the initial screening are transmitted to the State concerned to obtain its views on the allegations of violations.
The Working Group on Communications (WGC) is designated by the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee from among its members for a period of three years (mandate renewable once). It consists of five independent and highly qualified experts and is geographically representative of the five regional groups. The Working Group meets twice a year for a period of five working days to assess the admissibility and the merits of a communication, including whether the communication alone or in combination with other communications, appears to reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. All admissible communications and recommendations thereon are transmitted to the Working Group on Situations.
The Working Group on Situations (WGS) comprises five members appointed by the regional groups from among the States member of the Council for the period of one year (mandate renewable once). It meets twice a year for a period of five working days in order to examine the communications transferred to it by the Working Group on Communications, including the replies of States thereon, as well as the situations which the Council is already seized of under the complaint procedure. The Working Group on Situations, on the basis of the information and recommendations provided by the Working Group on Communications, presents the Council with a report on consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms and makes recommendations to the Council on the course of action to take.
Subsequently, it is the turn of the Council to take a decision concerning each situation thus brought to its attention.
A communication related to a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms is admissible, unless:
• It has manifestly political motivations and its object is not consistent with the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other applicable instruments in the field of human rights law; or
• It does not contain a factual description of the alleged violations, including the rights which are alleged to be violated; or
• Its language is abusive. However, such communication may be considered if it meets the other criteria for admissibility after deletion of the abusive language; or
• It is not submitted by a person or a group of persons claiming to be the victim of violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms or by any person or group of persons, including NGOs acting in good faith in accordance with the principles of human rights, not resorting to politically motivated stands contrary to the provisions of the UN Charter and claiming to have direct and reliable knowledge of those violations. Nonetheless, reliably attested communications shall not be inadmissible solely because the knowledge of the individual author is second hand, provided they are accompanied by clear evidence; or
• It is exclusively based on reports disseminated by mass media; or
• It refers to a case that appears to reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights already being dealt with by a special procedure, a treaty body or other United Nations or similar regional complaints procedure in the field of human rights; or
• The domestic remedies have not been exhausted, unless it appears that such remedies would be ineffective or unreasonably prolonged.
The National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), when they are established and work under the guidelines of the Principles Relating to Status of National Institutions (the Paris Principles) including in regard to quasi-judicial competence, can serve as effective means in addressing individual human rights violations.
Partial List of References:
1. United Nations Charter
2. United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
3. United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
4. United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
5. The First Optional Protocol on the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
6. The Second Optional Protocol on the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
7. The United Nations International Covention on the Rights of the Child
8. J. Robinson, Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary (1946)
9. L. Sohn & T. Buergenthal, International Protection of Human Rights 556 (1973) and L. Henkin The Age of Rights 51 (1990)
10. D. McGoldrick, The Human Rights Committee: Its Role in the Development of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 300 (1994)
11. International Human Rights, 3d edition, Buergenthal,Shelton and Stewart, (2002) West Publishing Company
12. International Human Rights in Context, 2d edition, Steiner and Alston, (2000) Oxford University Press
13. United Nations Human Rights Council Complaint Procedure
to be continued
Islamic Regime in Iran has been on a so called moral mission to clear the society from “Thugs and Hoodlums” and in this process they have already executed 100’s of young Iranian in the past few months. According the 2006 records, Iran’s government has committed the highest percentage of executions in the world. However this year Iran has already exceeded its prior record substantially.
In a shocking announcement yesterday, Colonel Ahmad Roozbahani, the head of moral division of Iran’s police stated ” Based on recent studies performed: from the 4800 “thugs an Hoodlums” who have been arrested since the beginning the “collection plan” , 5% are between the ages of 14 and 17″. Roozbahani stated that possibly 30% face life sentence while the execution orders of all the remaining has not yet been finalized.
The new shocking official statistics translates to 240 additional Iranian children who are imprisoned under the context of “Collection plan” of the “Thugs and Hoodlums”; about 70 of which (30%) facing life sentences and the remaining 70% or about 170 are anticipated to be executed (some have already been executed) this year.
Article 37 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states: “Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age “. Iran is a signatory to the convention..
Iran already holds the number one records of child executions worldwide. Stop Child Executions Campaign has recorded the names of at least 80 other children facing execution in Iran. There are other reports under our study (soon to be published) which indicate a much higher number of children on death row in Iran.
Unless the world community, United Nations, human rights organizations and other citizens immediately act to stop this mass murder by Islamic Regime in Iran, 170 more Iranian children can be executed in the next few months.
How you can help: https://www.stopchildexecutions.com/how-you-can-help.aspx
|
رئيس پليس امنيت اخلاقي نيروي انتظامي خبر داد تاکنون براي 31 نفر از اراذل و اوباش کشور به جز تهران، حکم اعدام صادر شده است. سردار احمد روزبهاني اعلام کرد؛ بررسي هاي انجام شده از 4 هزار و 800 اراذل و اوباش که از ابتداي طرح جمع آوري تاکنون دستگير شده اند نشان داد 5 درصد اين افراد، 14 تا 17 سال دارند و 53 درصد در گروه سني 17 تا 23 سال قرار دارند. وي با اعلام اين که حکم اعدام صادر شده از سوي مرجع قضايي براي اين متهمان هنوز نهايي نشده و بايد مراحل قضايي خود را طي کند، تاکيد کرد؛ 30 درصد اين متهمان نيز محکوم به حبس طولاني مدت شده اند. وي با اشاره به آمار 5 درصدي اراذل و اوباش 14 تا 17 ساله اعلام کرد؛ بسيار دوست داشتيم اسامي اين اراذل و اوباش کم سن را از ليست بيرون آوريم، اما جرائم ارتکابي از سوي اين متهمان درست همانند يک اوباش حرفه يي بود. بر اين اساس نتوانستيم از اين آمار 5 درصد بگذريم
|
16, US sponsored Radio Farda interviewed Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer, human rights activist and 2003 Nobel Winner. Following are some of the scripts of her interview:
“As for human rights, the death penalty is an absurd and unacceptable penalty because the reason for penalty is to reform the convicted and by killing someone that possibility is taken from him and therefore the the death penalty is rejected.”
“Iran’s government not only in the cases of many crimes calls for death penalty but unfortunately in action they use it very often too. Especially comparing to prior years, this year the number of executions has multiplied and worse than all, they even exercise the death penalty for children under the age of 18 .”
“Based on the Sharia Islamic laws which were ratified after the Islamic revolution, the penal age for girls was changed to 9 for girls and 5 for boys. Therefore a 10 year old girl or a 16 year old boy in the eyes of law are the considered the same as a 40 year old man who commits a crime.”
“One of the problems with the children rights is that in Iran the childhood age for each matter is different. For example if the same boy (Mohammadreza Turk) who was executed because of murder at the age of 16 wanted to obtain a passport to leave the country, he had to obtain his father’s permission. On one hand (Iran’s) law states that until the age of 18 a person is not mature enough to leave the country but when it comes to penal laws unfortunately it states that the child is held responsible for his actions and therefore they issue death penalty!”
به نام خدا
رياست و نمايندگان محترم مجلس شوراي اسلامي
بيش از چهار سال است كه لايحة دادرسي رسيدگي به جرايم اطفال و نوجوانان به مجلس ارسال شده و اینک در كميسيون حقوقي و قضايي در حال بررسي می باشد . بسیاری از فعالین حقوق بشر و وکلای دادگستری ، در ایران و همچنین نهادها و سازمانهای بین المللی از جمله یونیسف ، عفو بین الملل و نیز اتحادیه اروپا ، چشم انتظار تصویب هر چه سریعتر این لایحه و حذف مجازات اعدام برای اطفال زیر 18 سال می باشند . چون اينجانب وكالت چهارده نفر از اطفالي كه در هنگام ارتكاب جرم سنشان زير 18 سال بوده و به قصاص نفس محكوم شده اند و هم اكنون با قطعيت حكم محكوميتشان ، در انتظار اجراي حكم اعدام مي باشند ، را به عهده دارم به شرح ذيل مراتب نگراني خود را نسبت به سلب حیات از موكلانم و نقض حقوق بشر پيرامون « اعدام اطفال زير 18 سال » اعلام می دارم و خواستار تسريع در تصويب اين لايحه با در نظر گرفتن سن مسئوليت كيفري اطفال در تعيين مجازات مرگ ، بر اساس اسناد بين المللي و رویه اکثریت قریب به اتفاق کشورها مي باشم .
اينجانب در سوم شهريور ماه سال 1386 نامه اي خطاب به رياست محترم قوه قضاييه مرقوم نموده و از ايشان استدعا نمودم مقرر فرمايند تا تعيين تكليف لايحة رسيدگي به جرايم اطفال و نوجوانان كه در بهمن ماه سال 1383 تقديم مجلس شده و همچنان مسكوت مانده است ، عمليات اجرايي اعدام اطفالي كه در زمان ارتكاب جرم سنشان زير 18 سال بوده را متوقف نمایند ليكن تاكنون پاسخي دريافت ننمودم . به اين لحاظ با توجه به احساس مسئوليت نسبت به جان موكلينم و ديگر اطفال مرتكب جرم ، به شما وکلای ملت پناه آورده ، به دلیل اهمیت و ضرورت موضوع ، خواستار آنم كه ترتيبي اتخاذ فرماييد تا اين لايحه با حذف مجازات مرگ برای اطفال زير 18 سال ، هر چه سريعتر در صحن علني مجلس مورد تصويب قرار گيرد تا شاهد جان دادن اطفالی كه ناخواسته و ندانسته و از روي كودكي مرتكب جرم شده اند نباشيم.
با تقدیم شایسته ترین احترام
محمد مصطفايي وكيل مدافع عده اي از محكومين به اعدام
سحرگاه بيست وچهار آبان سه نفر به نام های محمد رضا ترک ۱۸ ساله و منوچهر ترک ۳۰ ساله و نيز صفرعلی ورمزيار ۳۱ ساله در زندان همدان به دار آويخته شدند.
اين سه نفر در يک نزاع خانوادگی سه کودک را در روستاهای اطراف ملاير به قتل رسانده بودند .محمد رضا ترک يکی از اعدام شدگان در هنگام ارتکاب جرم ۱۶ سال داشته که تلاش های مدافعان حقوق بشر برای نجات جان او بی نتيجه ماند.
شيرين عبادی، حقوق دان، فعال حقوق بشر وبرنده جايزه صلح نوبل، درباره صدور احکام اعدام به راديو فردا می گويد:«مجازات اعدام در محدوده مقررات حقوق بشر يک مجازات ناپسند ومزموم است زيرا هدف از مجازات اصلاح مجرم است وبا کشتن فرد خاطی امکان اصلاح از او گرفته می شود و به همين دليل هم مجازات اعدام مطروداست»
خانم عبادی می افزايد:«دولت ايران نه تنها در مواردی چند درقوانين حکم مجازات اعدام را برای برخی جرايم پيش بينی کرده بلکه متاسفانه در عمل هم بسيار زياد از آن استفاده می کند خصوصا که امسال ميزان محکومين به اعدام از سال گذشته چند برابر شده و از همه بدتر اين که اعدام کمتر از هجده سال هم داريم
اين فعال حقوق بش در ادامه اضافه می کند:«واين يکی از مواردی است که همواره به دولت ايران اعتراض می شود زيرا که دولت ايران در
سال ۱۳۵۴ به کنوانسيون بين المللی حقوق مدنی سياسی و کنوانسيون حقوق اقتصادی اجتماعی پيوسته و متعهد به اجرای آن شده است. وليکن در عمل می بينيم که قوانين ما در مغاير با کنوانسيون ها است
برخی از مسئولان جمهوری اعدام کودکان کمتر از هجده سال در ايران تکذيب کرده اند اما شيرين عبادی می گويد که در قوانين کيفری اين مسئله تصريح شده است.
خانم عبادی می گويد:« طبق قانون مجازات اسلامی که بعد از انقلاب به تصويب رسيد سن مسئوليت کيفری برای دختر نه سال و برای پس پانزده سال تعيين شد واين بدان معنا ست که اگر دختری ده ساله ويا پسری که دارای پانزده سال تمام مثلا شانزده ساله باشد و مرتکب جرمی شود قانون اورا به همان چشم نگاه می کند که اگر فردی چهل ساله مرتکب ان جرم می شد» .
او می افزايد:«بنابراين متاسفانه اعدام کمتر از هجده سال در ايران قانونا وجود دارد و در عمل هم اجرا می شود. کليه تلاش های من وساير مدافعان حقوق کودک برای لغومجازات اعدام برای کمتر از هجده ساله ها و اصلاح قوانين مربوط به شيوه مجازات کودکان تاکنون بدون نتيجه مانده است
شيرين عبادی حقوقدان ومدافع حقوق کودک می گويد:«يکی از مشکلات حقوق کودک در ايران اين است که برای هر کاری پايان کودکی يک سن خاصی دارد.به عنوان مثال همين کودکی که در سن شانزده سالگی مرتکب قتل شد و به خاطراين عمل اورا اعدام کردند اگر می خواست از کشور خارج شود وگذرنامه تهيه کند ميبايستی حتما اجازه پدرش را بگيرد» . او می افزاید:« از سويی قانون معتقد است تا سن هجده سالگی کسی آنقدر عاقل نيست که بتواند از کشور خارج بشود وليکن وقتی به مجازات کيفری می رسد متاسفانه آنوقت می گويد که او بايستی متحمل اعمالش بشود وبرای او حکم اعدام صادر می کنن
Source: Radio Farda
Iranian judicial authorities are considering Makwan Moloudzadeh’s appeal against his death sentence.
IRAN
Makwan Moloudzadeh (m), aged 21, child offender
On 14 November, a branch of the Supreme Court heard an appeal against the death sentence imposed on child offender Makwan Moloudzadeh. At some time during the next few months, the Supreme Court is expected to rule on whether the sentence passed on Makwan Moloudzadeh remains valid.
Makwan Moloudzadeh, an Iranian Kurd, was convicted of lavat-e iqabi (anal sex) for alleged rape about eight years ago, when Makwan Moloudzadeh was aged 13. Amnesty International has recently received new information that he allegedly raped three individuals. Under Iranian law, boys under 14 years and seven months (15 lunar years) and those who have not reached puberty are considered children. Article 113 of Iran’s Penal Code states, “If a minor has anal sex with another minor, each will receive up to 74 lashes unless one of them was forced to do so [in which case he will not be punished].”
Following his arrest on 1 October 2006 in Paveh, western Iran, Makwan Moloudzadeh was tried and on 7 July 2007 found guilty and sentenced to death by Branch 1 of the Kermanshah Criminal Court, in an unfair trial. The plaintiffs reportedly withdrew their complaints in the course of the trial and at least one was reportedly arrested in order to make him appear in court. During his trial, Makwan Moloudzadeh is said to have maintained his innocence. Previously, however, he claimed he was ill-treated during interrogation and “confessed” during interrogation that he had had a sexual relationship with a boy in 1999.
According to Article 49 of Iran’s Penal Code: “Children, if committing an offence, are exempted from criminal responsibility. Their correction is the responsibility of their guardians or, if the court decides, by a centre for correction of minors.”
Makwan Moloudzadeh lodged an appeal on 5 July, which the Supreme Court rejected on 1 August. In finding Makwan Moloudzadeh guilty, judges relied on ‘elm-e qazi – the “knowledge of the judge” – to determine that penetration had taken place and that Makwan Moloudzadeh had reached puberty at the time of his alleged offence and could thus be sentenced to death as an adult.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
International law strictly prohibits the use of the death penalty against people convicted of crimes committed when they were under the age of 18. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has raised concern about child offenders’ criminal responsibility being determined by judges, using subjective and arbitrary criteria such as the attainment of puberty, the age of discernment or the personality of the child. As a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Iran has undertaken not to execute child offenders. However, since 1990, Iran has reportedly executed at least 27 child offenders, five of them in 2007. Most recently, Mohammad Reza Turk was executed on 15 November 2007 after conviction of murder. At least 75 child offenders are on death row in Iran; and there are fears that at least 15 Afghan child offenders convicted of drug smuggling may have been, or face being, sentenced to death. For more information about Amnesty International’s concerns regarding executions of child offenders in Iran, please see: Iran: The last executioner of children (MDE 13/059/2007, June 2007) http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde130592007
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Using your own words, please choose a few of the suggestions below to create a personal appeal and send it as quickly as possible:
– welcoming reports that a committee of the Supreme Court is re-considering the case against Makwan Moloudzadeh;
– noting that his original trial was unfair, as the judge is said to have relied on subjective and arbitrary criteria in contravention to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and that the appeal appears to have ignored the retraction of testimony made by witnesses;
– reminding the authorities that Iran is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibit the use of the death penalty against people convicted of crimes committed when they were under 18, so executing Makwan Moloudzadeh would be a violation of international law;
– urging the authorities to abolish the death penalty for offences committed by anyone under the age of 18, so as to bring Iran’s domestic law into line with its obligations under international law.
APPEALS TO:
Head of the Judiciary:
Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi
Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Justice Building
Panzdah-Khordad Square
Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: info@dadgostary-tehran.ir <info@dadgostary-tehran.ir> (In the subject line write: FAO Ayatollah Shahroudi)
Salutation: Your Excellency
COPIES TO:
Speaker of Parliament:
His Excellency Gholamali Haddad Adel
Majles-e Shoura-ye Eslami
Baharestan Square
Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran
Email: hadadadel@majlis.ir <<a href=”http://mail2web.com/cgi-bin/compose.asp?mb=&mp=P&mps=0&lid=0&intListPerPage=20&messageto=hadadadel@majlis.ir&ed=zWaAlg7xFEDNcbiUL5d0H8RYiYu68Fxg0uK%2BxjtXY1dpnElu2qtKjMP5h88%2BBBRKb4Y5H5%2FE8xzE%0D%0AfNFQIryNkXfzMhq3PKvfMiVJzHAZ4zPpzrnAzW54gEhMAWgv6NGalud8hfKokXnqQtHm” target=”_blank”>hadadadel@majlis.ir>
Director, Kermanshah Central Prison:
Kermanshah Central Prison
Street Number 101, Deisel Abad
Kermanshah, Iran
Email: markazi@kermanshaprisons.ir <<a href=”http://mail2web.com/cgi-bin/compose.asp?mb=&mp=P&mps=0&lid=0&intListPerPage=20&messageto=markazi@kermanshaprisons.ir&ed=zWaAlg7xFEDNcbiUL5d0H8RYiYu68Fxg0uK%2BxjtXY1dpnElu2qtKjMP5h88%2BBBRKb4Y5H5%2FE8xzE%0D%0AfNFQIryNkXfzMhq3PKvfMiVJzHAZ4zPpzrnAzW54gEhMAWgv6NGalud8hfKokXnqQtHm” target=”_blank”>markazi@kermanshaprisons.ir> or ahead@kermanshaprisons.ir <<a href=”http://mail2web.com/cgi-bin/compose.asp?mb=&mp=P&mps=0&lid=0&intListPerPage=20&messageto=ahead@kermanshaprisons.ir&ed=zWaAlg7xFEDNcbiUL5d0H8RYiYu68Fxg0uK%2BxjtXY1dpnElu2qtKjMP5h88%2BBBRKb4Y5H5%2FE8xzE%0D%0AfNFQIryNkXfzMhq3PKvfMiVJzHAZ4zPpzrnAzW54gEhMAWgv6NGalud8hfKokXnqQtHm” target=”_blank”>ahead@kermanshaprisons.ir>
Fax: 011 988 318 262 049 (May be difficult to reach)
Mr Seyed Mahdi Mohebi
Chargé d’Affaires, Embassy for the Islamic Republic of Iran
245 Metcalfe Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2K2
Fax: (613) 232-5712
THANKS FOR YOUR SPEEDY INTERVENTION ONCE AGAIN.
</<a></<a></<a>
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) — A UN General Assembly panel on Thursday passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on executions with the ultimate goal of abolishing the practice despite fierce opposition from several members.
The vote, capping an acrimonious, two-day debate on the highly divisive issue, was 99 in favor, 52 against and 33 abstentions.
The United States and China joined many developing countries, notably from the Islamic world, in voting no.
The full 192-member General Assembly was widely expected to endorse the decision, possibly next month, according to diplomats. France’s UN Ambassador Jean-Maurice Ripert said the vote on the Italian-drafted text “marks a real turning point in the global realization of the need to abolish the death penalty.” “I hope that the General Assembly will confirm this vote in its plenary session,” he added.
“The strong vote in favor of this resolution is further evidence that the center ground on this debate has shifted towards the end of the use of the death penalty worldwide,” Britain’s UN Ambassador John Sawers chimed in.
But opponents decried what they saw as a bid by the 87 co-sponsors to impose their values on the rest of the world and made it clear that there was no consensus on an issue which they said would further polarize the assembly.
They argued that the death penalty was fundamentally a “criminal justice issue” to be decided by national authorities and saw the resolution as blatant interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states.
Malaysia, Singapore, Iran, Egypt, Barbados and the Bahamas were particularly vocal in their denunciation of the co-sponsors.
Singapore’s UN envoy Vanu Menon said ahead of the vote the co-sponsors were trying “to impose a particular set of beliefs on everyone else,” and described them as “sanctimonious, hypocritical and intolerant” for having rejected a “genuine dialogue” with opponents.
“This house is divided,” said Iran’s delegate Mahmoud Jooyabad. “There is no international consensus on the death penalty.” Opponents were particularly incensed that more than a dozen amendments they had proposed were all rejected, including one by Egypt backed by a number of Islamic countries and the United States that sought to insert a paragraph also upholding the right to protect life at all its stages, meaning the right of the unborn child.
Barbados even accused some of the co-sponsors of having threatened to cut off aid to developing countries opposing the moratorium.
China’s delegate said the divisive debate had increased tension among member states. “China cannot accept that co-sponsors of the resolution applied pressure on other countries,” the delegate said. “We do not wish to see discussions of this kind happen again.” “It is important to recognize that international law does not prohibit capital punishment,” US delegate Robert Hagen said after the vote.
Washington urges countries apply the death penalty “in conformity with their international human rights obligations and to ensure it is not applied in an extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary manner,” he added
The non-binding resolution states that the death penalty “undermines human dignity” and calls on all states which still maintain the death penalty “to establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty.”
It also urges them “to restrict its use and reduce the number of offenses for which the death penalty may be imposed” and to respect international standards that provide safeguards guaranteeing the protection of those facing execution.
It decides that member states would continue consideration of the issue at the General Assembly’s 63rd session beginning next September.
Amnesty International hailed what it called an “historic and major step toward the abolition of the death penalty worldwide.” “Establishing a moratorium on executions is an important tool to convince states still using the death penalty to engage in a nationwide debate and to review their laws on capital punishment,” said Irene Khan, Amnesty’s secretary general. According to Amnesty International, 133 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice, while 64 countries and territories retain and use capital punishment, although the number of countries which actually execute prisoners in any one year is much smaller.
The document also addresses Iran’s defiance of the signed International Covenants that forbid them to execute anyone who has allegedly committed an offence before the age of 18. “ We hereby declare that any attempt to severe a person’s body parts, whipping and other means of torture and violent acts, cruel, demeaning and inhumane punishments, public executions, and any other type of capital punishments which are not in accordance with the international laws and conventions, such as death by stoning, are to be abolished truly and legally. ” The document states.
Resolution also mentions women, minorities and tribal rights violations, and constant pressuring and censoring of the media.
During UN General Assembly meeting in September, Iran’s president, Mahmoud AhmadiNejad denied all the accusations and charges of violating Iranian citizens’ human rights and stressed that only punishments for crimes that do not confirm with the moral codes, such as drug trafficking are being enforced.
source: peykeiran.com translation: Mojgan (SCE)