87th Session of Nouri Court; Akhavan’s Message: “The Death Committee for 1367 Executions Was Worse Than Revolutionary Courts”

The eighty-seventh session of the trial of Hamid Nouri, accused of participating in the execution of political prisoners in the summer of 1367 in Gohardasht Prison, was held on Monday, April 25, 2022, only in the afternoon session with testimony from Professor Payam Akhavan as an expert-witness.

Payam Akhavan testified directly via video from Toronto, Canada in this court. In explaining his activities, he stated that he is a human rights lawyer and university researcher and has been a special advisor to prosecutors at the Hague court for many years.

The first part of Payam Akhavan’s testimony was devoted to explaining how the international people’s tribunal, Tribunal Iran, was formed in 2012. He explained to the court that in 2011-2012, he was invited by several mothers of Khavaran cemetery, including the families of Behkish and Babak Emad, through a telephone call to investigate the dimensions of the massacre and executions of political prisoners in the summer of 1367. This invitation was based on his experience with cases related to “crimes against humanity.”

Payam Akhavan said that first a committee was formed and a group of experienced prosecutors were gathered together. The first step of the committee was to form a fact-finding commission. The second phase of the work focused on the legal aspects of the case.

Payam Akhavan said: “Seventy-five individuals testified; seventeen through Skype and the rest in person. Thirty-eight of these witnesses were survivors who escaped execution and the rest were from the families of executed individuals. They had previously sent their written statements to the committee and committee members had previously read those written statements. The witness said the purpose of oral cross-examinations was only to confirm and establish the truth.”

The selection of seventy-five witnesses was done by volunteers from among ordinary people or from various political groups and minorities such as Kurds and Arabs. These volunteers contacted the witnesses. The committee also looked at the events of the 1980s in general. The testimonies were collected by one Iranian lawyer and two non-Iranian lawyers and presented to the committee. The result of the work was the preparation of a report and its presentation to the committee in July 2012. The next step was a session held at the Hague Court in October 2012; an oral and preliminary session in which the committee’s report was one of the court’s documents.

Payam Akhavan explained how at this stage nineteen witnesses were added to the number of witnesses and six prominent judges and one prominent lawyer also accompanied the group. The witness said a letter was also sent to the embassy of the Islamic Republic which never received any reaction or response from them.

Payam Akhavan testified that the result of the Tribunal court was a comprehensive report in 2013. He said the Tribunal court issued its ruling against the Iranian government. The court concluded that the Iranian government executed individuals because of their religious or political ideas in Iranian prisons in the summer of 1367. These executions were carried out by the highest authority in the country, Khomeini, their leader, and based on an order called a “fatwa.” Tribunal Iran confirmed that a death committee went to different prisons and decided on the execution of individuals. The final ruling of the court declared “crimes against humanity” by Iran.

Payam Akhavan said: “My assessment was that the witnesses were telling the truth. Many of them had experienced trauma or psychological crisis. They spoke of torture and multiple methods of torture, instances of rape, questions from the death committee and the methods of selecting individuals for execution. These details convinced me. Despite the large number of testimonies, their details did not contradict each other.” The witness emphasized that the Tribunal Iran court had other documents and evidence; including a report by Ronaldo from El Salvador which contained the names of thousands of executed individuals and was prepared at the request of the United Nations. That report also included a letter from Ayatollah Montazeri. Akhavan said Montazeri was Khomeini’s successor and opposed the executions.

Payam Akhavan declared Khomeini’s fatwa as the most important document proving the executions and the reason for their occurrence, in which Khomeini had written that all people with opposing views should be executed.

Payam Akhavan said the fatwa was written for a specific group of prisoners called “Monafeqin” (hypocrites). Everyone knew that the term “Monafeqin” referred to the “Organization of Mujahedin-e Khalq of Iran” which was involved and played a role in armed clashes related to the Iran-Iraq War. Payam Akhavan said: “It is claimed that there is a second fatwa as well but I do not think it is accessible. This second fatwa was about leftist individuals. These individuals are called apostates.”

Payam Akhavan said there was a relationship between the executions and the Iran-Iraq War and the armed conflict of the Mujahedin with the Islamic Republic, but the issue was more complicated than this. Mujahedin prisoners who were arrested for very ordinary activities were executed in groups as replacements for Mujahedin who participated in armed warfare against the government [at the borders], with the aim of retaliation.

Payam Akhavan said that individuals involved in these executions were later promoted. For example, Pourmohammadi became a senior judge. Nirei was promoted to the position of Deputy Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Ibrahim Raisi also became the Head of the Judiciary and is now President. The witness said: “The regime’s policy was to promote the perpetrators and perpetrators of these executions.”

Payam Akhavan provided detailed explanations about how the death committee operated and the extent of its conformity with Iran’s judicial system. He said Khomeini immediately after his return to Iran in February 1979 established revolutionary courts. Systematic executions began and individuals lost their lives based on trivial and vague Islamic crimes, such as fighting God or enmity against God.

Payam Akhavan said: “The revolutionary courts, which still operate today, do not conform to the constitution. They are famous for not allowing a person to defend himself and sentence people to death for anything. The death committee for the 1367 executions was worse than the revolutionary courts. The death committee had no judicial process. [Their action] was an inquisition of religious beliefs and the death committee operated outside Iran’s judicial system.

Payam Akhavan explained how Iranian authorities denied executions until before the audio message [of Ayatollah Montazeri] was broadcast. The witness said of course Iran did not deny the executions carried out in the 1980s for many reasons. He explained that he believes they did not announce and denied the summer 1367 executions because they knew public opinion would ultimately not accept it. He said they carried out mass executions of countless individuals in secret out of revenge.

Regarding the government’s justification for the executions, Payam Akhavan said: “There was a connection between political-ideological prisoners and military forces that participated in armed conflict. The government connected these two to each other. The witness said: “In this way they wanted to justify the mass executions. The main point of Khomeini’s fatwa in itself is this. In the fatwa it said that this group participated in armed conflict and specifically stated that these people should be executed.”

Payam Akhavan said: “According to Ayatollah Montazeri, between 2,800 to 3,800 people were executed in the summer of 1367. Others, however, have reported much higher numbers. Access to the correct number and statistics of executions is difficult due to the Iranian government’s non-cooperation, especially regarding the number of executions outside Tehran. We know these executions took place throughout the country.”

Payam Akhavan testified in another part that “there is no free media in Iran. The media announces their [Islamic Republic’s] general policy.”

Thomas Sander, the court judge, announced at the end of today’s session that the defense lawyers of the accused submitted new documents late last night to the court for the defense of their client. The judge said that the accused’s lawyers can present these documents in court at the scheduled time.

The judge’s statement caused severe objection from Kent Louise, a lawyer for several complainants who are members of the Organization of Mujahedin-e Khalq. The lawyer announced that given the limited remaining time, the complainants’ advisory lawyers, prosecutors, and the court in general do not have sufficient time to review these documents. He requested that if these documents are presented by the accused’s clients, the court also give time to the complainants’ defense lawyers and experts to challenge these documents and provide additional explanations.

The judge ultimately agreed to postpone the decision in this matter to later days after consultation with other court authorities and lawyers.

Hamid Nouri’s trial is in its final sessions. This week’s court sessions are allocated according to the previously announced schedule to the prosecutors and four advisory lawyers of the complainants in the case. In the next session to be held tomorrow, the prosecutors will formally announce to the court by presenting and fully explaining the final indictment and requesting the punishment of Hamid Nouri, the accused in the case. The subsequent court sessions this week are allocated to the four advisory lawyers of the complainants in the case to present their final arguments on behalf of their clients in court and formally request punishment of the accused on behalf of the complainants. Two final sessions of the court next week are also allocated to the accused and his lawyers to make final arguments and ask the court to issue a verdict of innocence for the accused.

Source: Voice of America