Corrupt Judges of Iran’s System and the ‘Credibility’ of Their Issued Sentences

Widespread corruption in Iran’s judiciary has raised many questions these days. Among them is the question of how credible are the sentences issued against journalists by judges like Mansouri? Is it possible to prosecute Judge Mansouri in Europe?

Gholamreza Mansouri, former head of the Culture and Media Public Prosecutor’s Office and former judge of the Court of Appeals, who has recently become known as the “fugitive judge,” during his service for the Islamic Republic system imprisoned many media activists, issued severe sentences for them, and has a dark record in his activities in Iran’s judiciary. Some journalists from his era have recalled his tenure as “the most difficult days of the 1990s for the profession.”

Now with the emergence of his financial corruption case in the course of a trial over the financial corruption of high-ranking members of Iran’s judiciary, the question has been raised by some Iranian media outlets: how credible are sentences issued by a corrupt judge who has been accused of accepting a bribe of half a million euros? Sentences that have come at the cost of destroying the careers, futures, and lives of some media activists.

The ISNA news agency raised this question in a report on Sunday, June 25, asking, “If the accusation of bribery against this former judge is proven, what will be the status of other cases he reviewed, and how can it be determined in which cases he exercised influence?” ISNA also asks: “With proof of this judge accepting bribes, what will become of the lives that may have been destroyed because of his erroneous sentences, or conversely, those who unjustly benefited from his sentences?”

It is not only ISNA that has questioned the sentences issued by judges like Mansouri. On Monday, the newspaper “Hamdelii” also raised similar questions with Iran’s judiciary and the sentences issued by its judges. Hamdelii recalled Gholamreza Mansouri as “one of the names heard these days on the high list of financial suspects in the judicial apparatus.”

The newspaper wrote that not only were some newspapers shut down by his order and never recovered, but many journalists also spent “many years of their lives behind prison bars” by Mansouri’s sentence. “Hamdelii” also referred to other figures including prosecutor Bijan Ghassemzadeh, who is also currently facing charges of financial crimes. Bijan Ghassemzadeh is the person who issued the order to filter Telegram. “Hamdelii” wrote that with this order, at least 40 million Iranians were deprived of using this useful and popular messenger, and “many businesses that had been formed using this messenger were shut down.” However, despite the fact that Bijan Ghassemzadeh is being tried for billions of tomans in financial corruption, “his decision and sentence are still in effect and being enforced, and people’s lives are being affected by his decisions in a way.” Another judge is Saeid Mortazavi. He has the Kahrizak case and essentially murder and torture on his record.

Hamdelii asked: “Why are the decisions and sentences of a group of criminals who are now sitting in the defendant’s chair in prison clothes or are imprisoned or have fled the country still required to be enforced?”

What do lawyers say about sentences issued by incompetent and corrupt judges?

Some Iranian bar association lawyers have attempted to address this issue and answer the question of whether sentences issued by individuals who are themselves corrupt and lack credibility are valid and still binding.

Saleh Nikbakht, a bar association lawyer, told Ensaf News: “If such a judge was the only effective judge in issuing a ruling, the ruling is void and must be reviewed by other judges; but if other judges were also involved in it, the ruling’s validity stands.”

Mr. Nikbakht further explained: “One of the conditions for judicial qualification that has been provided for in Islamic jurisprudence includes personal competence, including justice, integrity, being Muslim, and so on. If judges are later pursued for any reason and their accusations are finalized in primary and appellate courts or final courts, the rulings issued by these judges are, provided that he was the only effective judge in that ruling, not valid from a Sharia and competence perspective. This is in the case of one judge acting alone.”

Otherwise, according to Saleh Nikbakht, the verdict is valid. In other words, if other judges or authorities are involved in the judicial process or if their ruling has been confirmed by another judge, the ruling cannot be overturned.

Abdolkarim Lahiji, a lawyer residing in Paris, told Deutsche Welle Farsi about the sentences issued by the Islamic Republic’s judiciary:

“From the time Sadeq Khalkhali was appointed as Sharia judge in Iran until today, the sentences issued by Revolutionary Courts do not conform to any standards of human rights and do not conform to any judicial standards in developed countries, and all of them are examples of tyrannical sentences. All those who were responsible in issuing these sentences over the past four decades, or those who appointed individuals without qualification as judges or heads of the judiciary, all of them are responsible and all these sentences must be questioned.”

Mr. Lahiji points to the current head of the judiciary, Ibrahim Raisi, someone who bears responsibility for the killing of thousands of political prisoners. Abdolkarim Lahiji says: “The person who is now at the head of the judiciary is himself the biggest suspect. Therefore, how can one expect this judiciary and this head of the judiciary to bring Mansouri and Mansouris to justice for their actions? All of them have shared and joint responsibility for the crimes committed over the past four decades in Iran.”

Is it possible to prosecute Judge Mansouri in Europe?

Gholamreza Mansouri is currently in Bucharest and under the supervision of Interpol. Based on current reports, Interpol arrested him at Iran’s request and then conditionally released him. The Romanian judiciary has given the Islamic Republic of Iran until July 20 to present its documents to that country’s judicial authorities. But it is not only the Islamic Republic that is pursuing Judge Mansouri. More than Iran’s judicial apparatus, it is human rights advocates who are seeking to prosecute this person.

Reporters Without Borders has formally filed a complaint against Judge Mansouri with Romanian prosecutors. Christophe Deloire, secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders, two days ago (June 24) on his Twitter referred to Judge Mansouri as a “torturer” and said that preventing him from leaving Romania would be an “honor.” But to what extent do Reporters Without Borders and human rights activists have the opportunity to prevent Gholamreza Mansouri from being handed over to the Islamic Republic?

Abdolkarim Lahiji told Deutsche Welle Farsi about the possibility of prosecuting Mansouri in Europe: “It is true that member states of the European Union over the past two decades, that is, after the adoption of the Rome Statute in connection with the International Criminal Court, became parties to this statute and accepted the general principles related to international crimes, and there is also a principle called universal jurisdiction that has entered the legal system of these countries; but first we must note that when we say international crime, it means the three crimes provided for in the Rome Statute; genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.”

According to him, although the acts and sentences of Judge Mansouri are completely condemned from a human rights perspective, newspaper closure sentences are not among any of the above cases. This lawyer points to the issue of torture and that if it is proven that the judge “issued an order to flog or for example cut off someone’s hand, this constitutes torture and is prosecutable.”

He refers in this regard to the Anti-Torture Convention and adds: “The other issue is the Anti-Torture Convention, in which torture is mentioned as a crime, that if a torturer is not a citizen of a country and even if he has not committed torture in that country, but is resident in that country or even present as a visitor, he can be prosecuted in that country.”

According to him, if universal jurisdiction has been accepted in current Romanian regulations and the sentences he issued constitute torture, “in theory, this person can be handed over to justice and tried in Romania.”

Source: DW