78th Session of Hamid Nouri's Court; Iranian Lawyer's Explanation on the Possibility of Issuing a Blood Money Judgment Without an Expert Opinion

The 78th trial session of Hamid Nouri, accused of participating in the execution of political prisoners in the summer of 1988, was held in Stockholm, Sweden on Thursday, Farvardin 4, 1401, corresponding to March 24, 2022, with the testimony of two experts, Eric David, a retired professor of international criminal law, and Mohammad Oliaei Fard, a lawyer.

Eric David appeared in court at the invitation of Kenneth Lewis, a lawyer for the rescued prisoners and a member of the People's Mojahedin Organization. In the opening part of his testimony, he called the conflict between the People's Mojahedin Organization and the Islamic Republic government in Operation Forough Javidan or Mersad a "non-international armed conflict" and, referring to the Geneva Convention and the 1977 Additional Protocol, he said in his legal analysis and explanation of his opinion:

• Both sides of the conflict – the People’s Mojahedin Organization and the Iranian regime – were clearly defined.
• The People's Mojahedin Organization was legally accepted as an official organization by international institutions, including UNESCO, and had legal personality.
• Both sides in the conflict had declared war on each other.
• There was open hostility and violent conflict between the two sides.

Eric David said that assuming that Operations Forough Javidan and Mersad are considered "non-international," four legal principles should be mentioned:

• Killing is forbidden.
• Inhuman and degrading treatment is prohibited.
• It is prohibited to issue a judgment by a court lacking legal jurisdiction.
• Captivity and hostage-taking are prohibited.

Eric David went on to point out international law and evidence related to armed conflict, including:

• 1949 Convention
• The Geneva Conventions of 1950 and 1951
• Codification of National Customary Law 2005
• US Army Military Operations Manual, 1956
• British Army Military Operations Manual, 1958
• A book about armed conflict during the American Civil War in 1830.
• The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the verdict issued in 1995

Eric David said that taking these matters into account, we conclude that in general the laws of international armed conflict are also considered for non-international armed conflicts. He said that in relation to the events of 1988, we must simultaneously address three accusations:

• War crime
• Crime against humanity
• Genocide

The next witness in the trial was lawyer Mohammad Olyaei Fard, who testified via video from Toronto, Canada. He had been invited to testify by three of the four lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the case. Mohammad Olyaei Fard's testimony focused on the legal theory of Mohammad Nayiri, the Civil Liability Law and the Diyah Law, and in general the laws governing damages in Iran.

Bennett Hasselberry, one of the four plaintiffs' attorneys in this case, questioned the witness on behalf of two other counsel.

Mohammad Oliyei Fard testified that under Iran’s two laws of civil liability and blood money, which are also approved by Islamic law, the request for blood money by survivors and the families of the victims – whether Muslim or non-Muslim – in this case is perfectly legal. This right is established to acknowledge and legally recognize the financial and moral (spiritual) harm inflicted on such individuals.

Mohammad Oliaei Fard said that according to Iranian law, if the law is ambiguous or complicated in a case, more than one blood money can be demanded, which includes this case. He said that according to Iranian law, it is possible for a judge to issue a ruling on blood money without using an expert opinion. He said that this law also includes this case, meaning that the judge can demand blood money from the defendant without a doctor's opinion.

In this regard, Mohammad Oliaei Fard referred to Article 210 of the 2003 Islamic Penal Code and said that this law states that if the damage is unclear, the determination will be the responsibility of the judge in the case.

Mohammad Oliaeifard also pointed out the judge's broad authority to issue rulings in complex cases - without the need for an expert or doctor - under Iranian law, and listed the reasons for this broad authority as follows:

• Legal duty to issue a ruling and find and compensate for damages based on Article 167 of the Iranian Constitution in cases where the law is ambiguous or silent.
• The judge's justice and conscience to determine damages and administer justice in cases where the law is ambiguous or silent.
• The judge's greater understanding and experience over the years compared to an expert in cases where the law is ambiguous or silent.

Mohammad Oliaei Fard explained that in principle, “expertise” does not have an official organizational position in the criminal justice system. That is, it is not a criminal justice institution and is also not considered part of the evidence to prove a crime. The witness said: “For this reason, Article 265 [of the Criminal Procedure Code] states that even in specific cases, the judge can not give the case to an expert and make the decision himself.”

Mohammad Oliaeifard also addressed the issue of changing the amount of blood money annually in Iran, saying that the amount is determined in the month of Farvardin every year. Shahed said that if a crime in a case occurred during the sacred months, one-third is added to the amount of blood money. He said that the current amount of blood money in Iran is nine hundred million tomans, which is equivalent to nine billion rials.

It is worth mentioning that the lawyers defending the plaintiffs and the families of the survivors have requested eight billion and four hundred million rials, equivalent to one million Swedish kronor, as blood money in this case.

The lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Hamid Nouri case have requested the court to pay eight point four billion rials, equivalent to one million Swedish kronor, in blood money.

According to Swedish law, regarding blood money, Iranian domestic laws can be relied upon - as long as they do not conflict with common European law and Swedish law.

The next court session will be held next Tuesday, March 29, 2022, with the testimony of Mahmoud Khalili in Stockholm, Sweden.

Source: Voice of America