January 8, 2010

Source:

Nasrin Sotudeh is a prominent defense attorney in Iran who has taken the cases of many detained post-June presidential election demonstrations. She spoke with Rooz about her concerns about the recent remarks by political and military officials who have advocated that judges impose the maximum penalty. She says such remarks and actions are unlawful, adding, “Such pressure on judges, threatens the independence of the judiciary and judges.” Read on for the details.

Rooz: What is the status of your case regarding the three political detainees who have been sentenced to death?

Nasrin Sotudeh (Sotudeh): From amongst the many detainees, the judgments of many have gone to appellate courts or the supreme court for final confirmation. I am still waiting for the decision of the appellate courts. Atefe Nabavi’s sentence has gone to the appellate court, while Ayub Porkar, Reza Khademi and Arash Rahmanipour have been sentenced to death and their cases are now before the supreme court.  Atefe has received a four year prison sentence and we are still waiting to see whether this judgment will be upheld or not. Mr. Samimi’s court hearing has been rescheduled for Sunday at the revolutionary court. Mr. Saharkhiz’s indictment has been issued and so his defense attorneys are getting ready for the defense.

Rooz: What about those who were arrested more recently? Have you succeeded in contacting your clients or at least learn of the charges against them?

Sotudeh: Among these are Mrs. Foroogh Mirzai, Morteza Kazemian and Mrs. Nooshin Ebadi. The crime of this last one is that she is the sister of Shirin Ebadi, the Nobel laureate. Mrs. Mansure Shojayi is my new client whose family has not been told anything about her arrest. In my pursuit of Mrs. Ebadi’s case too, court and judiciary officials have not given me any acceptable cause for her arrest. For the others too, I have not heard any acceptable explanation from the revolutionary court. I am extremely concerned about each one of my clients who have a political case because according to law, any advice by officials to judges – for whatever reason – is a crime. This criminal activity is being propagated every day from the official forums of Iran and by officials of the government. Through their advice and requests, they are putting the judges under tremendous pressure and intimidation. How do you expect judges subjected to such tactics to do their work? This is why I am concerned about my clients.

Rooz: Some lawmakers in the Majlis are advocating a proposal requiring the judiciary to execute a person who has been convicted to be a Mohareb within five days. What is the legal status of such a proposal?

Sotudeh: According to the constitution, the executive branch of government has no right to interfere in the affairs of the judiciary. This is a blatant interference in the judiciary. From a criminal law perspective, this is crime. Any advice to a judge is a crime. Whether you decide to bribe a judge or decide to give him advice for political reasons, this is considered a crime. Such acts take away a judges freedom. So this issue is a violation both from the constitutional perspective and also at the criminal law level.

Rooz: There was a rumor that people who were arrested on Ashura had been done so on the basis of an en-masse warrant signed by Mr. Larijani, ie a warrant that did not have any person’s name on it. Have you encounter this as an issue or does the prosecutor have such a right?

Sotudeh: As far as I know and have seen, Tehran’s attorney general Jafari Dolatabadi issued a single warrant to intelligence officials allowing them to arrest anyone they deemed to be violating national security. I would like to take this opportunity to say that this arrest warrant lacks legal backing. If a person’s name is not specifically and clearly mentioned on an arrest warrant, but he is arrested, this falls under unlawful and arbitrary arrest categories. The attorney general or a prosecutor should not issue such en-masse warrants.