Iran Human Rights (IHR) Demands a Stop to Illegal Arrest of Iranian Lawyers

Following the arrest and the orders of provisional arrest and imprisonment that were issued for “Nasrin Sotoudeh, Qasem Sho’le Sa’di, and Arash Keykhosravi”, Iran Human Rights demands all the lawyers in the world to express their solidarity with their Iranian peers.

During the past few days, we received news of Nasrin Sotoudeh’s sentence that was issued at Branch 28 of the Revolutionary Court by Judge Mohammad Moghiseh. She was convicted in absentia and sentenced to five years in prison through an unfair judicial process. Furthermore, Qasem Sho’le Sa’di, and Arash Keykhosravi, two lawyers who were arrested by security forces in front of the Iranian Parliament on Saturday, August 18, were transferred to Fashafuye Prison and a provisional arrest was ordered.

Abdolfattah Soltani, another lawyer on leave to attend his daughter’s funeral, who passed away from cardiac arrest, has served seven years of his ten-year prison term.

Mohammad Najafi, attorney at law in Arak, is another lawyer arrested a few months ago. He was arrested by security forces at his house in Arak on January 15 after publishing information about Vahid Heydari. Vahid was a vendor from Tekyeh Valley in Shazand, Arak who was arrested by the police during the protests in Arak on December 31 period. His body was delivered to his family. According to the latest news, Mohammad Najafi has been sentenced to one year in prison and 74 lashes for “disturbing public order” and to two years for “publishing false information in order to disturb public opinion”.

Zeynab Taheri is another lawyer who was arrested last month. She was arrested following the execution of one of her clients, named Mohammad Salas, and apparently, an indictment was issued against her on the charge of “publishing false information in order to disturb public opinion”. She was later released on bail.

Mostafa Daneshju, lawyer and defender of the rights of Gonabadi dervishes, was also arrested along with the dervishes and is currently held in prison.

Iran’s intelligence institutions have evidently pressured lawyers during the four decades of the existence of the Islamic Republic. However, the pressure seems to have increased in the past few months. Some of their methods of repression of lawyers include threatening, summoning to the court, arresting, issuing illegal verdicts, and enforcing article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code based on which political defendants can only choose their lawyer from a list of 20 lawyers who have been selected by the Judiciary.

After the list of lawyers was made by the Judiciary, many lawyers and Iranian Parliamentary representatives protested the new article. Iranian Parliamentary representatives considered the Note contradictory to many principles of the constitution, especially Article 35, which gives the litigants the right to freely choose a lawyer.

Having refused to attend her trial in spite of being summoned by the court, Nasrin Sotoudeh explained why she wouldn’t attend her trial in an open letter recently published on her husband’s Facebook.

Nasrin Sotoudeh:

Dear compatriots!

As you know, I was arrested with an arrest warrant for the implementation of a sentence issued in absentia by Branch 28 of the Revolutionary Court, and illegally summoned to the Prosecutor’s office in Evin Prison where I was charged again.

From the moment I learned my new charge, I refused to provide any defence in protest to the note to Article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code.  The main reasons I refused to present my defence are as follows:

The establishment of the Prosecutor’s Office of District 33, which is located in Evin Prison since summer 2009 and is specifically in charge of investigating political charges, has been protested against by lawyers and jurists. Since the establishment of the Prosecutor’s Office on the premises of the prison and imposing security measures for referring to the Prosecutor’s Office have no other meaning than the domination of intelligence institutions which contradicts the principle of independence of the Judiciary.
The Prosecutor’s Office illegally cites a list, which clearly contradicts Article 35 of the Constitution, preventing the defendants from choosing a lawyer.
Exercising my right to choose a lawyer upon arrival at the Prosecutor’s Office stationed in Evin Prison, I gave the names of three of my colleagues in order to handle my case, but the relevant investigator has refused to appoint any of them so far.

Considering the abovementioned points and because I have no intention of being responsible for the sentence that has already been issued for me by accepting a lawyer that is approved by the Intelligence Agency of the Judiciary, I refuse to attend the court and defend myself in front of the relevant prosecutor and investigator.

In hope of establishment of law and justice in our dear country, Iran

Nasrin Sotoudeh

August 2018