Country of origin information report Iran January 2010

Return to contents

Go to list of sources

Human rights institutions, organisations and activists

17.01 The Freedom House report ‘Freedom of Association Under Threat – Iran’, dated 21 November 2008, stated that:
“Registration and legal requirements for NGOs are restrictive, inconsistently enforced, and poorly coordinated among government ministries. In 2003, the Ministry of the Interior and a group of leading NGOs drafted a law designed to ameliorate government regulation and support civic organizations, but the parliament rejected the legislation. Instead, a cabinet decree was issued in 2005 to increase government surveillance of NGO activity. While the decree does streamline registration, it also subjects NGOs – the majority of which are community-based social service organizations – to more government monitoring and prohibits participation in political activity.
“Ahmadinejad describes NGOs as a ‘Western’ phenomenon and a risk to national security. He has attempted to supplant their efforts using government-controlled Islamic councils and has withdrawn government funding that was provided under Khatami. NGOs have little recourse to the courts if authorities violate their rights. Severe infringements on freedom of expression prevent civic groups from openly criticizing state policies and holding government officials accountable. For example, watchdog efforts regarding conditions in prisons or the systematic persecution of the Baha'i religious minority are rare and draw heavy penalties. After Ahmadinejad's election, two of the most prominent NGOs in Iran were shut down: the Center for the Defense of Human Rights, led by Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi, and the Organization for the Defense of Prisoners' Rights, led by Emad Baghi. Baghi remains imprisoned on charges of working against national security.” [112e]
17.02 Reporters Without Borders’ (RSF) World Report 2009 - Iran, released 1 May 2009, stated that:
“… the regime also targets human rights defenders. Iranian police on 21 December 2008 closed the offices of the Circle for the Defenders of Human Rights, headed by lawyer and Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi, on the grounds that the organisation did not have interior ministry permission to ‘carry out its activities’. The organisation, which was founded by Ebadi in 2002, provides free legal aid to Iran's journalists and human rights activists. Her legal chambers were searched on 29 December.” [38b]
17.03 An article in Radio Free Europe, dated 30 June 2009, noted that “Hundreds of human rights activists, intellectuals, civil society leaders, opposition political activists, students, and journalists have been arbitrarily detained in Iran since the disputed June 12 presidential election. An unknown but substantial number have also been killed and injured.” [42y]
For more information about events following the presidential elections held on 12 June 2009 see Government suppression of women’s rights organisations, Freedom of political expression and Freedom of association and assembly, Arbitrary arrest and detention, Recent Developments and Latest news
Return to contents

Go to list of sources

Corruption

18.01 In its 2009 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), released on 17 November 2009, Transparency International ranked Iran 168^th in the world corruption rankings out of 180 countries (down from 141^st in 2008 [62a]), giving it a CPI score of 1.8. (The CPI Score relates to perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen to exist among public officials and politicians by business people and country analysts. It ranges between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt). [62b]
18.02 Freedom House’s Freedom in the World 2009 report noted: “Corruption is pervasive. The hard-line clerical establishment has grown immensely wealthy through its control of tax-exempt foundations that monopolize many sectors of the economy, such as cement and sugar production.” [112g]
18.03 A report from the CIRB dated 3 April 2006 commented as follows:
“Bribery and punishment of border officials
“Based on consultations with UNHCR’s office in Tehran, a UNHCR official provided the following information in 31 March 2006 correspondence:
“It may happen in practice that individuals who have fraudulent travel documents, or outstanding financial, military or legal obligations, or who are sought or under suspicion by the government for political reasons resort to pay[ing] bribes to the Iranian border officials to pass through the control system unharmed. The higher the risk, the more they pay.
“In particular, the UNHCR official noted that bribery was more common in the south-eastern provinces of Sistan and Baluchistan (31 Mar. 2006).
“This information was partially corroborated in a June 2001 report of the 7th European Country of Origin Information Seminar, which claimed that ‘corruption certainly exists’ in Iran and that bribery of airport officials to facilitate exit may be possible ‘in individuals [sic] cases’ (UNHCR/ACCORD 11–12 June 2001, 107). On the other hand, the same report stated that departure procedures are still such that it would be highly improbable that anyone with a forged passport in which name and number do not tally would be able to leave the country. Security officials at the airport possess lists of suspected or wanted persons and it is not unusual that passengers wishing to leave are prevented from leaving and told to refer to the security department. In general, the security checks at Tehran airport are still very strict and it is doubtful that anyone with a security record and convictions in Iran for political offences would be able to leave the country legally by air (ibid.).
“Regarding punishment for corruption, the UNHCR official stated that ‘border and airport officers who are caught red-handed at the time of taking bribes shall be subject to punishments that become more serious depending on the amount of the bribe’ (31 Mar. 2006). For example, individuals found guilty of taking bribes of more than rials 1,000,000 (CAN$128.18 [XE.com 3 Apr. 2006]) can be sentenced [to] 5 to 10 years in prison, fined an amount commensurate to the bribe received, be permanently banned from working for the government, and be subjected to 74 lashes (UNHCR 31 Mar. 2006).
“The International Narcotics Control Strategy Report 2006 reported, without providing details, that ‘punishment of corruption can be harsh’ (Mar. 2006).
“International and domestic sources have reported on the incidence of generalized corruption in Iran (TI 18 Oct. 2005; ibid. 7 Oct. 2003; INCSR 2006 Mar. 2006; Iran Daily 13 Apr. 2005). Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) score shows a slight increase in the perception of corruption in Iran from 2003 to 2005: Iran’s CPI was 3.0 (out of 10.0, which is the score representing the least corruption) and its overall country ranking was 78 (out of 133 countries) in 2003 (TI 7 Oct. 2003), whereas a CPI score of 2.9 and a country ranking of 88 (out of 158 countries) was recorded in 2005 (ibid. 18 Oct. 2005).
“The US Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report 2006 noted that corruption in relation to drug trafficking is reportedly more serious than previously thought and that such corruption likely exists among lower to mid-level law enforcement authorities (Mar. 2006, Sec. III). The report also mentioned that cases of corruption were heard by the courts and received media attention, and that the government supports such ‘high-profile effort[s]’ to deter corruption (INCSR Mar. 2006, Sec. III).
“In April 2005, Iran Daily reported that economic corruption, specifically illegal smuggling of goods, had increased ‘in recent years,’ and outlined the government’s efforts to contain the problem, which include the drafting of legislative measures (13 Apr. 2005).” [2z] (p6)
18.04 The US State Department Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2008, Iran, released 25 February 2009 (USSD Report 2008) noted, in its introduction, that official corruption and a lack of government transparency existed; while, in section 1d, the report noted that corruption and impunity were problems amongst the security forces. [4a] “The law provides criminal penalties for official corruption; however, the government did not implement the law effectively, and official corruption remained a serious problem in all three branches of government, including the ‘bonyads’ (tax-exempt foundations designed for charitable activity that control consortia of substantial companies).” [4a] (Section 3)
See Security forces and Forged and fraudulenty obtained official documents
Return to contents

Go to list of sources
Freedom of religion
Overview
19.01 The Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2009 report on Iran, published on 16 July 2009, reported that
“Religious freedom is limited in Iran, which is largely Shiite Muslim but includes Sunni Muslim, Baha’i, Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian minorities. Shiite clerics who dissent from the ruling establishment are frequently harassed. The Special Court of the Clergy investigates religious figures for alleged crimes and has generally been used to persecute clerics who stray from the official interpretation of Islam. Ayatollah Seyd Hussain Kazemeini Boroujerdi, a cleric who believes in separation of religion and politics, is currently serving 11 years in prison for his beliefs and has been unable to obtain treatment for his multiple ailments. Another reformist cleric, Hadi Qabel, was defrocked by the Special Court and sentenced to 40 months in jail beginning in April 2008 for his involvement with a reformist political party.” [112g]
19.02 The 2009 Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), covering the period May 2008 to April 2009 and released on 1 May 2009, stated that:
“The government of Iran continues to engage in systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom, including prolonged detention, torture, and executions based primarily or entirely upon the religion of the accused. Iran is a constitutional, theocratic republic that inherently discriminates against its citizens on the basis of religion or belief. Over the past few years, the Iranian government‘s poor religious freedom record has deteriorated, especially for religious minorities and in particular for Baha‘is as well as Sufi Muslims and Evangelical Christians, including intensified physical attacks, harassment, detention, arrests, and imprisonment. In September 2008, the Iranian parliament took further steps toward passing a revised penal code that would codify serious punishments, including the death penalty, on converts from Islam. Heightened anti-Semitism and repeated Holocaust denial threats and activities by senior government officials have increased fear among Iran‘s Jewish community. Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, significant numbers from religious minority communities have fled Iran for fear of persecution. Dissident Muslims also continue to be subject to abuse.” [88b]
19.03 The US State Department International Religious Freedom Report 2009, Iran, released on 26 October 2009, (USSD IRF Report 2009) covering the period 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009, stated that:
“During the reporting period, respect for religious freedom in the country continued to deteriorate. Government rhetoric and actions created a threatening atmosphere for nearly all non-Shi'a religious groups, most notably for Baha'is, as well as Sufi Muslims, evangelical Christians, and members of the Jewish community. Reports of government imprisonment, harassment, intimidation, and discrimination based on religious beliefs continued during the reporting period. Baha'i religious groups reported arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention, expulsions from universities, and confiscation of property. Government-controlled broadcast and print media intensified negative campaigns against religious minorities, particularly the Baha'is, during the reporting period. All non-Shi'a religious minorities suffered varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in the areas of employment, education, and housing.
“Although the Constitution gives Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians the status of ‘protected’ religious minorities, in practice non-Shi'a Muslims faced substantial societal discrimination, and government actions continued to support elements of society who created a threatening atmosphere for some religious minorities.” [4b]
19.04 The USSD IRF Report 2009 also stated that:
“The Constitution states that Islam is the official state religion, and the doctrine followed is that of Ja'afari (Twelver) Shi'ism. The Constitution provides that ‘other Islamic denominations are to be accorded full respect,’ while the country's pre-Islamic religious groups – Zoroastrians, Christians, and Jews – are recognized as ‘protected’ religious minorities. However, Article 4 of the Constitution states that all laws and regulations must be based on Islamic criteria. In practice, the Government severely restricted freedom of religion.” [4b]
19.05 The same report further stated:
“Members of religious minorities, excluding Sunni Muslims, are prevented from serving in the judiciary and security services and from becoming public school principals. Applicants for public sector employment are screened for their adherence to and knowledge of Islam, although members of religious minorities could serve in lower ranks of government employment, with the exception of Baha'is. However, government workers who do not observe Islam's principles and rules are subject to penalties.” [4e] (Section II)
19.06 The US State Department Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2008, released on 25 February 2009 (USSD Report 2008), stated that:
“All religious minorities suffered varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in employment, education, and housing. In 2006 the UNSR for adequate housing visited the country and reported that rural land, particularly that belonging to minorities including Baha'is, was expropriated for government use, and owners were not fairly compensated. Inheritance laws favored Muslims over non-Muslims. With the exception of Baha'is, the government allowed recognized religious minorities to conduct religious education of their adherents, although it restricted this right considerably in some cases. The law required all Muslim students to take Islamic studies courses.” [4a] (Section 2c) “
19.07 The Landinfo report, Christians and converts in Iran, dated 10 June 2009 (Landinfo Report 2009) noted that:
“After Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president in 2005, the situation for everyone who can be suspected of being in opposition to the regime has deteriorated. Human rights advocates (lawyers, women’s rights activists and journalists), students, Kurdish activists, intellectuals, the organised political opposition and trade union leaders have all felt the stricter limits of the authorities’ tolerance, among other things in the form of harassment, arrests, political trials and harsh sentences. Religious minorities have also experienced a general worsening of the political climate. This has affected adherents of Baha’i in particular, while Jews have increasingly been on the receiving end of the president’s verbal tirades and threatening rhetoric (US Department of State 2008)”. [33a] (p12)
19.08 The Landinfo Report 2009 also observed that:
“Iranian religious tradition differentiates between offences committed in the public domain and that which takes place within the confines of privacy. Offences that are in violation of Islam and that are committed in the public domain must be punished, while what takes place in the private sphere, and is thereby concealed, is tolerated to a greater extent. This can include, for example, drinking of alcohol, prohibited sexual relations, use of illegal films, books, music and religious practice. Irrespective of their ethnic and religious background, very many Iranians in practice live two lives, one in the public domain and another in private. As long as the private sphere remains private and Islamic rules and values are not visibly challenged or violated, the Iranian authorities will not normally intervene in citizens’ private sphere.
“All non-Muslim minorities generally maintain a low profile in public as regards religious affiliation. As long as they follow the rules, minorities can practise their religion without being in the authorities’ spotlight because this constitutes lawful and socially acceptable behaviour.” [33a] (p10-11)
See Recent developments and Latest news
Return to contents

Go to list of sources
Religious demography
19.09 The USSD IRF Report 2009, released on 26 October 2009, stated that:
“The country has an area of 631,000 square miles and a population of 70 million. The population is 98 percent Muslim--89 percent is Shi'a and 9 percent Sunni (mostly Turkmen and Arabs, Baluchs, and Kurds living in the southwest, southeast, and northwest respectively). There are no official statistics available on the size of the Sufi Muslim population; however, some reports estimate between two and five million persons practice Sufism in the country. Non-Muslims are estimated to account for 2 percent of the population.
“Recent unofficial estimates from religious organizations claim that Baha'is, Jews, Christians, Sabean-Mandaeans, and Zoroastrians constitute 2 percent of the population. The largest non-Muslim minority is the Baha'is, who number 300,000 to 350,000. Unofficial estimates of the Jewish community's size vary from 20,000 to 25,000.
“According to U.N. figures, 300,000 Christians live in the country, the majority of whom are ethnic Armenians. Unofficial estimates for the Assyrian Christian population range between 10,000 and 20,000. There are also Protestant denominations, including evangelical religious groups. Christian groups outside the country estimate the size of the Protestant Christian community to be less than 10,000, although many Protestant Christians reportedly practice in secret. Sabean-Mandaeans number 5,000 to 10,000 persons. The Government regards the Sabean-Mandaeans as Christians, and they are included among the three recognized religious minorities; however, Sabean-Mandaeans do not consider themselves Christians. The Government estimates there are 30,000 to 35,000 Zoroastrians, a primarily ethnic Persian minority; however, Zoroastrian groups claim to have 60,000 adherents. There are indications that members of all religious minorities are emigrating at a high rate, although it is unclear if the reasons for emigration are religious or related to overall poor economic conditions.” [4b] (Section I)
Legal framework
19.10 The UN Secretary-General’s Report on the situation of human rights in Iran, dated 23 September 2009, noted that:
“The Iranian Constitution explicitly declares Islam to be the State Religion but contains two important provisions concerning religious minorities. Article 13 states that Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian Iranians are the only recognized religious minorities who are free to perform their religious rites and ceremonies, within the limits of the law, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education. Article 14 also provides protection for non-Muslims, provided they refrain from conspiracy or activity against Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Baha’i community is not recognized as a religious minority, but the authorities assert that Baha’is enjoy the rights accorded to all other Iranians.” [10g]
See section on Baha’is below
19.11 The 2009 Annual Report of the USCIRF stated that:
“The constitution of Iran formally recognizes Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians as protected religious minorities who may worship freely and have autonomy over their own matters of personal status (e.g. marriage, divorce, and inheritance). Nevertheless, the primacy of Islam and Islamic laws and institutions adversely affects the rights and status of non-Muslims. Members of these groups are subject to legal and other forms of discrimination, particularly in education, government jobs and services, and the armed services. Non-Muslims may not engage with Muslims in public religious expression or persuasion; some also face restrictions on publishing religious material in Persian. In 2004, the Expediency Council authorized collection of equal blood money for the death of Muslim and non- Muslim men. Baha‘is, Sabean Mandaean men, and all women remain excluded from the revised ruling. According to Iranian law, Baha‘i blood is mobah, which means members of the Baha‘i faith can be killed with impunity.” [88b]
19.12 The USSD IRF Report 2009 stated that:
“By law religious minorities are not allowed to be elected to a representative body or to hold senior government or military positions, with the exception that 5 of a total 290 seats in the Majles are reserved for religious minorities. Three of these seats are reserved for members of Christian religious groups, including two seats for Armenian Christians and one for Assyrian Christians. There is also one seat to represent Jews and one to represent Zoroastrians. While Sunnis do not have reserved seats in the Majles, they are allowed to serve in the body. Sunni Majles deputies tend to be elected from among the larger Sunni communities. Members of religious minorities are allowed to vote; however, no member of a religious minority, including Sunni Muslims, is eligible to be president…
“The Ministry of Islamic Culture and Guidance (Ershad) and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) monitored religious activity closely. Members of recognized religious minorities were not required to register with the Government; however, their communal, religious, and cultural events and organizations, including schools, were monitored closely. Registration of Baha'is was a police function during the reporting period. The Government also required evangelical Christian groups to compile and submit membership lists for their congregations.” [4b] (Section II)
Apostasy (conversion from Islam)
19.13 The Landinfo report, Christians and converts in Iran, dated 10 June 2009 (Landinfo Report 2009) observed that
“Conversion in a Muslim context is related to the question of apostasy – the renunciation of Islam. Seen from a historical perspective and in a theoretical framework, according to traditional Islamic law, the world is divided into Dar-al-Islam, territory under Muslim rule, and Dar-al-Harb, territory at war with Muslims. Consequently, conversion is primarily renunciation of Muslim unity and, in Muslim history, it has been compared with high treason or associated with political rebellion or opposition. This thinking also explains why Christian evangelical work aimed at Muslims is either prohibited or subject to strong restrictions in the vast majority of Muslim countries.” [33a] (p8)
19.14 The same report stated, in relation to Iranian law, that:
“Apostasy is not regulated directly in the current Iranian penal code. Apostasy is considered in relation to traditional Islamic law and legal interpretations from religious authorities. The interpretations have legal authority as law. The chief characteristic of Shi’a law is the authority and competence it assigns to the Imams, i.e. the successors of and stand-ins for the founder Ali, who was the Prophet Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law.” [33a] (p9)
19.15 The Advisory Panel on Country Information (APCI) review of the COI Service’s Iran COI Report of Augst 2008, undertaken by Dr Reza Molavi and Dr Mohammad M Hedayati-Kakhki of the Centre for Iranian Studies at Durham University, dated 23 September 2008, (APCI Report 2008) stated that:
“According to Article 513 of the Iranian Penal Code, anyone who insults the Holy Islam or the Prophet or any Imam, as well as the Prophet Mohammed’s daughter, will be punished by death if the insult is so radical so as to amount to rejection of the Prophet, Saabolnabi (equivalent to apostasy). Otherwise, the offender would be sentenced to between one and five years imprisonment.
“The government practice of using ancillary offences to prosecute apostasy so as to avoid undesirable international publicity may account for the lack of information on recent apostasy prosecutions per say [sic]” [6a] (p34)
Law on apostasy
19.16 The 2009 Annual Report of the USCIRF stated that:
“In early 2008, the Iranian parliament began considering a new law that would impose serious punishments, including the death penalty, on converts from Islam. In September 2008, a committee in the Majlis approved advancing the amended language on apostasy, which could be passed by the full Majlis in the near future. Although the Iranian government has in the past applied the death penalty for apostasy under Islamic law, it has not been explicitly codified. If the proposed law is passed, it would further endanger the lives of all converts from Islam, particularly members of the Baha‘i faith, who are already considered apostates, even if they are fourth- or fifth-generation Baha‘I adherents.” [88b]
19.17 The Landinfo Report 2009 stated that “In the draft of the new Iranian penal code, a new provision is proposed that expressly prohibits renunciation of Islam. The draft bill has been under consideration for several years, and was adopted by parliament in October 2008. The draft has not yet been adopted by the Council of Guardians, which is necessary for a new penal code to enter into force.” [33a] (p9)
19.18 Regarding the draft bill, the FIDH report Iran/Death Penalty: a State Terror Policy, dated 28 April 2009, stated that:
“Apostasy, heresy & witchcraft: Articles 225-1 through 225-14 of the bill discuss these topics. An apostate is any Moslem who denies Islam and converts to infidelity. There are two types of apostates. An innate apostate is a person born to Moslem parents and therefore a Moslem. A parental apostate is a person born to non-Moslem parents, who converts to Islam after maturity and later denies Islam. The punishment is death in both cases, though the latter shall be given three days to repent, in which case he shall escape death. The related provisions enforce ‘positive’ discrimination for female apostates, who shall be given life imprisonment in both cases.
“This provision has for the first time introduced the crime of apostasy in the penal code. The applicable laws do not contain any provisions on apostasy. Nevertheless, this exclusion did not prevent the execution of a large number of members of opposition groups on charges of apostasy or atheism in both 1981 and 1988.” [56i]
19.19 The FIDH report added: “The draft bill’s definitions of an apostate as well as the pertaining punishments have been taken from that book [Ayatollah Khomeini’s book, Tahrir ul-Vassileh], as have many other definitions and punishments.” [56i]
19.20 A Daily Telegraph article dated 11 October 2008 stated that the Iranian parliament had voted in favour of the draft Penal Code bill which would codify the death penalty for male apostates and life imprisonment for female apostates. The article also noted that the draft bill contradicted Article 23 of Iran's own constitution, “…which states that no one may be molested simply for his beliefs.” It was reported that the new law is not yet in force because it requires another vote in parliament, and then the signature of the Ayatollah. [134a]
19.21 On 26 June 2009 Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported that:
“A decision has been made by the Iranian Government’s Parliamentary Committee to remove articles stipulating the death penalty for apostasy from the Islamic Penal Code Bill.
“Ali Shahrokhi of the Legal and Judicial Committee of the Parliament reportedly told the Iranian state news agency (IRNA) of this pronouncement according to a BBC Persian news service report on 23 June. Mr Shahrokhi also stated that stoning was not ‘in the interest of the regime’. He told IRNA that ‘Islam has set a strict set of conditions for the implementation of punishments such as stoning, that they can rarely be proven. Hence the legal and judicial commission members concluded that some of these laws are unnecessary to mention.’…
“The bill’s initial approval has been strongly condemned by the international community. The Islamic Penal Code bill will now be sent to the Iranian Parliament for a final vote before its review by the Guardian Council.” [116c]
19.22 At the time of writing of the COI Report the Islamic Penal Code bill had not passed into law.
See also Penal Code
Prosecution of apostates
19.23 The USSD Report 2008 noted that “Apostasy was punishable by death according to Shari'a law. There were no reported instances of the death penalty being applied for apostasy during the year.” [4a] (Section 2c) On the prosecution of apostates the Landinfo Report 2009 noted:
“In practice, it is very rare for anyone to be convicted of apostasy. The last time this happened was in 1990, when a priest was executed for apostasy, evangelisation and US espionage (Telegraph 2008). However, three priests (two of them converts) were kidnapped and killed by unknown perpetrators in 1994 (Landinfo 2006). In 2004, a pastor who had converted to Christianity in 1980 was arrested in connection with a Christian conference. The pastor, a colonel in the army, was tried for apostasy but acquitted (Norwegian Mission to the East, 2005). However, he was convicted of violating military law because he had kept his Christian faith hidden from his superiors. Pursuant to the law, only Muslims can become officers in the Iranian armed forces. The man was sentenced to three years imprisonment and his pension rights were revoked. In 2005, another pastor was stabbed with a knife on the street by unknown perpetrators. The pastor died from his injuries.” [33a] (p12)
19.24 However the government’s attitude to apostasy may be changing (see also Overview above for information about the Government’s hardening stance towards perceived opposition groups). The APCI Report 2008 stated that: “In …recent years, the Iranian government and clerical leadership have viewed apostasy as an increasing threat to the structure of Iranian society as the result of a perception that the rate of conversion is accelerating rapidly.” [6a] (p33) While the USSD 2008 Report noted that: “Proselytizing of Muslims by non-Muslims was illegal. The authorities have been increasingly vigilant in recent years in curbing proselytizing activities by evangelical Christians.” [4a] (Section 2c)
19.25 The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) report Iran/Death Penalty: a State Terror Policy, dated 28 April 2009, stated that:
“There have been few reports on apostasy cases in recent years. According to a 21 December 2008 report, a man by the name of Alireza Payghan, claiming to be the 12th imam of the Shiite and author of a book on the topic, was sentenced on charge of apostasy and executed in Qom on 18 December. He had been arrested in November 2006 and, based on rulings of ‘some sources of emulation’, had been found to be an apostate and a ‘corrupt on earth’ person. The government newspaper, The Daily Iran, did not report on Payghan’s claim, only noting: ‘he was spreading warship of superstition’. In 2007, another man by the name of Darvish, also claiming to be the 12th imam, had been executed in Qom. Ayatollah Khomeini’s book, Tahrir ul-Vassileh, is the most frequently invoked source in apostasy cases.” [56i]
19.26 However, the above cases could be considered to be based on heresy charges as the FIDH report observed that:
“Heresy: Anybody who claims to be a prophet is to be condemned to death and any Moslem who devises a heresy and based on it creates a sect, which is detrimental to Islam, shall be considered an apostate, and thus subject to the death sentence. While Christianity, Judaism and the Zoroastrianism are recognised under the Constitution, this provision seems to be directed at followers of the Baha’i minority, who have suffered ongoing persecution since the 1979 revolution.” [56i]
19.27 The CSW July 2008 Iran Profile states that verdicts stipulating the death penalty for apostasy are rarely, if ever, carried out but that intense pressure and serious human rights abuses occur regularly, and extra-judicial murder and attacks by official Islamic militias or radical groups are a serious concern. [116a]
See also Christians and Baha’is below