When Is the Right to Justice Undermined? Identifying and Applying International and Islamic Human Rights Law Standards for Domestic Judicial Processes: The Case of the Seven Bahá’í Leaders and Iran’s Revolutionary Courts
In: Religion & Human RightsSearch for other papers by Golriz Ghahraman in
Current site
Google Scholar
Section one of this article is divided in two parts, defining a ‘competent tribunal established by law’, and secondly independence and impartiality, including both structural and substantive standards for assessment. The second section provides an assessment of the legitimacy of the process in terms of minimum standards of due process. This part consists of three sub-sections, addressing three aspects of the right to due process that most gravely risk political manipulation of trials. These are: the principle of legality; procedural transparency; and the right to be represented by competent defence counsel. Both these sections also apply the components identified to the general operation of Iran’s Revolutionary Courts. Finally, section three will analyse the conduct of Iran’s Revolutionary Courts in the particular trials of the seven Bahá’í leaders (known as the ‘Yaran’ or ‘friends’) in Iran in 2010.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
6
M. Baderin, International Human Rights and Islamic Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 97–98.
-
10
A. Seibert-Fohr, ‘European Comparatives Perspective on the Rule of Law and Independent Courts’, Journal für Rechtspolitik 20 (2012), available at: <http://www.mpil.de/shared/data/pdf/jrp3_seibert-fohr.pdf>.
-
13
General Comment 32, supra note 8, para. 22.
-
14
European Court of Human Rights, Campbell and Fells v. United Kingdom, Application Nos. 7819/77 and 7878/11, Judgment of 28 June 1984, para. 76.
-
19
Tamadonfar, supra note 16, 216.
-
21
Tamadonfar, supra note 16, 207.
-
22
Tabari, supra note 17, 105.
-
27
Baderin, supra note 6, 67.
-
30
Ibid., 72.
-
31
Bangamwabo, supra note 23, 244.
-
34
Tabari, supra note 17, 107.
-
38
Tamadonfar, supra note 16, 216.
-
42
Bangamwamo, supra note 23, 249.
-
45
Ibid., 4.
-
50
European Court of Human Rights, Beaumartin v. France, Application No. 15287/89, 24 November 1994, para. 38.
-
51
European Court of Human Rights, Van de Hurk v. The Netherlands, Application No. 16034/90, 19 April 1994, paras. 50–52.
-
52
European Court of Human Rights, Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, Application Nos. 6878/75 and 7238/75, 23 June 1981.
-
60
Baderin, supra note 6, 72.
-
62
Zhang, supra note 48, 40.
-
69
Tabari, supra note 17, 104.
-
82
E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.3, supra note 77, para. 13.
-
84
E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.3, supra note 77, para. 28.
-
94
Baderin, supra note 6, 98.
-
111
Ibid., 112.
-
114
Baderin, supra note 6, 111–112.
-
115
Ibid., 112.
-
122
Habibzadeh, supra note 20, 111–2.
-
124
Ibid., 113.
-
134
Ibid., 167.
-
136
Ibid., 262.
-
137
Ibid., 269.
-
139
European Court of Huan Rights, Poitrimol v. France, Application No. 14032/88, 23 November 1993.
-
144
See for example Baderin, supra note 6, 106; and Sukvir Gossal, ‘Human Rights and the Death Penalty: A Comparative Analysis of International and Islamic law’, 16 Coventry Law Journal (2007), p. 5.
-
149
Baderin, supra note 6, 107.
-
157
Human Rights Watch, supra note 44, 4.
-
161
Baderin, supra note 6, 12.
-
164
Ibid., 97–98.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 670 | 218 | 21 |
| Full Text Views | 220 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 95 | 14 | 0 |
When Is the Right to Justice Undermined? Identifying and Applying International and Islamic Human Rights Law Standards for Domestic Judicial Processes: The Case of the Seven Bahá’í Leaders and Iran’s Revolutionary Courts
In: Religion & Human RightsSearch for other papers by Golriz Ghahraman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Section one of this article is divided in two parts, defining a ‘competent tribunal established by law’, and secondly independence and impartiality, including both structural and substantive standards for assessment. The second section provides an assessment of the legitimacy of the process in terms of minimum standards of due process. This part consists of three sub-sections, addressing three aspects of the right to due process that most gravely risk political manipulation of trials. These are: the principle of legality; procedural transparency; and the right to be represented by competent defence counsel. Both these sections also apply the components identified to the general operation of Iran’s Revolutionary Courts. Finally, section three will analyse the conduct of Iran’s Revolutionary Courts in the particular trials of the seven Bahá’í leaders (known as the ‘Yaran’ or ‘friends’) in Iran in 2010.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 670 | 218 | 21 |
| Full Text Views | 220 | 5 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 95 | 14 | 0 |
