Featured Documents
Supreme Court of Iran: General Administration of Uniformity of Judicial Decisions and Publication of Deliberations and Opinions of the General Board (Opinion Number 835)
(Translation by Seyed Bahman Khodadadi)
Islamic Republic of Iran
Judiciary
Supreme Court of the Country
General Administration of Uniformity of Judicial Decisions and Publication of Deliberations and Opinions of the General Board
Subject: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court
Opinion Number: 835
With the enactment of the Islamic Penal Law (1375) and the subsequent dissolution of public and revolutionary courts from [Iran's] judicial system, the responsibility for conducting preliminary investigations was assigned to the courts. Consequently, the reference to the "Prosecutor's Office" in Article 650 of the aforementioned law concerning perjury has become obsolete.
Following the re-establishment of the Prosecutor's Offices, Article 322 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, along with Article 209 of the same law, explicitly addresses the punishment for perjury, establishing a legal obligation for investigators regarding witness testimony. This provision emphasizes the necessity of enforcing penalties for violations committed by witnesses, thereby underscoring the duty of investigators to interpret the law with the intent of uncovering the legislative purpose.
Accordingly, the punishment prescribed for perjury occurring during the preliminary investigation phase, prior to the involvement of the Prosecutor's Office, remains subject to Article 650 of the Islamic Penal Code (Penalties). Therefore, the decision rendered by the 13th Branch of the Alborz Court of Appeal, which aligns with this opinion, is recognized as correct and lawful by the majority of votes. This decision is binding for the branches of the Supreme Court, as well as all other judicial and non-judicial authorities, pursuant to Article 471 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, along with subsequent amendments and additions in similar cases.
Popular Documents
Supreme Court of Iran: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court (Opinion Number 834)
(Translation by Seyed Bahman Khodadadi)
Islamic Republic of Iran
Judiciary
Supreme Court of the Country
General Administration of Uniformity of Judicial Decisions and Publication of Deliberations and Opinions of the General Board
Subject: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court
Opinion Number: 834
In accordance with the supplementary note to Article 18 of the Islamic Penal Code and the provisions of Article 2 of the Law on Reducing the Punishment of Imprisonment, approved in 1399, it is mandated that when a court imposes a sentence of imprisonment exceeding the minimum penalty established by law, the court must provide a justification based on the clauses of this article or other relevant legal provisions. The philosophy underlying this law aims to mitigate the severity of imprisonment sentences, thereby establishing the minimum prescribed punishment as the baseline for sentencing.
Consequently, if a court fails to adhere to this requirement and imposes a sentence that exceeds the minimum threshold, such a sentence will be considered to surpass the legally mandated punishment. Under the final provision of paragraph "C" of Article 474 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, this situation provides grounds for the resumption of proceedings.
Thus, the decision rendered by the Thirty-Eighth Branch of the Supreme Court is deemed correct and lawful by the majority of votes, insofar as it aligns with this opinion. This decision is binding on the branches of the Supreme Court, as well as all judicial and non-judicial authorities, in accordance with Article 471 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, along with subsequent amendments and additions in similar cases.
Featured Collections
Online Companion to Mālik's Muwaṭṭaʾ: Translated by Mohammad Fadel & Connell Monette (Harvard Series in Islamic Law, Harvard University Press 2019)
Edited by Mohammad Fadel, Connell Monette. Contributions by Daniel Jacobs, Rami Koujah, Ari Schriber, Cem Tecimer.
Online Companion to Justice and Leadership in Early Islamic Courts, ed. Intisar Rabb & Abigail Balbale (Harvard Series in Islamic Law, Harvard University Press 2017)
Edited by Intisar Rabb, Abigail Krasner Balbale. Contributions by Daniel Jacobs, Abtsam Saleh.
