In an interview with the Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN), Hossein Ahmad Niazi (the attorney to Hedayat Abdollahpour) confirmed that he had visited him at Orumiyeh Central Prison last week and he had contested the verdict.

Hedayat Abdullahpour was arrested following the complaint and report of the Revolutionary Guards Corps (RGC) of Shno and Orumiyeh. He was sentenced to death by Revolutionary Court of Orumiyeh (Branch 2) at the request of the prosecutor on charges of “assisting the armed action of members of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI) of Iran by providing them with shelter, food and supplies in addition to acting as one of the main members of PDKI and propaganda activity in favour of that party”. An appeal was filed with the Supreme Court.

According to Abdullahpour’s lawyer, the Supreme Court concluded that Abdullahpour, was innocent since he had no weapons and he had left the area before the conflict. “Given that the law should be interpreted in favour of the accused who has not played any part in the conflict and basically he is not a rebellion, the death sentence is revoked.”, the judge argued.

Hedayat Abdullapour

Articles 278 and 279 of the Islamic Penal Code (enacted in 2013) deal with the definition of Rebellion and related regulations.

Baqŷ (Rebellion) and Efsad-e-fel-arz (Corruption on Earth)

Article 286- Any person, who extensively commits felony against the bodily entity of people, offenses against internal or international security of the state, spreading lies, disruption of the economic system of the state, arson and destruction of properties, distribution of poisonous and bacterial and dangerous materials, and establishment of, or aiding and abetting in, places of corruption and prostitution, [on a scale] that causes severe disruption in the public order of the state and insecurity, or causes harsh damage to the bodily entity of people or public or private properties, or causes distribution of corruption and prostitution on a large scale, shall be considered as Mofsed-e-fel-arz [corrupt on earth] and shall be sentenced to death.

Note- When, considering all the evidence and circumstances, the court does not establish the intention to cause extensive disruption in the public order, or creating insecurity, or causing vast damage or spreading corruption and prostitution in a large scale, or the knowledge of effectiveness of the acts committed, provided that the offense committed is not punishable under the title of a different offense, it shall sentence the offender to a ta’zir imprisonment of the fifth or sixth degree, considering the harmful consequences of the offense.

Article 287- Any group that wages armed rebellion against the state of the Islamic Republic of Iran, shall be regarded as Moharebs, and if they use [their] weapon, its members shall be sentenced to the death penalty.

Article 288- When members of the rebel group are arrested before any conflict occurs or a weapon is used, if the organization or core of that group exists, they shall be sentenced to a ta’zir imprisonment of the third degree, and if the co-organization or core of that group cease to exist, they shall be sentenced to a ta’zir imprisonment of the fifth degree.

Article 279 defines a “Mohareb” as someone who draws “a weapon on the life, property or chastity of people or to cause terror as it creates the atmosphere of insecurity.”

“Abdollahpour had no other choice but to be an accessory to the crime. When one is stuck where there are some armed people who have pointed the guns at him/her, one is forced to do what he/she is asked to do. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the Revolutionary Court (Branch 2) which was notified of the revocation. However, unfortunately, the Revolutionary Court (Branch 2) sentenced him on the previous alleged charges.”, his lawyer said.

“Abdollahpour’s lawyer contested the death sentence based on the following grounds including: 1. There are a few shortcomings in the formation of this case including lack of supporting document, evidence or reason for the accused’s membership in the Democratic Party, 2. AbdollahPour has had no intention to participate in the conflict and he just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time and 3. AbdullahPoor left the place and then the conflict occurred, so he should not be charged with participation in the conflict.”, he added.

“Moreover, according to the interpretation of the law in favour of the accused, the rule of ‘Dar al-Hudīth Beshobahat’(No penalty (is given) on suspicious proof) and “the principle of innocence” in addition to the above-mentioned reasons, Hedayat AbdollahPoor is innocent and his execution sentence should be dismissed. Therefore, it is not fair to execute Hedayat AbdullahPoor.His only crime is that he did not inform the security forces of the presence of the Peshmerga in the area.”, he concluded.

According to AbdollahPoor’s lawyer, all interrogations during the preliminary investigation stage were without the presence of a lawyer and none of the confessions were made under normal circumstances.