Skip to main content

Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani – a mother of two children - is to be stoned to death by the Islamic Republic of Iran

Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani – a 43-year-old mother of two children - is to be stoned to death by the Islamic Republic of Iran. She has already been convicted of having an ‘illicit relationship’ and been sentenced to 99 lashes. In another trial, she was sentenced to death by stoning.

Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani was interrogated in 2006 for the murder of her husband. In the interrogation session, Sakineh confessed to committing adultery with Nasser and Seyyed Ali, the two men responsible for her late husband’s murder. In May 2006, branch 101 of the Criminal Court of Oskoo in the province of Eastern Azerbaijan (in northwestern Iran) sentenced Sakineh to 99 lashes for committing adultery. After serving her sentence, she was released. Four months later, branch 6 of the Criminal Court of Azerbaijan sentenced her to death by stoning for adultery while married*.

In the past few years, Sakineh has requested a pardon twice. Her requests were turned down by the Amnesty and Pardon Commission of Azerbaijan.

Last week, the news of the possible stoning of Sakineh was published on news sites and, once again, it drew public attention to the punishment of stoning to death.

Currently, the case of this young woman is in the Executions office in Tabriz (the capital of the province of Eastern Azerbaijan), and her stoning sentence can be carried out any moment- the same way the sentence of death by stoning for Mr. Jafar Kiani [in the summer of 2007 in a village in the province of Qazvin] was carried out, to the public’s astonishment and disbelief.

THE VERDICT OF BIGOTED AND RABID JUDGES

Sakineh’s case, like others stoning cases, has some serious errors and objectionable problems. For example, two of the five judges, Kazemi and Hamdollahi, presiding over the case in branch 6 of the provincial Criminal Court, believed in her acquittal.

In an interview with Rooz, Mohammad Mostafaei, Sakineh’s laywer, stated, “When two, or even one of the magistrates presiding over a case in the Criminal Court, believe in an acquittal and find errors in the presented evidence, then the defendant should not be sentenced to death. When the life of a human being is in question, there must be more hesitation and contemplation. One’s life should not be taken away so easily or be subjected to [excruciating] death.”

Mr. Mostafaei, who was referring to the fact that the request for a pardon and amnesty for Sakineh was turned down twice, stated, “I believe some of the judges in the province have specific dogmas, and these dogmas play a key role in the fate of legal cases. There is the fury caused by the dogma of murder [editor's note: which causes the judges to take on a linear approach with murder cases]. There is also the act of adultery committed by Sakineh and the fact that the murderers were deemed incapable of correct judgment. Consequently Sakineh was sentenced to and endured 99 lashes for adultery. Why, just a few months after the case was closed, was she sentenced and convicted again on the charge of adultery? Wasn’t the first court presiding over the case aware of the act of adultery?”

THE SEARCH FOR FOUR WITNESSES

Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani is spending her days awaiting her stoning sentence. She has no access to a complainant or plaintiff outside the prison and her two children have acquitted her. She, like many other women sentenced to stoning, confessed to adultery during her interrogation, but in the court and before the judge, she recanted her confession and declared that she was forced to confess during interrogation.

Asieh Amini, a journalist who has been active in research and writing on death by stoning, said to Rooz Online, “The most important question in all the stoning cases, including that of Sakineh, is what evidence and reasoning was used to prove adultery in the court? Based on the Islamic Penal Code, four fair witnesses are required to have seen the act firsthand, in full, and from close up. An alternative acceptable piece of evidence is the voluntary confession of a defendant stated four times. How are these four witnesses found? Isn’t the very law that has its root in religious sources a testament to the fact that religion should close the legal case? Nevertheless, if we observe carefully, the stoning sentences handed down all use a permissive religious jurisprudence. A religious defense is not considered in the courts. ”

Asieh Amini points out that it is practically impossible to find four fair witnesses as described in religious jurisprudence. She adds, “The objection is still valid against the courts that only use the knowledge of the judge [as a basis for conviction],** while many of the jurists and legal experts believe that the knowledge of the judge is not a valid method of proving that adultery was committed. Moreover, the confessions of all the defendants who I investigated were obtained under duress in prison, and the legal admissibility of the confessions is greatly compromised.”

INEFFECTIVE CONDUCT OF THE 8TH PARLIAMENT (THE CURRENT PARLIAMENT THAT BEGAN ITS MANDATE IN 2007)

Sakineh Mohammadi is at the top of the list of those sentenced to death by stoning. However, there are other women and men in various cities of Iran who pass their days hoping that their sentences and the penal law will change. During the international protests against stoning in Iran, the only action taken by members of the 8th Parliament was omitting the section pertaining to stoning punishments from the draft of the Islamic Penal Code. Now, the question is, will the omission of this section put an end to stoning in Iran?

Asieh Amini’s replies, “It will have no effect whatsoever, because according to article 43 of the Constitution, when the judge has no legal source for jurisprudence, (s)he can use religious jurisprudence sources for sentencing. Removal of this section [pertaining to stoning in the Islamic Penal Law] will not have any particular impact. The parliamentarian, by taking this step, has only evaded responsibility and obligation and passed the buck before international observers, without really contributing to the improvement of conditions surrounding punishments such as stoning. The best reason to support [my claim] is the discussion of the MP’s after eliminating stoning from the Act. They said: Divine limits and punishments*** are not eliminable. That includes stoning – however, this punishment is rarely handed out, but its international burden is very high, so we prefer to omit it.”

Amini describes the conduct of the MP’s as an attempt to wipe out any questions, instead of answering. She said, “No positive step has been taken. Sakineh and other women are spending their days in fear that their sentences may get confirmed and executed. Omission of this law from the Islamic Penal Code, even after approval by the MP’s, is not practical and enforceable. In other words, the omission is worth nothing and the government is able to say: we do not have such a law. Stoning exists because there are private plaintiffs.”

Translator’s Notes:

* In Islamic Sharia law practiced and enforced in Iran, there are two types of adultery. The first one applies to unmarried women (and men) and the sentence is 99 lashes (for someone convicted two times on this charge, the third conviction results in death by stoning). The second type applies to married individuals (and mostly women). It carries a sentence called Rajam (i.e. death by stoning).

**In the Islamic Penal Code, knowledge of the judge has been cited as an alternative in a case where there is lack of evidence and/or four fair witnesses.

*** In Sharia law, there are two types of punishments. One is called Hodud-e Elahi (i.e. Divine limits) and its extent and degree (limits) are set by the divinity (or God). It includes the following punishments and crimes: severing the hand, theft; flogging, drinking alcohol; and stoning, adultery committed by a married person. Most religious scholars and jursiprudents consider these laws absolute and unchangeable.


Source: Persian2English, June 28, 2010

Click here to sign the "Help To Save Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani" petition: "Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani is incarcerated since 2005 in Tabriz prison in Iran. She is accused of having committed adultery with a married man and henceforth is sentenced to being stoned to death while her crime has not been proved. We condemn this judicial sentence and ask for international help for Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. We hope that someday in near future stoning people to death be eradicated from all judicial laws." More petitions here.

Comments

Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term:   Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight.  In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution.  Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order. 

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

Alabama | Judge bars nitrogen gas execution, says method is unconstitutionally cruel

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A federal judge on Tuesday permanently blocked Alabama from executing an inmate with nitrogen gas after declaring it violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. District Judge Emily Marks issued the ruling hours after an appeals court reversed her initial finding that the method was constitutional. Marks permanently enjoined the state from executing Jeffrey Lee, 49, by nitrogen gas. He was scheduled to be executed Thursday. The decision, for now, blocks the use of the controversial new execution method that the state has championed since 2024, but the issue will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Idaho will soon turn to firing squad executions. Police will pull the triggers

Trained members of Idaho law enforcement with demonstrated firearms proficiency are expected to fill slots for carrying out the death penalty by firing squad as the state prison system transitions to the controversial execution method next month.  Six volunteers certified for no less than three years apiece through Peace Officer Standards and Training, or POST, will be recruited to ensure the Idaho Department of Correction is ready to comply with a state law that prioritizes shooting prisoners to death over lethal injection starting July 1.  No one on the team may have faced disciplinary action over firearms, use of force, or related conduct over the prior year, according to new execution protocols the prison system released this week. 

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.