of kin, conflict resolution council branches and the Women and Children and Protection Office
of the judiciary. 7
In 2016, Mr. Haddadi’s court-appointed lawyer filed a request to review Mr. Haddadi’s case
pursuant to Article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code (2013).8 Article 91 allows judges to pronounce
alternative sentences in circumstances where the juveniles “do not realize the nature of the crime
committed or its prohibition, or if there is uncertainty about their full mental development,
according to their age”.9 The Article further adds that “the court may ask the opinion of forensic
medicine or resort to any other method that it sees appropriate in order to establish the full
mental development”.10 In 2017, a number of special procedure mandate holders described
ongoing executions in the Islamic Republic of Iran as “conclusive proof of the failure of the 2013
amendments to stop the execution of individuals sentenced to death as children”.11 In 2019, the
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran found that the
aforementioned assessment of the mental development of the accused at the time of the offence
was “arbitrary and inconsistent, and at the sole discretion of the judge, who can choose whether
to seek medical advice or not”.12
The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran answered the 2016 Special Procedures’
communication and confirmed that Mr. Haddadi had been sentenced to qisas and 16 years
imprisonment, a verdict upheld by the Supreme Court. The Government added that following the
review requested under Article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code (2013), the Department of Justice of
the Fars Province established that Mr. Haddadi was aware and had knowledge of the crime and
its consequences; subsequently the death penalty was permitted by the court. It was however
reported that the forensic doctor assigned to the case of Mr. Haddadi confirmed that the accused
had not reached maturity at the time of the crime and arrest.13 The Government further addressed
the work of the reconciliation commission and the working group on “prevention of life
deprivation punishment”, a subset of the executive committee of defending the rights of children
and juveniles in the Supreme Court. However, the Government did not mention whether these
institutions engaged with the case of Mr. Haddadi.14
The sentence and potential application of the death penalty against Mr. Haddadi represent a
violation of Articles 6(5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and 37(a) of
the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Human Rights Committee has further stipulated
that the death penalty cannot be imposed if it cannot be proven, beyond reasonable doubt, that


See https://iranhrdc.org/english-translation-of-books-i-ii-of-the-new-islamic-penal-code/.
See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21547&LangID=E


Select target paragraph3