Special Court for Economic Offenders; 'Hitting Water in a Mortar or a Definitive Cure?'

Economic offenders will now be tried in a new branch of the Revolutionary Court. This action follows the request of Sadegh Amoli Larijani, the head of the judiciary, to Ayatollah Khamenei. In this week's program, we asked whether the special court for economic offenders will be effective in solving the economic crisis or not? With the presence of Ghasem Shole-Sadi, a lawyer and representative of the third and fourth Majlis, and Fereydoun Khavand, an economist and professor in Paris. It is noted that this program was recorded before the arrest of Mr. Shole-Sadi in front of the Majlis. On Saturday morning, a number of lawyers gathered in front of the Majlis at the invitation of Ghasem Shole-Sadi, a legal scholar. Mr. Shole-Sadi had announced on Friday that he would go to Baharestan Square in protest against the supervisory oversight, following the example of Mohammad Mossadegh. He also protested against the legal regime convention of the Caspian Sea. Mr. Shole-Sadi, let’s start with you. Are the new branches of the Revolutionary Court effective in combating corruption in the Islamic Republic? I don’t think so. It may create a wave, but this is not the way to fight. For example, regarding drug trafficking, we have had codified laws for about a hundred years and have executed criminals for a hundred years. But has drug addiction been eradicated? Or are millions of our youth and people addicted to drugs? Mr. Rouhani also said that problems cannot be solved with harsh measures. We need to eliminate the sources and reasons. For example, let me mention one case. Mr. Mohammad Reza Rahimi was the head of the Court of Audit, whose job is to control the country’s income and expenses to prevent violations. This man, who was the head of this court and later became the first vice president of Ahmadinejad, has been imprisoned and convicted of financial corruption. This means we did not entrust the work to qualified individuals, which led to this situation. Or for instance, that bank president (Khaavari) who took billions of money and went to Canada. The story of those thousand families that have clung to the fate of this country like an octopus and have government rents at their disposal. The head of the city council said that more than a third of the Iranian nation is below the poverty line. Meanwhile, these billion and multi-thousand billion figures are being stolen from the public treasury. The latest example is the currency issue, where it was said that twenty to thirty billion dollars had left the treasury. Why is this happening? Because the work is not in the hands of qualified individuals. I wrote a private letter to Mr. Khamenei in 2016. He had apologized to the Iranian people once or twice. I wrote that your apologies are because your country is not well managed. If it were well managed, you wouldn’t need to apologize. The reason it is not well managed has two main reasons: one is the weakness of the system and the other is weak and corrupt officials. I said it is time for a house cleaning. Mr. Shole-Sadi, you mentioned the letter you wrote to Ayatollah Khamenei. How much do you think Mr. Khamenei himself is involved in the corruption that exists in Iran? Currently, it is his officials who are committing these corruptions. When I was a member of parliament, we had a meeting with Mr. Khamenei. Mr. Ali Naqi Jahromi, who later underwent an identity surgery and changed his name to Mohammad and then became 'Sayyid' through a court ruling, then became a doctor. Initially, when he became the governor of Fars, he had a high school diploma. Then suddenly he became a doctor. In that meeting with Mr. Khamenei, who was also present as the governor of Fars, Mr. Khamenei said, 'Our dear Mr. Jahromi.' He used the word 'dear' exactly. This dear gentleman was the main accused in the three billion corruption case. Although he escaped punishment, he is not the only one. The way they manage the country brings corruption itself. It is very clear. Mr. Mahmoud Sadeghi, a member of parliament, revealed about sixty-three accounts that the head of the judiciary apparently withdrew from their profits, and they wanted to prosecute him. They went to his house at night. When you expose something, you are at risk of being arrested. Mr. Khavand, let me ask you the same question. Do you think the establishment of special courts for those labeled as economic offenders is effective in combating corruption? What do you think as an economist? I really think this is hitting water in a mortar. Because in a society, judicial actions work when corruption is exceptional and the judiciary addresses these exceptional aspects within a healthy society and economy. In Iran, corruption is systematic and pervasive. A large part of experts in Iran agree that corruption is widespread because the economic foundations of Iran prepare the ground for this universal corruption. Based on various assessments, about 70 to 80 percent of Iran's gross domestic product is under the control of the public sector and semi-public institutions. 70 percent of the country’s total budget belongs to state-owned companies. The officials of such an inflated, costly, and inefficient government are the undisputed rulers of the Iranian economy. They have golden signatures. They use these golden signatures, free from any kind of control in various areas such as exports and imports, granting tax facilities, signing contracts for tenders and auctions, granting bank facilities, transferring production units of the country under the guise of privatization, land grabbing, and so on. As long as this powerful bureaucracy does not come to an end, talking about fighting corruption resembles a joke. How many judges can be appointed to combat this level of corruption? Another issue is that Iran's oil exports are the most important currency and budget needs in Iran. This currency, which accounts for about 80 percent of the country's foreign receipts, is in the hands of this bureaucracy and the owners of golden signatures who, through this oil rent, are in the mafia networks where we see such extensive corruption. A similar situation exists in countries like Venezuela, Algeria, Russia, and Nigeria. The third point is the existence of semi-public institutions, especially economic facilities that are under the control of the Revolutionary Guards and are a major source of corruption. The last point in this regard is that we have institutions like the Court of Audit, the General Inspection Organization, and the judiciary itself, which are corrupt and cannot oversee the income and expenses of government institutions and uncover corruption. In any case, given this set of factors that are the main sources of corruption, asking the judiciary to combat corruption is more like a joke. Mr. Shole-Sadi, Mr. Khavand pointed to the widespread and systematic corruption that exists in Iran, including military institutions, the Revolutionary Guards, and the public and semi-public sectors. The judiciary is facing criticisms. You yourself mentioned the accounts of the judiciary. Does the judiciary currently have the ability to handle corruption cases, and is it right for it to investigate these cases? The issue of managing the judiciary is separate from the issue of judges. In the judiciary, there are many honest and independent judges. However, the management of this judiciary is not effective enough to deal differently with honest and independent judges compared to dishonest judges. One of the fundamental problems of the judiciary is its management, which has been political since the revolution. The first head of the judiciary after the revolution was Dr. Beheshti, who, while being the head of the judiciary, was also the secretary-general of the Islamic Republic Party, the largest political party in the country. Then Mr. Khamenei became the secretary-general of this party. Mr. Mousavi Ardabili, Mr. Mohammad Yazdi, then Mr. Shahroudi, who was for a long time the head of the Supreme Council of the Iraqi Revolution and later became the head of the judiciary in Iran, and finally now Mr. Sadegh Larijani. All of these were political figures in the country. When the manager in the judiciary is political, inevitably, the political aspect of the manager overshadows the performance. When Mr. Yazdi was the head of the judiciary, he issued a circular that accused individuals should not be sent to unofficial prisons. This means that unofficial prisons existed where it was unclear what happened to the prisoners. As the head of the judiciary, he never asked who created these unofficial prisons and what happened to the prisoners there. In recent months, we have heard many cases where some accused individuals have disappeared in prisons or security and police detention centers. Of course, they generally say they committed suicide, but this is not acceptable. The judiciary, in its current form, cannot be successful in this area. In principle, the judiciary has not been able to gain public trust to the extent that befits the dignity of the Iranian nation. Therefore, I have no hope that the judiciary can perform this duty well. The actions taken by Mr. Larijani, who wrote a letter to Mr. Khamenei asking for permissions, are among those masterpieces. That is, this gentleman wants to perform his legal duties, and the judiciary he is responsible for has among its duties the prevention of crime and the resolution of disputes and the prosecution of criminals and the restoration of public rights and legitimate freedoms, and then he writes to Mr. Khamenei asking whether he should do this or not. It is clear that he should do it. Does he need permission, or is Mr. Khamenei the authority to say whether to shorten or lengthen the period of appeal? What does it have to do with him? These are legal issues that should be clarified by the parliament. Currently, we have a relatively good procedure both criminally and civilly. The action taken by the head of the judiciary was very surprising to me. In any case, with these actions, permits, and this system we have, I have no hope that we can seriously address economic corruption like other corruptions and eradicate economic corruption. Regarding the powers of the head of the judiciary and the criticisms that exist, let’s talk more about the judiciary. Let me also ask Mr. Khavand a question while the judiciary issue is raised. Mr. Khavand, regarding the corruption in the judiciary, is there another institution that can oversee the prevention of corruption in Iran? The General Inspection Organization and the Court of Audit, institutions like the Organization for Trade and the Majlis can address this issue, and most importantly, in all countries, there is an institution that plays a key role in exposing corruption, and that is the free press. As long as there is no free press, a large part of the corrupt escape punishment. In developed countries, in the United States and Europe, we see that most corruption cases are exposed through the press, and as long as this institution in Iran does not have the necessary freedom, issues will not be resolved. However, these institutions outside the press themselves lack the necessary credibility in the eyes of public opinion in Iran, and especially the finger of accusation is pointed at the judiciary. What is important in the issue of corruption is what the International Transparency Organization calls the perception and understanding of corruption. The International Transparency Organization consults academics, experts, business owners, and ordinary people and asks them what their understanding of the state of corruption in the country is. The perception of corruption in Iran is very high. People feel and understand that they live in a corrupt country. I don’t think they are wrong because it is enough to refer to the statistics of the International Transparency Organization. We see Iran ranked 130th. Among the most corrupt countries in the world. Many times, it has even fallen behind countries like Ivory Coast and Rwanda. Many African countries have acted more successfully in combating corruption than Iran. Even in a region like the Middle East and North Africa, only war-torn countries like Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen are considered more corrupt than Iran. The reports of the International Transparency Organization regarding corruption in Iran, which ranks Iran 130th, and the understanding of the Iranian people is at this level, are accepted by Iranian sources. Mr. Rouhani's book about Iran's economy and national security refers to this report. The reports of the Research Center of the Majlis, which is the research arm of the legislative body, regularly cite this report. No one has denied that the report of the International Transparency Organization, which places Iran among corrupt countries, is questionable. Mr. Shole-Sadi, there have been many criticisms of these special courts for trying economic offenders. You yourself mentioned the powers of the head of the judiciary and that the Majlis should take action in this regard. Another issue that has drawn the criticism of legal scholars is the issue of appeals in these cases. According to the constitution, how is the appeal ruling for those convicted? Do you think this proposal regarding the handling of cases of those labeled as economic offenders is legal and practical? Currently, this proposal is not legal. When the criminal court issues a ruling and convicts someone, they can appeal within 20 days. Depending on the case, the appeal authority is either the provincial appeal court or, in some crimes, the Supreme Court. In this regard, the country’s procedure does not have any specific problems. This 20 days is not a long time. It is a relatively appropriate time, and almost all countries observe this range. We had something during the war, where military courts during the war or sometimes even field military courts were formed. But those are during wartime. It is very dangerous to want to deal with the ordinary processes of the country in an extraordinary manner. Even now, regarding some of these accused individuals who have charges of organized crimes or security, even at the investigation stage, according to Note 48 of the criminal procedure, they do not have the right to choose any lawyer they want, and they must choose a lawyer approved by the judiciary. Therefore, it is a very dangerous situation for the principle of rights and justice. After all, a criminal or accused has rights that the constitution has enumerated and has set arrangements that they must be informed of the charges within 24 hours. Not only should it be communicated, but it should also be explained to them. The case must be sent to the judicial authority as soon as possible, and they have the right to have a lawyer. If we want to take these rights away from the accused, it is a stone...