The Government of Whipping: Instilling Fear and Normalizing Torture Among the People

In late Ordibehesht 1395 (May 2016), 17 gold mine workers in Agh-Dareh, East Azerbaijan, were whipped 30 to 50 times in addition to imprisonment and fines for alleged incitement to unrest (the prison sentence was later revoked). In another case, 35 boys and girls who were arrested during a graduation party in early Khordad (June) near Qazvin were sentenced to 99 lashes for mixing and breaking norms, and on the same day, without preliminary investigations regarding the crime, a guilty verdict and indictment were issued, substantive proceedings were conducted, and the punishment was immediately executed (summary justice). From the perspective of many Islamists, mixed parties of boys and girls represent cultural permissiveness, secularism, chaos, and disregard for Islamic rituals. The revolutionary conscience of Islamists dictates that the affluent, who do not adhere to the government lifestyle, should be made regretful through severe suffering from joy and pleasure. But why does a government that came to power with slogans of helping the oppressed whip protesting workers who engage in the hardest jobs? Why should a film critic demand the whipping of a regime's propaganda figure for rudeness? The transformation of corporal punishment by state authorities was a significant achievement of the Pahlavi regime in the judicial sphere, eliminating whipping as a medieval torture method. During that time, corporal punishment was not removed from law enforcement, security, or even schools, but neither the government nor society accepted whipping as a punishment. Those who still believe that the people of Iran deserve the Islamic Republic and its harsh punishments must explain how these same people gradually set aside whipping and marginalized it in the current political and social discourse. Harsh corporal punishments entered the political and social culture of the Iranian people during the revolution. During the revolution, besides the clergy, others did not call for whipping politicians and 'tyrants' but spoke of revolutionary executions; once execution becomes a common topic, whipping, amputation, and finger severing become easily digestible for the public. The prevalence of whipping in the Islamic Penal Code approved in 1392 (2013) mentions whipping (3 to 100 lashes) 39 times. In this law, whipping is on par with imprisonment and monetary punishment as one of the main punishments. Legislators have designated whipping as an alternative punishment for many offenses to reduce the number of prisoners. As stated in the Islamic Penal Code, whipping is a punishment for the poor because, in most cases, individuals or judges (based on the convict's status) can endure either monetary punishment or whipping. Those who lack financial means are naturally forced to endure the punishment of whipping, while those who are financially capable willingly pay the fine to avoid torture. Whipping ranks third among severe punishments in the Islamic Penal Code after execution and amputation (Article 127). Legislators are well aware of the power of whipping to inflict pain and suffering on individuals. The punishment of whipping is not limited to specific crimes and encompasses various offenses (from drinking alcohol to sexual relations prohibited by the legislator, and from causing bodily harm to insult). Due to the designation of whipping as a ta'zir (discretionary punishment), it can be applied in any case at the discretion of the judge. Three categories of institutions have been serious advocates of corporal punishment: religious institutions, military institutions, and authoritarian and totalitarian governments. The only aspect of issuing a whipping sentence is to instill fear and demonstrate power, as monetary fines with compensation or retribution for bodily harm or life do not justify whipping. Religious, military, and political institutions merely want to show that they are in power and that disobedience to their orders has a cost. In contrast, three categories of institutions have opposed corporal punishment: liberal democratic governments, modern educational institutions, and research institutions in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Religious institutions in predominantly Christian countries have largely eliminated such punishments due to external pressure. Research institutions, focusing on results and functions, have realized that corporal punishment does not achieve most of the intended functions of its proponents (except for taming and subjugation). Unfortunately, today in Iran, the government and military and religious institutions unanimously support various forms of corporal punishment (execution, amputation, torture). The heaviest recipients of whipping in Iran are the youth, workers, women, and religious and ethnic minorities. These four groups share three common characteristics: 1) they have the least financial power and cannot buy their whipping sentences with bribes or alternative punishments; 2) they have the least access to political power; and 3) their lifestyle is further removed from that of the ruling class than other groups (such as merchants or teachers or government employees). The government cannot select individuals for being workers, young, women, or minorities, but teachers and other government employees are selected, and many merchants have cooperated with the Islamic Republic from the beginning to secure their interests. Some youth are whipped under the label of thugs, and some for attending parties. Active students have also occasionally received whipping sentences, and sentences against them have been executed. (Amin Niayi Far and Payman Aref in Mehr 1390). Of course, to equate the protesting worker, the active student, and the dancing youth with other criminals, whipping sentences have also been executed for theft suspects. In today's judicial norm, whipping is no longer a punitive punishment but, like other forms of corporal punishment, constitutes torture (Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). The Islamic Republic has introduced such laws as Western, un-Islamic, and non-indigenous, and has renamed torture as ta'zir to keep both identity seekers and indigenous advocates satisfied or to prevent their protests, while not conveying the negative feeling to supporters of the regime that the government tortures individuals. The religious government does not 'torture' individuals but executes divine rulings. Why whipping? If whipping can be eliminated from punishments in Iran (as gradually happened during the Pahlavi era) and has been removed in the world (except for a few governments like the Taliban, Indonesia, ISIS, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria, and the Islamic Republic), why do Islamic governments frequently use it? First, whipping is overt violence: it is mostly executed in public and leaves marks on the body. This allows society to well perceive the intimidation it causes and keeps the memory of it fresh in the mind. Thus, society becomes accustomed to torture and violence. Religious governments do not want people to forget how much capacity they have to inflict pain and violence. Second, the memory of it remains until death, unlike monetary or imprisonment punishments. Whipping, like other torture methods, serves as a tool for the unforgetting of the cruelty of the 'system.' Third, whipping has a ritualistic aspect, and those subjected to it (who know no alternative) believe that whipping purifies society from evil, wrongdoing, and corruption. Whipping can succeed in creating this illusion. Fourth, whipping does not cause permanent defects in the individual's body. This punishment belongs to systems where slavery and serfdom were prevalent, where a master wanted to punish a slave or serf severely for disobeying orders but did not want to incapacitate them to reduce their productive value. Whipping is a punishment for the mamluk from the owner.