The decisions of the Special Court, which operates independently of the ordinary legal framework and is accountable only to the Supreme Leader, are also final and cannot be challenged before the normal system of courts of appeal, but only through an internal appeal mechanism that must be approved by the ruling judge. Princeton professor Mirjam Kuenkler writes: “It is not difficult to imagine how, given its legal status, the SCC could become the Supreme Leader`s main instrument for disciplining and prosecuting dissident clerics outside of responsible and transparent control by any government office other than the Supreme Leader`s office.” [6] The Special Court deals with crimes allegedly committed by clerics, although it has also taken cases from lay people. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, all banks had to follow Sharia banking procedures, including the prohibition of interest (riba) and the prohibition of usury. Iran`s Supreme Audit Office regulates banking and financial transactions. In recent years, Iran has created free trade zones, such as on Kish Island and Chabahar Port, where such rules are not enforced to stimulate investment, as in other Muslim countries. While the Islamic Republic has publicly and officially committed to an interest-free economy and banking, “it has decreed that government borrowing based on a fixed interest rate from the nationalized banking system would not constitute interest and would therefore be allowed.” [19] [20] The clerics of the parliament and seminary in Qom strongly opposed the Davar reforms, but almost all Iranian lawmakers supported modernization. Reza Shah maintained the new judicial system on a “temporary basis” as an “experiment”, perhaps to pacify the clergy, and made it final in 1936. If a person commits serious crimes “against the state”, such as espionage, treason, activism, “terrorism”, etc., they could be sentenced to death for “moharebeh” and “mofsede-fel-arz”. Major economic crimes can also be punished by death for “mofsed-fel-arz” if the stability of the financial system is threatened.

[ref. needed] In the past, reformist politicians have attempted to challenge the death penalty and uphold the rule of law with regard to the unlawful use of torture in prisons. Journalists and human rights defenders in Iran who try to draw attention to these issues often face prison sentences and the death penalty themselves, as in the case of Akbar Ganji. 18. In December 2003, President Mohammad Khatami said: “I do not like the death penalty, although if there is a case where there should be an execution, the most just case would be for Saddam. But I would never want that. [ref. needed] This study provides an overview of the “life of law” in the Islamic Republic of Iran, an overview of “law in action” from the perspective of lawyers who are members of the Iranian Bar Association (Kānun-e Vokalā-ye Dādgostari, “IBA”).

Their daily experiences as lawyers and their accounts of the daily struggles within the legal system are pieces of a puzzle that, once in place, will reveal the institutional practices that, over time, produce and replicate the Islamic Republic`s legal order. It also tells us a lot about the power struggles within Iranian society and the ongoing struggles over its normative boundaries and future leadership. How does Iran`s overtly religious legal system, based on “Islamic criteria,” distinguish itself into a relatively independent field of action? How does a male-dominated judiciary cope with the increasing feminization of the legal profession? Why is the relationship between the legal profession and the judiciary marked by hostility? Why do many Iranian lawyers express a strong aversion to family law cases? Why is the Iranian public suspicious of lawyers? And finally, what does legal life in the Islamic Republic reveal about the development of late modernity in Iranian society? These are some of the questions we faced when we started interviewing Iranian lawyers and getting acquainted with their daily reality. These are also the questions we want to shed light on in this study. The legal methods of execution are hanging, shooting, stoning, beheading and throwing from a great height. In practice, however, only hanging is allowed by the authorities (firing squads were used for many military/political crimes until the 1990s). There are few records of beheadings or executions. Stoning has rarely been used, but in practice it has been abolished as a punishment in recent years. In 2012, the Penal Code was amended to officially abolish stoning as a punishment (although it can still technically be applied in unspecified circumstances).

If the crime was serious, the execution could take place in public at the scene of the crime. [ref. needed] Illusio is the emotional and physical investment that agents have made in the game of the law.