Branch 39 of Iran’s Supreme Court has upheld the controversial death sentence for Kurdish political prisoner Pakhshan Azizi, despite glaring procedural flaws in her case. Her lawyer, Amir Raeisian, expressed dismay over the court’s dismissal of vital evidence during the review process, calling attention to critical inconsistencies in the proceedings. Azizi’s supposed actions in refugee camps were humanitarian, yet the court branded her activities as part of an armed insurrection.
On July 23, 2024, Azizi was condemned to death and an additional four years in prison by Branch 26 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Tehran for charges including “armed insurrection” and “opposition group membership.” The ruling, presided by Judge Iman Afshari, cited her alleged involvement with the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) and framed her efforts as a threat against the Islamic Republic. Despite her family’s innocent protests, the court’s ruling faced scrutiny for its severity.
In a notable shift, Judge Afshari applied a stricter interpretation of the Islamic Penal Code, switching from Article 288, which favored lesser sentences, to Article 287, which mandates death for those considered rebellious during an armed struggle. Azizi consistently refuted any allegations of militant operations or affiliations with PJAK throughout her imprisonment, emphasizing her commitment to peaceful humanitarian efforts. Her case, a reflection of broader tensions surrounding Kurdish activism in Iran, remains contentious.
Azizi’s family also faced repercussions, receiving one-year sentences for allegedly assisting her evasion from justice. Amidst widespread criticism from civil rights groups, her legal team continues to advocate for a thorough reassessment of her evidence, arguing that the charges lack substantive legitimacy. Without due diligence in examining the documentation provided, Azizi’s fate hangs precariously in the balance, underscoring the urgent need for judicial transparency and fairness in political cases.
The Iranian Supreme Court has upheld the death sentence for Kurdish political prisoner Pakhshan Azizi, ignoring major procedural flaws. Despite evidence of her peaceful humanitarian work, she faces severe charges of armed insurrection. Her lawyer condemns the court’s decision, arguing that critical evidence was disregarded and emphasizing the need for justice and transparency in her trial.
The Supreme Court’s affirmation of Pakhshan Azizi’s death sentence raises critical questions about judicial integrity and human rights in Iran. Advocates argue that her case exemplifies the systemic flaws within the legal process, particularly concerning political prisoners. As Azizi’s appeals are dismissed, the call for justice and transparency in her trial resonates loudly, spotlighting the plight of Kurdish activists and the struggle for their voices to be heard in a repressive regime.
Pakhshan Azizi’s case highlights the contentious legal landscape in Iran, particularly for Kurdish activists. The Iranian judicial system has been criticized for its lack of procedural fairness and its harsh repression of dissent. Azizi’s humanitarian work among Syrian Kurdish refugees contrasts sharply with the government’s characterization of their efforts as threats to national security. Her sentence reflects the broader suppression of Kurdish identity and political expression within Iran, raising concerns about human rights violations in the country.
Original Source: kurdistanhumanrights.org
