Asghar Jahangir, spokesman for the Islamic Republic’s Judiciary, has announced the identification and seizure of 262 properties belonging to defendants in cases described as “betrayal of the homeland.” From the perspective of both domestic law and Iran’s international obligations, this measure lacks a clear legal basis and violates the fundamental principles of a fair trial.
Under Iranian criminal law, there is no distinct and specific charge criminalized as “betrayal of the homeland.” Employing such a term as grounds for criminal prosecution or asset confiscation contradicts the principle of the legality of crimes and punishments. According to Article 36 of the Constitution and Article 2 of the Islamic Penal Code, no act is deemed a crime, and no punishment can be enforced, except under a clear, predictable, and binding law.
The sweeping seizure of individuals’ assets prior to a final judicial verdict is a blatant violation of the presumption of innocence, property rights, and fair trial guarantees. Articles 22, 37, and 47 of the Iranian Constitution safeguard citizens’ dignity, property, rights, the presumption of innocence, and legitimate ownership from encroachment, except within the framework of the law and through a valid court order.
From an international law perspective, this practice is in stark conflict with Iran’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), particularly regarding the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and the prohibition of arbitrary punishment. Weaponizing ambiguous security charges to strip individuals of their assets transforms the judicial system from a guarantor of justice into an instrument of political coercion.
The Hana Human Rights Organization emphasizes that the seizure or confiscation of property based on vague, politically motivated, and legally undefined accusations constitutes an arbitrary assault on property rights and a violation of the rule of law. This practice must cease immediately.
Any restrictions on individuals’ assets must only be imposed based on specific legal charges, an independent judicial review, respect for the right to defense, and a final verdict from a competent court.