Strengthening Judicial Capacity

Project Number:         FS/IRN/R34

Title:                        Strengthening Judicial Capacity

Background

Twenty years after the Islamic Revolution that ousted a despotic and authoritarian monarchy and the establishment of the principle known as Velayat-e Faqih (Supreme Jurisprudence by the religious leader who provides guidance to the three branches of the state), the I. R of Iran is nowadays confronted with the problems of many modern industrial societies. The doubling of the Iranian population and its increased access to higher education have not been matched by an equal State capability to deliver public services and providing attractive job opportunities to the new generations of post-revolution Iranians. In this context, a number of sources seem to indicate the dissatisfaction by the general public with the delivery of court services by the administration of justice, as well as with a relatively low judicial accountability.

In Iran, as in many other parts of the world, the efforts made by both the Government and the Judiciary aimed at enhancing judicial accountability have become subject of political debates and confrontations. In this context, there is an increasing recognition among top-ranking government and judicial authorities that court reforms following best worldwide practices are needed in order to strengthen the capacity and credibility of the judiciary. One of the challenges faced by the Iranian judiciary in this context is to generate court proceedings and rulings in a predictable, consistent, and coherent manner. Additionally, there's a growing recognition, within Iran's judicial domain, of the need to strengthen the institutional capacity to supply court services in an effective, accountable, and predictable manner in ways contributing indirectly or directly to the prevention of future abuses of public office for private benefit.

Lack of Judicial Accountability in Iran

Enhancing judicial accountability became a crucial element of President Khatami´s re-election campaign in 2001 and ever since has been at the centre of the public's attention. Recent court cases as well as statements of opinion makers with insight into the countries political and economical life suggest that lack of accountability among judicial personnel is relatively widespread. The extent and infiltration of corrupted practises at different levels of the Iranian productive and administrative sectors caused Leader Khamenei himself to address the matter several times in his speeches to the nation, as well as to call all Iranian institutions to an all-out campaign against economic corruption.

The urgency of addressing the issue of lack of judicial accountability in Iran is not limited to ethical considerations only, but founds its soundest justification in the peculiar structure of the Iranian economy. The flow of capitals controlled by the para-state and private financial institutions, unofficial credit funds, illegal exchange houses, and contraband are all indicated as obstacles to the sound planning of the Iranian economy. Experts from the Ministry of Economy and Finance estimate that the "unofficial sector" controls 50% to 54% of the domestic growth production. The same experts estimate the capital turnover of the Iranian "unofficial sector" reaches $39 Billion USD- almost 17% more than the total government budget in 1998-99".

Recently a number of criminal proceeding files on cases of economic crimes involving figures of the political and business circles have highlighted the permeability of the system.  Yet, the legal system contemplates a range of penalties to be applied to economic crimes.  For example, Article 49 of the Iranian Constitution clearly spells out that funds generated through irregular and unlawful activities must be confiscated and punitive measures be applied against offenders ^.

Effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of the Judiciary 

In 2001, five million cases were pending in the courts.  As far as the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of the judiciary are concerned, the core problem seems to lay in the unbalance between pending and settled cases that result in abuses of procedural and substantive discretion. The excessive overload of unsettled cases in the courts is cause for the considerable increase in procedural times. The current judicial procedures (applicable to both criminal and civil cases) according to which the same judge has to carry out preliminary investigations, trial and issuance of the final verdict (with the exception of some parts of the investigation phase which are undertaken by other judicial personnel) further reduce the capabilities of court personnel to reduce the volume of unsettled pending cases.

The excessive volume of cases to be settled also affects the quality of justice. The continued pressure on judges for settling cases forces them to shorten both time and attention devoted to the different phases during the instruction of cases. As a result of procedural violations, denial of justice occurs frequently and defense layers often advise their clients to resort to extra judicial means of resolving (civil) disputes rather than referring them to the justice administration.

Government policy, strategy and plans for the specific target area

A series of steps have already been undertaken to enhance judicial accountability and preventing abuses of judicial discretion in Iran. A special Committee has been established within the Judicial and Legislative domains with the mandate to fight the abuse of power. 

Strengthening Judicial Capacity

This project will be carried out within the framework of UNODC's Human Security Branch, under the substantive guidance of the UN Global Programme against Corruption. It is aimed at strengthening the effectiveness, transparency and accountability of Iran's judiciary.  The project is divided into two phases, the "cognitive" (phase one), and the operational (phase two). Under phase one, study tours to Singapore and Austria, will expose a selected group of top-ranking Iranian judicial officers to successful process in judicial reforms. The two study tours will be complemented with the implementation in Tehran of a workshop on international best judicial practices relevant to the Iranian context. Under phase 2 the activities of the project will focus on the designing and implementation of policy measures based on a needs-assessment blueprint developed by the Iranian judicial officers with UNODC's assistance.