Report 12: Plaintiff Hearings pt. 6
In our previous report, we gave an overview of the three plaintiff hearings that were held last week. The trial continued this week and included a total of five plaintiff hearings by link from Albania, which at times were plagued by technical difficulties. In this report we will summarize the hearings, which in all cases involved plaintiffs who are relatives of individuals who were executed in Gohardasht prison. The hearings have all been shorter in length than the hearings with plaintiffs who are survivors themselves.
Plaintiff 18
The trial continued Tuesday morning this week, with Plaintiff 18 giving testimony by link from Albania. Plaintiff 18 gave testimony by link from Albania and is the sister of a person who the prosecution claim was executed in Gohardasht prison. Kenneth Lewis, the plaintiff’s privately appointed counsel, who was present with his client in Albania, initiated the hearing with a brief presentation of his client. The counsel explained that the plaintiff had lost several of her brothers in the armed conflict between the MEK and the Iranian regime and that one of them had been executed in Gohardasht prison. Another one of her brothers may have also been executed in Gohardasht prison, but his execution is not part of the indictment as less is known about the circumstances around his death. Thus, the hearing did not entail any questions about him.
The brother whose death is encompassed by the indictment was arrested in 1981, at the age of 17, for selling magazines from the MEK, and was sentenced to life in prison. The plaintiff herself had also been arrested the same year, at the age of 12, but had been released on bail after eight months in prison. Her brother had first been incarcerated in a prison in their hometown of Qazvin. The plaintiff had met him in prison, along with three of their other brothers, while she was incarcerated herself, and had also visited him about three years later, in the same prison, along with her mother. The plaintiff had left Iran shortly thereafter. When rumors of the mass executions had started spreading in the summer of 1988, the plaintiff became worried and called her mother in Iran. The plaintiff was told by her mother that her brother had been executed in Gohardasht prison, after having been moved there from the prison in Qazvin a few months earlier. The plaintiff had later been told by others who had been imprisoned in Gohardasht prison that they had seen her brother there and that he had remained steadfast in his support for the MEK until his death. When the plaintiff’s brother had stood before the death committee, he had refused to refer to himself as monafeqin and refused to disavow his beliefs. The plaintiff further described that her family had never received her brother’s body and that they have never been told where he is buried.
The defense refrained from asking the plaintiff any questions.
Plaintiff 19
After lunch break on Tuesday, the trial proceeded with Plaintiff 19, who provided his testimony by link from Albania. As the parties gathered again in the courtroom and prepared to start the hearing, the court encountered technical issues, with the transmission in the courtroom in Albania reverberating back through the speakers in Stockholm. After a few unsuccessful attempts to fix the issue, the chairman of the court, judge Tomas Zander, began laughing at the sound of his voice coming back from Albania through the speakers. The defendant began laughing with the chairman and the defense, prosecution and plaintiff counsels struggled to keep a straight face in what was, given the serious matter at hand, a somewhat absurd scene. After a short intermission, the technical issues were worked out and the proceedings could continue.
Like the plaintiff heard before him, Plaintiff 19 is also represented by the privately appointed counsel Kenneth Lewis, who began by giving a short presentation of his client and his personal history. The plaintiff had lost three of his brothers. One of his brothers had been killed in an attack on the MEK: s camp in Iraq in 2013 while two of his brothers had been executed in 1988. One of these brothers was executed in Gohardasht prison and the hearing was thus centered around him.
The plaintiff’s brother was arrested in the month of azar in 1359 in accordance with the Iranian calendar, or in 1980 according to the Gregorian calendar, which was prior to the MEK being banned by the regime. Despite this, the plaintiff’s brother was given a one-year sentence in prison for sympathizing with the organisation. Since he remained steadfast in his support for the MEK during his incarceration, he was never released. The plaintiff explained that his brother had been incarcerated in three different prisons – Evin, Ghezel Hesar and Gohardasht prison. The plaintiff further explained that he had been told by others that his brother was one of the first prisoners to stand before the death committee in Gohardasht prison and one of the first to be executed.
During questioning, the plaintiff explained that his brother had belonged to a group of prisoners often referred to as the “59 prisoners”. The group was comprised of a hundred or so prisoners who had been arrested in the year 1359 in accordance with the Iranian calendar, prior to the MEK being banned, and who remained steadfast in their support of the MEK during their time in prison. The plaintiff explained that these prisoners were known for being particularly radical and that they were not allowed to mix with other inmates, as it was feared that they might influence others and that the ideology they represented would spread among other inmates.
When asked how the plaintiff had found out his brother had been executed, the plaintiff described how his mother had been contacted a few months after the mass executions in 1988 and had been told to come to Evin prison. The plaintiff’s mother had thought it was time for another visit or that the request concerned some other practical issue. Once there, the plaintiff’s mother had been handed two bags and was told they belonged to two of her sons and that both had been executed. The plaintiff further described how the guards, to break down his mother, had told her that they had made her life easier by ensuring she would not have to travel from her home to see her sons again. When asked why the plaintiff’s mother had been asked to come to Evin prison when one of his brother’s had supposedly been executed in Gohardasht prison, the plaintiff explained that his family had been told that the belongings of all prisoners were collected at Evin.
During the questioning by his counsel, the plaintiff explained that another one of his brothers had been killed in an attack by Iranian forces on an MEK camp in Iraq in 2013. When speaking of the incident the plaintiff referred to the now deceased former Iranian general Qasem Soleimani as a “murderer”, which prompted an instant reaction from the defendant who exclaimed something along the lines of: “The organisation MEK are the murderers, not Qasem Soleimani”. One of the guards from the Swedish Prison and Probation Service accompanying the defendant in court even felt the need to leave her seat and approach the defendant. The chairman of the court called for a short intermission to calm things down before the hearing was concluded.
The defense again refrained from asking the plaintiff any questions.
Plaintiff 20
On Thursday morning, the trial proceeded with the hearing of Plaintiff 20 by link from Albania. The plaintiff’s counsel, Ghita Hadding Wiberg, present in the court in Stockholm, began by giving a brief introduction of her client. The plaintiff grew up in a family of MEK sympathizers and one of her younger brothers had been executed in Gohardasht prison. The plaintiff’s brother was arrested in 1982 and given a four-year sentence. After being released in 1986, the plaintiff’s brother was apprehended again two months later as he was trying to flee Iran.
At the time of his first arrest, the plaintiff’s brother was studying architecture at university and the plaintiff described him as someone known locally for his ties to the MEK. He had been arrested after being spotted in the street by members of the Revolutionary Guard. After being released after serving his four-year sentence, he was arrested again in 1986 and given a five-year sentence. After initially being incarcerated at Evin prison, the plaintiff’s brother was moved to Gohardasht prison. Their father, who had previously worked as a judge but was working as a lawyer at the time, had visited the plaintiff’s brother in Gohardasht. As their father was somewhat familiar with individuals working within the judicial system, he had recognized a few members of the prison staff and had specifically mentioned the person who the prosecution claim is the defendant in a later conversation with the plaintiff.
A few months after the mass executions in Gohardasht, the plaintiff’s father had been summoned to the prison. Once there, guards at the prison told him that his son had been executed and handed over a small bag containing the belongings of the plaintiff’s brother. The plaintiff had later been told by former prisoners who survived the mass executions in Gohardasht prison that her brother had been executed in the early stages of the period of executions in the summer of 1988.
The defense again refrained from asking the plaintiff any questions.
Plaintiff 21
The trial continued after lunch on Thursday with another plaintiff giving testimony by link from Albania. Plaintiff 21 was introduced by her counsel, Ghita Hadding Wiberg, from the courtroom in Stockholm and was heard regarding one of her brothers who was executed in Gohardasht prison. The plaintiff’s brother had been arrested in 1981 and had spent time incarcerated in three different prisons – Evin, Gohardasht and a “secret detention center” near Karaj. The plaintiff had herself been imprisoned between 1981 and 1986 but had visited her brother in Gohardasht prison after being released and shortly before leaving Iran.
The plaintiff’s brother had been arrested in 1981 and had initially been sentenced to eight years in prison. While in prison, the sentence was extended to ten years. After being released from prison, the plaintiff managed to visit her brother in Gohardasht – despite not being allowed to do so per the conditions of her release – by using their sister’s identification card. The plaintiff’s brother had looked worn and was marked from years of continual torture. The plaintiff explained that she had a feeling during the visit that it would be the last time that she would see her brother. During the visit, he was able to hand her a recently taken photograph of himself. The plaintiff held up the photo during the hearing and asked rhetorically: “Does this look like a 24-year-old? Because he was 24 at the time but looked so worn”.
The plaintiff’s mother had also visited the plaintiff’s brother in Gohardasht frequently and had been told by the plaintiff’s brother on her last visit that there was suspicious activity going on in the prison. The plaintiff’s mother went to Gohardasht prison continually after the visits had stopped in the summer of 1988 to try and find out what had happened to her son. Months later, the plaintiff’s mother had been called to Gohardasht prison and been told that her son had been an enemy of the Islamic republic and that he had been executed. She was also handed a sack with his belongings.
The privately appointed counsel, Kenneth Lewis, who on behalf of his clients has argued that the events in 1988 should be considered an act of genocide, also took the opportunity to ask the plaintiff questions. Lewis opened by stating that “during this trial we have nearly only heard about men and what happened to them during these years”. He then asked the plaintiff to recount her own experiences of incarceration and to speak on what women had been subjected to in prison. The plaintiff described how, when she had been incarcerated at Evin prison, she had been housed in a section of the prison with women only and that there were 600 women in her section alone, with three other, similar sections in the prison. Some of the inmates were as young as 16 and all were political prisoners. The plaintiff estimated that 90 % of the women incarcerated at Evin prison while she was there had been executed and recounted how, during certain periods, between 100 and 200 women were executed each night. From their section in prison, the plaintiff and other prisoners could hear the shots from the firing squads in the evening. The plaintiff also described that she had been incarcerated in Gohardasht prison for a short spell as well and that there were women only sections there as well.
The defense refrained from asking the plaintiff any questions.
Plaintiff 22
The trial continued on Friday morning, with another plaintiff giving testimony by link from Albania, concluding this week’s hearings. As per usual the hearing began with the plaintiff’s counsel, Ghita Hadding-Wiberg, giving a brief presentation of her client. The plaintiff’s brother had been a member of the MEK and had participated in a major demonstration in Teheran in the summer of 1981. After the demonstration, he had gone underground but had subsequently been arrested and sentenced to ten years in prison. The plaintiff’s brother had served his sentence in both Evin and Gohardasht prison and their parents had visited him in both prisons.
The plaintiff’s brother had been transferred from Evin to Gohardasht prison in 1987 and their parents had been able to visit him in the prison up until the summer of 1988 when visits were suddenly denied. Months after the mass executions, their parents had been summoned to Gohardasht prison and been told that their son was a hypocrite and that he had been executed on the basis of the fatwa issued by Khomeini. When their father asked where the plaintiff’s brother was buried, he had been pushed and threatened by the guards. He had also been told that they were not allowed to hold any kind of grieving ceremony.
The defense refrained from asking the plaintiff any questions.
Next Report
In our next report, we will summarize the plaintiff hearings due to be held next week.
A translated version of this report in Farsi can be found here.
