Talk:1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners

The title and tone of this article may possibly be POV and unbalanced. Khodavand 02:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

How? Please elaborate. What specifically is false.--Patchouli 12:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

First, only the MKO (Peoples Mujahideen) are called "Monafegheen" by the regime. That label is only for them. Second, it seems to be only about their executions of MKO members, and not people from other groups. Also, the "massacre" in the article title is possibly POV as I already said. Is there a source for the title? Khodavand 23:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

A search engine will yield over 260,000 results. It won't hurt to use it.--Patchouli 01:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I agree with user Khodavand. For example, the article defines the so called 1988 massacre of Iranian prisoners as a "systematic slaughter of thousands of political prisoners across Iran by the Islamic Republic of Iran". Why is the word slaughter used instead of executed? The people that were executed were prisoner. Although their executions may not have been justified, it is for the reader to decide. Furthermore, I would take search engine results with a grain of salt (I can elaborate if necessary). I will change slaughter to execution if there are no objection. Agha Nader 03:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Agha NaderReply

Execution is WP:NPOV. I will change it as per discussions here.--Gerash77 22:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

How many people were executed during this time? GutterMonkey 07:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I got rid of a bunch of POV OR. The "Backgrounds" section was removed because it was a biased, unsourced, & unnecessary section that basically retold the facts from the lead with an anti-IRI spin. The "Aftermath" section appeared to be simply some anti-IRI commentary, sourced to a book that is a collection of passages from Iranian blogs. That is not reliable.

Now, it is just the lead (which has plain information, no spin) and a "Response" section. I believe that a "Background" section can be reintroduced if it is informative, focused, and neutral. However, the lead shall suffice for now. My main deal is to have the "Response" section be expanded with significant, relevant, and reliable responses from notable parties. Please, no blogs or blatantly biased sites. The responses should be written neutrally and receive due weight. I'm thinking of groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, national governments, the UN, etc. In general, real groups. The Behnam 07:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

We are Iran has a collection of blogs indeed, but in the case of numbers it was not quoting one. The background section could have used a reword but was complete removal of all that necessary? If you are going to expand it, feel free to revert me but it didn't have a POV tag so unless the info is completle nonsense I don't think you should remove it --Rayis 08:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I didn't remove the numbers; they are still there (in my version), with two 'real' sources to back them up. To be on the safe side the blog-book should not be used. It does not soundly meet reliability requirements. Perhaps a better source can be afforded? As far as the "Backgrounds" section goes, I tried to find something to salvage but, after a good look, found it unacceptable. It was no-value-added, and the fact that it was rather POV-OR & of dubious accuracy left it detracting from the article. The stuff about the crackdown being a response to an MKO attack is the only part worth mentioning, and this is satisfied in the lead. A clear tie to the Iran-Iraq War (such as mention of Mersad) is fine, but a "Background" section is not needed for this; the information could easily be added to the lead without negative consequence. But it isn't even reliably established that this crackdown was in response to MKO attack; I left that (for now) simply because it seemed sensible enough to have a good source somewhere.

To prevent further damages, I am probably going to reinstate my version of the article since it was a careful removal of un-encyclopedic content, while your blind revert 'for the sake of talk' simply reintroduced the problematic version. Most of it was unsourced anyway, so I am justified even in that respect. Perhaps you should make a compelling case for putting certain questionable items back in, rather than leaving them in with a tag. There is no reason to favor the questionable, poorly/not-sourced version. Do you contest the neutrality of my version? I basically just removed random anti-IRI recap of the lead & similar commentary ('Aftermath'), so the edit did not make it more POV. A neutral version should be used to be on the safe side. Please explain what you think.

Yes, I do plan to expand it over time, though I encourage others to do so as well, just with strong & reliable sources. I don't like to be harsh with these things, but frankly, the article version before my edits wasn't acceptable at all for an encyclopedia; I stand by my edits. So, I will reinstate it, but if you really contest my version feel free to add the POV tag and we can work on it from there. Thanks. The Behnam 08:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Moved to Talk:1988 executions of Iranian prisoners/Unrelated and Uncivil remarks --Rayis 11:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you can confirm the authenticity of the video it is an acceptable source. Otherwise, not reliable. Perhaps you can just find an official BBC link, or at least a transcript? The Behnam 05:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

• Abrahamian Ervand. Tortured Confessions. Berkeley, Cal.: University of California Press, 1999. 978-0-520-21866-6
• Afshari Reza. Human Rights in Iran. The Abuse of Cultural Relativism. 2001. ISBN 0-8122-3605-X
• Final Report on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, pursuant to Commission resolution 1992/67 of 4 March 1992. Document number E/CN.4/1993/41 http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/Documents?OpenFrameset
• Cooper Roger. Death Plus Ten Years (Paperback). Harpercollins; New Ed edition (May 1995) ISBN 0006381030
• Rejali Darius. Torture and Modernity: Self, society and state in modern Iran. Westview Press1994.

This is from the Massacre of Iranian political prisoners which is getting deleted. It may be of interest for future contributions to this article. --Rayis 21:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'll add it, thanks. The Behnam 21:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

It appears that it was there already. The Behnam 21:43, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Lol who knows, I may have added it myself.. --Rayis 21:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

For some reason I'm having trouble finding the AI report on the matter. Perhaps I need to eat. Anyway, it should be included in the response section, along with other significant groups. If anyone can find it, it would be an excellent addition. Thanks. The Behnam 21:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hmm yeah. I don't know if we can find the original report from that year on their site, it depends on their archives I guess --Rayis 22:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I contacted Amnesty, and apparently it is available in a published title "IRAN violations of Human Rights 1987 - 1990 >>MDE 13/21/90 ISBN: 0 86210 188 3." --Rayis 11:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

In fact, it looks like I may be able to get them soon in email.. --Rayis 11:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Great. I'm going to look to see if HRW said anything about the incidents. The Behnam 19:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

HRW response added. The Behnam 21:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Excellent. I haven't heard from the Amnesty organiser who was gonna scan it yet although apparently it may be available in university libraries (I have seen the Amnesty year books so maybe next to them). Also I think lots of groups were included in the executions, especially the guerrilla type ones like Iranian People's Fedai Guerrillas [1] [2] --Rayis 21:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also, this unreliable source mentions an AI day in the first paragraph that may help us in our search [3]. The Behnam 21:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I found another item [4]. While it is possible to just use it as a ref, it may also be better to ref directly to the articles mentioned within. The Behnam 21:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I recieved the AI report in email, it is very comprehensive and very detailed. Sadly the collection of AI reports here does not have these. But interesting this report suggests that there were 900 reports of executions that year only for those with "criminal offenses"!! that's about a 100 times of all reported executions of last year in the world.. --Rayis 11:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

That's a lot of executions. Anyway, just add the AI information and cite the title, publication date, and whatever else that is needed so that the reader can obtain it if he needs to. The Behnam 18:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Don't you think we should move the article to 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners? --Rayis 00:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Definitely. They may have executed some 'normal' prisoners in 1988 but that is ain't what this here article refers to, so I support the move to a more accurate title. The Behnam 23:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

User:Patchouli, who has since earned himself a permanent community ban, was closely involved with this article. Please make sure that the article closely adheres to the standards of NPOV acceptable here. Much thanks, Khodavand 11:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry it's being watched closely. However please do not revert blindly, --Rayis 12:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

No Rayis ain't a Patchouli sock, and I know Patchouli socks. You need to give a specific content objection as Patchouli's former involvement alone is not grounds for a neutrality tag. I've been through this article quite a bit and I don't see it in need of anything except expansion. In a sense, I've already checked it for neutrality, but if you have a specific problem with the article, please bring it up here for discussion. And please don't make ill-considered accusations. Thanks. The Behnam 14:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Haha, where are those accusations coming from? and based on what?! Keep your uncivil accusations to yourself, Khodavand (talk · contribs · count), I suggest you be careful about reverting user's edits based on your baseless accusations --Rayis 16:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've restored the terrorist mention for MKO, as this is generally the convention in RS news sources. It is also important to context here, since there is a difference between killing a bunch of perceived terrorists and just killing a bunch of 'political' people. Let's not whitewash the group, as this presents a distorted view of the situation. The Behnam 17:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thats exactly my point, the people who were killed were not all terrorists, they were members of political groups, MKO being one of them. Currently by restoring that version, it looks like all IR did was to kill "terrorists" --Rayis 18:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

No, the line right under mentions Communists and other progressive groups. I am just clarifying MKO's usual classification. There is no need to worry. The Behnam 19:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Alright. Well I hope you are OK with the compromised version. I hope to expand on it soon --Rayis 19:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yeah that looks good. But about the 'it is claimed' part, doesn't that seem odd? I mean, it either happened after or it didn't. Of course, what is claimed is that there was a causal connection between them, so perhaps that needs to be clarified. I'll wing it. The Behnam 19:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Look good? The Behnam 19:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I mean it's not too important until it is expanded fully. But I will add sources for that specific part, from what I remember from the Amnesty source, it actually said "It is claimed" (I don't remember what it said the source was) --Rayis 19:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Indeed. It would be nice to have some more detail about which other progressive groups were also affected. The Behnam 19:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I am not much familiar with the details of the event. But Khomeini's letter clearly mentions the position of PMOI in the Iran-Iraq war and their attack on Iranian borders in cooperation with Saddam Hossein. Then he wrote if those prisoners still support PMOI policy they need to be executed. Khomeini's letter only and only mentions PMOI members and no one else. To me, his letter is more or less fair. May be he could sentence them to jail for life instead. But obviously, as a leader of the state, he had no right to release those prisoners. Sina Kardar 16:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

These alleged executions involved few political prisoners if any. The title of this article really needs to be changed. Members of the previously Western backed Mojahedin terrorists, who had assisted the arabs during their 1980-88 invasion of Iran and commited terrorists acts in Iran, have been classified by Iran (and now almost uninimously by the West) as a Terror group...hence we are not talking about "political prisoners". This article is also one sided and largely written (and titled) likely by the MKO: It needs serious editing and fact checking. New suggeseted title: 1988 Alleged execution of Prisoners in Iran.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not an expert on this topic, but the title of the article seems appropriate to me. Here is an excerpt from an Amnesty International report on this subject, "Report on Human Rights Violations in Iran, 1987 to 1990: The Massacre of 1988" (http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE13/021/1990/en/5c32759d-ee5e-11dd-9381-bdd29f83d3a8/mde130211990en.html)

"The political executions took place in many prisons in all parts of Iran, often far from where the armed incursion took place. Most of the executions were of political prisoners, including an unknown number of prisoners of conscience, who had already served a number of years in prison. They could have played no part in the armed incursion, and they were in no position to take part in spying or terrorist activities. Many of the dead had been tried and sentenced to prison terms during the early 1980s, many for non-violent offences such as distributing newspapers and leaflets, taking part in demonstrations or collecting funds for prisoners' families. Many of the dead had been students in their teens or early twenties at the time of their arrest. The majority of those killed were supporters of the PMOI, but hundreds of members and supporters of other political groups, including various factions of the PFOI, the Tudeh Party, the KDPI, Rah-e Kargar and others, were also among the execution victims." CordeliaNaismith (talk) 01:06, 22 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Agree with replies above. According to Abrahamian, members of the Mojahedin who were arrested for violent offenses didn't go to prison they were executed. It was the Mojahedin political prisoners who were left over (and these were the victims of the 1988 executions).

According to Abrahamian (Abrahamian, Ervand, History of Modern Iran, Columbia University Press, 2008, p.181)

"from June 1981 until June 1985, revolutionary courts executed more than 8000 opponents." These were mainly members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq, but also included

Fedayins and Kurds as well as Tudeh, National Front, and Shariatmadari supporters. ... Thus the toll taken among those who had participated in the revolution was far greater than that of royalists. This revolution — like others — had devoured its own children.

-BoogaLouie (talk) 19:43, 27 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

  As a survivor of 1988 Massecare I believe:

1- There was not any relation between mojahedins attack to Iran and the killing.The procesures started a long time before.On March 1988 one of the top clergy in Evin in a gathring warned that we won't let you live this easy life for ever.We've got plan for you.Sayaad shirazi was present there,giving speach aboat the Iraq war. 2- Several monthes before the execution they talked a lot about the amnesty and were very easy on prisoners,so most of the prisoners start talking openly,and became the target for the execution.

What? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:252:D46:350:6C5B:8099:12E:9BB5 (talk) 06:06, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

There is a problem about the date on which the massacre began. The Robertson report says 29 July, following directly from the NLA offensive against Kermanshah. Moin's account is consistent with that date, but Abrahamian (and your article) says 19 July (without explanation). I prefer 29 July. 217.42.77.109 (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.pww.org/article/view/5754/1/231/
  • In History of Iran on 2011-03-29 15:02:01, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-05-25 05:44:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-06-24 07:41:47, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.doughtystreet.co.uk/files/Iran%20Massacre%20Report.pdf}}
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-05-25 05:44:48, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-06-24 07:41:56, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.gozaar.org/template1.php?id=1078&language=english
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-05-25 05:44:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-06-24 07:42:08, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.jstor.org/view/00207438/ap010130/01a00070/0
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-05-25 05:44:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-06-24 07:42:19, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.iricrimes.org/alblist.asp
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-05-25 05:44:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners on 2011-06-24 07:42:29, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 07:42, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Currently the article states in the section Dealing with leftists: The questioners wanted to know if prisoners' fathers prayed, fasted, and read the Qur'an because the sons of devout men could not be called apostates. If they had not been raised in proper Muslim homes first and "exposed to true Islam," they could not be apostates. The first sentence seems to contradict the second, doesn't it? Or am I missing something? Gugganij (talk) 11:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050924060950/http://www.pww.org/article/view/5754/1/231/ to http://www.pww.org/article/view/5754/1/231/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140611045918/http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE13/021/1990/en/5c32759d-ee5e-11dd-9381-bdd29f83d3a8/mde130211990en.html to https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE13/021/1990/en/5c32759d-ee5e-11dd-9381-bdd29f83d3a8/mde130211990en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:49, 16 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Gholamreza Hassani (Left) and Ruhollah Khomeini.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Evin Prison, 1980's.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

It should be noted that as of the current sourcing, it is a claim of human rights bodies, not a fact, that these killings were "extrajudicial". While they almost certainly lacked the due process expected of legal systems in most countries, the problem here is that the killings were supported by the Islamic government, where supported by the supreme leader, whose autocratic power is somewhat absolute, and were presided over by "commissions" that included members of the judiciary. It is likely for reasons that no reliable, secondary academic writing on the subject has baldy asserted that the killings were "extrajudicial", a term that strictly pertains to a given legal (here Islamic) context. It is possible that reliable, secondary academic sources exist to establish this, but these need to be found, cited and quoted before we start asserting in Wikivoice that these killings were "extrajudicial". Iskandar323 (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The claim that the executions were "extrajudicial", despite the involvement of the judiciary, is an extraordinary one and falls under WP:ECREE. As noted, the claim is illogical, since in Iran the supreme leader is the head of the judiciary, so any orders or directives stemming from the supreme leader, as in the case of the 1988 executions are quintessentially judicial. The only current sources currently claiming otherwise are Amnesty and Radio Farda, a US government-funded service. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:07, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Here are more sources that support that the killings were "extrajudicial"

• In the summer of 1988, during the premiership of Mir-Hussein Mousavi, thousands of opponents of the Islamic Republic were extrajudicially executed while in prison.^[1]

• In a statement, the Justice for Victims of the 1988 Massacre in Iran welcomed Rehman's call, saying that a U.N. investigation into the extrajudicial executions was "long overdue".^[2]

Please stop deleting this from the article now. Also Raisi was mentioned first in the original text of the inforbox’s image, and there is no reason to change that. Raisi and Mostafa Pourmohammadi were part of the "Judges of Death" committee, and the accused of carrying out the executions were Islamic Republic officials, including Raisi. In the Trial of Hamid Nouri, there was a conviction about these massacres. I have now written this clearly in the infobox, so please also stop deleting all this information. You are also deleting information sourced to the Harvard Human Rights Journal and Iran Analysis Quarterly. None of this is disputed material. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

If the best sources that you can come up with for this are a paper by an Iranian expatriate published by a US-based foreign policy think tank (not academic) and a victim advocacy group called "Justice for Victims of the 1988 Massacre in Iran" then you prove my point that there are none. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

You don’t think these two sources are reliable? should we ask at WP:RSN? I haven’t looked for more sources, but I can if you still have big doubts that the killings were not extrajudicial. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

My thoughts (or doubts) don't come into it. We don't have multiple reliable sources stating as much, and that's a verifiability problem. And no, the above sources are not reliable. If the claim of 'extrajudiciality' was self-evident, we might expect one of the anchor sources, such as Abrahamian or Cohen, to say as much. That they don't suggests the claim is not one that the subject-matter experts feel comfortable asserting. A single human rights source (advocacy), a think thank (advocacy) and a victim group (extremely pointed advocacy) are totally inadequate. It is worrying if you cannot see this. In fact, the think tank source is actually worse than I originally thought - I had though that it was Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) based on the unclear information in the citation template, but it is actually the Begin–Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a predictably partisan Israeli think tank that talks in terms of "the Iranian threat". Iskandar323 (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your input, from what you say we should then remove the RAND think tank source from the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran since it is a partisan U.S. think tank. More sources about the extrajudicial executions:

• None of those executed was accorded a public trail by an independent and impartial tribunal. Nor was any accorded legal counsel or the right to appeal the verdict. None was granted the 'right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted by him by constitution or by law".^[3]

• Montazeri insisted that it was not out of love for the Mojahedin that he intervened, but out of concern for the reputation of religion and the revolution. He was not generally opposed to executing political opponents, notably if they had taken arms against the regime, but he was outraged at the unlawful killing of people who had often not done more than distribute tracts or shout slogans.^[4]

• It is all the more relevant as many of those alleged to have been involved in the 1988 enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions hold or have held positions of power in Iran.^[5]

• Swedish prosecutors accuse Hamid Noury of participating in the extrajudicial executions of political prisoners who were affiliated with an armed Iranian opposition group^[6]

• Mousavi and his supporters insisting that he was unaware of the extrajudicial mass executions^[7]

Most books I read about this say similar things. If you can find books that say the killings were lawful, then maybe that's how you could prove your point. Fad Ariff (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The more academic sources seem to say something along the lines of the first bullet above - they point out the legal flaws in the proceedings. That material seems very similar to what Abrahamian says, and yes, that the usual legal framework was to some degree circumvented is evident. However, even the second bullet, which asserts that they were "unlawful" does not specify their "extrajudiciality", which requires that the killings occurred outside of the judiciary system altogether, without judges (and here, both judges and a legal framework were present). All "extrajudicial" killings are "unlawful", but not necessarily vice versa - the terms are interrelated, but not synonymous. "Unlawful" would be much easier to stand up as a term. The three sources that do use the specific word "extrajudicial" provide far less context. It is hard to say how sophisticated the third source is on the subject without further reading. The fourth source uses the word in the context of an accusation by the prosecution, so it is just an accusation in that one, and the fifth source is Radio Farda, which is (and I can't believe I have to say this) a radio service formed and funded by the US government clearly to vex the Iranian regime. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

As to RAND, nothing on its article makes any hint at partisanship, so you need sources to stand up the claim that it is so. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

You seem to be against using U.S. think tanks for some things, and in favor of using U.S. think tanks for other things, so that is contradicting. I think we should be using think tanks together with other sources (when such sources are available), but if they are not available (and the content is controversial) then I think it would be best to avoid them. In this particular case, "extrajudicial" is supported by enough additional sources that it can be kept. If you are not in agreement, we can confirm at WP:RSN. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fad Ariff: As I've noted, the Begin–Sadat Center for Strategic Studies is an Israeli think tank that is pointed on Iran. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Iskandar323: I gave more sources than an "Israeli think tank". I don't agree with removing the Amnesty material from the lead. It is important material since it talks about the inhuman practices in the executions. Maybe we can rephrase it, but not remove it. Fad Ariff (talk) 11:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

The lead shouldn't contain any single-source opinions or lengthy quotations - it's meant to be a brief summary. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:16, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

So let's use all the other sources I provided and come up with something that represents all of them. I'm against whitewashing what the regime did to these prisoners, so please stop removing this information from the article until we can come up with a suitable compromise. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fad Ariff: We don't need a lead that represents everything; we need a lead that briefly summarises the key points of the article in as few words and with as little duplication as possible. Not every article needs a four-paragraph lead - many good articles only have one or two. What the point about whitewashing is I don't know, but if you are accusing me of somehow misrepresenting the reliably sourced information, it sounds very much like a personal attack - and a baseless one, since the edited-down lead still makes absolutely plain the scale and scope of the executions, which is its purpose. I suggest you cross out that unwise statement. If you would like to revert it, do so, but don't mess around with all of the other page edits that have been made since. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I will only reply about content. About the lead, if you don't agree with the article's original sourced version, then provide a compromise based on the other sources I provided. You are also removing much more than Amnesty's quote in the lead, so if you want to remove that well sourced material, you need to start by explaining why first. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Statements from Amnesty International and other advocacy groups are currently inappropriately being presented as fact in this article, affecting its overall accuracy. I have tried to clean this up and attribute the obvious quotations and claims appropriately, but have been repeatedly reverted. It remains flawed. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The statement is attributed to Amnesty, and Amnesty is a good source as far as I know. There are also other sources saying similar things:

• ... the IRI was set to wipe out the "hypocrites" as a prelude to the liquidation of the atheists and 'apostates.'... The Christian Science Monitor reported that two members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, from California and Ohio,'have asked for action from the United Nations. In a letter to [the] Secretary General... they urge sending a UN mission to inspect 'Iranian prison and torture chambers'. Iran's chief justice, Ayatollah Mousavi Adebili, said the people are so angry at the dissidents that the 'judiciary is under great pressure from public opinion, which questions why we even try them. There is no need for any trial. The crime is clear, the verdict is clear, and the punishment is also clear. There is no need for [a] trial...' After Iranian activists and their international cohorts, journalists, lawyers, intellectuals, human rights advocates and political organizations, as well as some media outlets, called attention to the execution of political prisoners in Iran, a few international institutions felt compelled to address and condemn the atrocities of the Iranian regime... Indeed, it indicated that it was a thorough purge and a sort of cleansing of all relevant opposition groups, including the most important leftist organizations.^[1]
• In the summer of 1988, during the premiership of Mir-Hussein Mousavi, thousands of opponents of the Islamic Republic were extrajudicially executed while in prison.^[2]

So I don't see a fair reason for removing this. If you still disagree, we can ask at WP:RSN, but for now I'm restoring the article's original text. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:49, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Fad Ariff: The lead is not the place for including random quotes. Few if any lead summaries contain any quotes at all - a fact you know well given the discussion over the Abrahamian quote in the lead of People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran. Why you think an opinionated Amnesty International quote deserves to sit in the lead when even scholarly quotes rarely do is beyond me. It is fairly basic violation of both NPOV and standard best practice for lead summaries. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

What we can do is merge this with other sources, like we did on the lead of the People's Mojahedin or Iran. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

An event infobox (as instituted in this diff) is fine for this, but the "civilian attack" infobox previously added is inappropriate. That template is for stabbings, bombings and the like - not political executions carried out through state institutions. Government-sanctioned executions, however morally opprobrious, are not "civilian attacks". Even if these executions were considered a crime against humanity, the "civilian attacks" template would still not be the right one. In the context of this event, the regime judges are just that: the judges, not the 'perpetrators', who, in the context of the political trials were the political prisoners - who were executed on charges of crimes against the state. The executions will never be a 'crime' in the sense as government figures as 'perpetrators' until such a time as there is regime change and all of those involved are put to trial. Until that point, the criminality of government figures remains hypothetical and the preserve of the legal opinions (but only opinions) of human rights organizations. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sources describe them as perpetrators.

• The Iranian people know Raisi as the "Henchman of the 1988 massacre." He was a key perpetrator of the murder of over 30,000 political prisoners in 1988.^[1]
• Noury is by no means the only person to have filled such a role, and he is far from the highest-profile perpetrator of what has been called Iran’s greatest crime against humanity. His cooperation with the Tehran “death commission” put him in direct contact with Ebrahim Raisi, one of four figures to serve on that body, and arguably the one who showed the greatest commitment to issuing death sentences liberally and implementing them rapidly.^[2]
• For perpetrators, their ideological enemies were not critical citizens or political adversaries who, at least, deserved a dignified resting place. Executed political opponents were reified and labelled as evil forces that had waged war against Allah.^[3]
• According to a Swedish indictment, the suspect "along with other perpetrators in the prison, participated in mass executions and is suspected of having intentionally deprived the lives of a very large number of prisoners who sympathised with the Mujahedin."^[4]
• This summer, ultra-hardline cleric Ebrahim Raisi took office as president. He is listed by major human rights groups as a key perpetrator of the massacre of thousands of political prisoners in 1988. Iran has never acknowledged the killings.^[5]
• He was also found to be a key figure in the massacre of political prisoners in Iran in 1988 when at least 30,000 dissidents were killed and secretly buried in mass graves. Survivors of that purge and families of the victims — the overwhelming majority of whom were supporters of Iran’s principal opposition — have been pursuing justice for more than three decades, but Nouri was the first perpetrator to face justice.^[6]
• The trial of Hamid Noury is the first time in the last 33 years that a perpetrator of the 1988 massacre is facing justice.^[7]
• Since 2016, the authorities have increasingly glorified the perpetrators of the mass killings as "national heroes" and likened any criticism of the atrocities to support for "terrorism".^[8]
• Human Rights Watch has prepared a question and answer document to address the known facts of these mass executions, why the executions should be classified as crimes against humanity, and possible paths to hold the surviving perpetrators accountable.^[9]
• According to a Swedish indictment, the suspect “along with other perpetrators in the prison, participated in mass executions and is suspected of having intentionally deprived the lives of a very large number of prisoners who sympathised with the Mujahedin.”^[10]
• investigate the massacre and to gather evidence and identify the names and roles of specific perpetrators with a view towards bringing them to justice^[11]

Fad Ariff (talk) 12:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

That's not the problem. You're mixing two perspectives. You are coming at it from the perspective of the executions being a crime against humanity and the government officials as perpetrators, while from the perspective of the government-led criminal trials of opposition figures, the opposition figures were the perpetrators. This is an extremely confused way in which to add the information, describing executions but rather than having those executed as the 'perpetrators' having those authorizing the executions as the 'perpetrators'. If you can't see any of this or come around to the idea of simply having a less confused infobox without shoehorning in confused information, the article can just as easily go back to simply having no infobox at all - no confusion there. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

For example, see how the information is displayed on other 'execution' pages: Execution of the Romanov family, Execution of Saddam Hussein, Execution of Louis XVI and Execution of Nagaenthran K. Dharmalingam - little to no information (simple is best) or, in the latter, information detailing the manner of execution and crime of the executed. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Iskandar323, the crimes were a "crime against humanity", and this is not my "perspective", this is what reliable sources say about the massacre. Your argument of "there are no perpetrators if the government is involved" is ridiculous, especially about the Iranian regime who have a lengthy track record of human right violations. Your examples are also irrelevant to the topic of this article, see for example this Guardian article describing the Srebrenica massacre (which has the perpetrators in the infobox). Aside from personal opinions, what matters here is what reliable sources say, and reliable sources say Iranian regime officials were the perpetrators:

• In Iran's political culture, utter impunity has been as widespread as government-ordered crimes. Many of those implicated in the 1988 massacre have enjoyed promotions. Others have seemingly changed their political allegiances and have reappeared on the scene as moderates and democrats. To borrow Arendt's words, criminals responsible for the 1988 executions are still "prominent and flourishing in the public realm." Investigating and publicizing the facts of the massacre would begin to reverse this culture of impunity. A meticulously researched human rights report that effectively highlights the crimes of the perpetrators would be a wake-up call to Iran's government, reminding them that the massacre of 1988 has not been forgotten.^[12]

• Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, for many years the closest ally of Khomeini, says in his memoirs that in 1988, after accepting a cease-fire in the war with Iraq, Khomeini ordered the execution of 3,800 political prisoners. The "courts" pasing execution orders have alwyas been the "Islamic Revolutionary Courts" that the United Nations Special Human Rights Representatives on Iran and the United Nations Commission on Human Rights have consistently for two decades called on the regime to dismantle and pu an end to. These "courts" have been criticized for holding unfair, secret summary trials without any semblance of due process and in violation of international human rights standards requiring infomring defendants of charges against them, allowing defendants sufficient time to prepeare for their defense, allowing witnesses to testitfy on their behalf, and having access to attorneys of their choice. In these "courts", the "judge" acts as prosecutor, investigator, jury, and judge at the same time. They call this "Islamic justice." This is what Khomeini meant by "simplicity of Islamic justice and its expeditious character."^[13]

• Absent any official acknowledgment of the 1988 prison massacre, the most credible account of these events comes from the memoirs of Ayatollah Hussein Ali Montazeri, who was one of the highest-ranking government officials in Iran and trhe designated successor of Ayatollah Khomieni, then the supreme leader. Ayatollah Montazeri identified Mustafa Pour-Mohammadi as the representative of the Ministry of Information and a central figure of the mass execution of prisoners in Tehran. Pour-Mohammadi was the deputy minister of the Ministry of Information in 1998, when agents of the ministry killed several dissident intellectuals in teh so-called serial murders... Human Rights Watch has argued that Iran's judiciary, which has been implicated in many of these abuses, is demonstrably unable to conduct impartial investigation into these massacres. Other human rights orgnaizations such as Amnesty International have also expressed grave concern at the persistence of serious crisis of impunity and accountability at the hightest levesl of the Ahmadinejad administration. This crisis will call into question the legitimacy and credibility of the new government. Human Rights Watch has asserted that it is imperative to set up a serious independent inquiry to determine if these new ministers were among the perpetrators of these crimes and atrocities.^[14]

• Mr. Raisi, 60, was a member of the four-person committee that interrogated prisoners and issued execution orders. Mr. Raisi has said he was acting under the direction of the founding father of the revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who had ordered a committee be formed to facilitate the executions.^[15]

• There are many culprits in the killings and horrible treatment of detainees. But one in particular is Seyyed Asadollah Lajevardi, who had been jailed by the Shah's government several times. After the 1979 Revolution he was appointed the Tehran Prosecutor. When in June 1981 the MKO assassinated Mohammad Kachouei, the warden of the Evin prison, Lajevardi was appointed the warden. He even moved his family to Evin. One of Lajevardi's main claims was that he was an excellent tavvab saaz, boasting that 95% of his "guests" at Evin prison eventually gave a tape-recorded "confession" and "praised" the Islamic Republic. In reality, he was a brutal, possibly mentally ill man, known aptly as the "Butcher of Evin." He was responsible for thousands of executions, including those in 1988.^[16]

• "The perpetrators continue to enjoy impunity. They include the current Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and judiciary chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei"^[17]

• "Iran’s judiciary is led by perpetrators of the 1988 massacre. While we always knew there was a culture of impunity in the Iranian government and judiciary, this reality was put on stark display with the cold-blooded murder of some 1,500 Iranians by the authorities in the course of the 2019 anti-government protests"^[18]

• Yalbugha Zahrani, an Iranian researcher, explained the importance of non-Iranians speaking out on the matter, saying that Nouri’s trial in Sweden—which came after his 2019 arrest in Sweden while visiting family—could cause Iranians like Raisi who perpetrated these crimes to fear traveling abroad given the precedent.^[19]

• Following the Iran Tribunal's sensitisation of the Iranian public to the facts of the 1988 mass executions, the release of this audio recording caused an unprecedented storm of controversy. In a scene that would have been unimaginable to the Mothers of Khavaran when the Iran tribunal campaign first began, the Ministry of Justice and former death commission member Mostafa Pourmohammadi appear on Iranian state television to and and defend the mass executions as "the will of God". He was unrepentant but still accountable to the Iranian people. Obviously, public awareness of the truth, and widespread condemnation of these atrocities, had compelled the Islamic Republic to engage in a damage-containment propaganda exercise.^[20]

If there are sources that say the Iranian regime were not the perpetrators of the massacres, then add them to the article, and if you still think all these sources are not enough for describing the Iranian regime as the perpetrators of the killings, then we can verify it at WP:RSN. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:55, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

This isn't about sourcing the words 'perpetrators', this is about the use of the infobox template, and ripeness for confusion that is created when in the context of an 'execution' you call the executioners the 'perpetrators', while those executed, which in the normal ways of things are those judged to be criminals by a court and typically referred to as 'perpetrators' in the legal sense, are not. From the Iranian government's perspective, the political opposition are 'perpetrators' of treason or whatever fanciful crime. The confusion arising from having an infobox at once about individuals executed for one crime and featuring other individuals for the crime of punishing the crime should be obvious. Try and find another page about an execution that labels the executioner as a 'perpetrator'; I think you will struggle. I have already provided examples showing the opposite. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

this is a big crime islamic republic regime some of the news agencies say they kill 30,000 people in 2 month just because of that they want their stock in country I do not defend mojahedins , i just say about IR's crimes . 5.122.231.118 (talk) 10:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I have edited out the claim that children were executed. The two sources were the products of campaigns (one by some politicians at the UK House of Commons and the other by Human Rights Watch) and did not cite their own sources. I do not deprecate either the UK parliament or HRW, but neither of these sources of themselves justify the claim being reported as fact at this article. My own instinct is to leave the claims out until/unless an appropriate source is cited rather that qualify the claims. All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 08:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hm, I’d opt to restore with a ^{[better source needed]} tag. HRW is usually good, no? Zanahary (talk) 00:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply