A/HRC/43/20 out between 1 January and 10 October 2019, compared with the same period in 2018. Seven individuals were executed for moharebeh (taking up arms to take lives or property and to create fear in the public) or efsad-e fel-arz. 2. Execution of child offenders 7. It is of grave concern that child offenders remain subject to the death penalty. Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which the Islamic Republic of Iran is a State party, its imposition is absolutely prohibited for individuals convicted of crimes committed while under the age of 18, without exception. Nevertheless, the Penal Code retains the death penalty for girls as young as 9 and boys as young as 15 lunar years of age in cases in which the child is convicted of qisas (retribution in kind) or hudud crimes (punishments mandated by God under sharia law), such as homicide or adultery. In cases of qisas, the victim’s next of kin has the right to forgive the defendant, accept a diya (blood money) as compensation or request the death penalty. The Government has noted that its general policy is to encourage reconciliation between the victim’s next of kin and the defendant and that it provides cash assistance should a family lack the means to pay the diya. 8. In 2019, two 17-year-old boys, one of whom reportedly had an intellectual disability, were executed. 3 The execution of those boys contradicts the assertion by the Government that alleged offenders are not executed as children, but as adults. 4 Notwithstanding a decline compared with 2018, when at least seven child offenders were executed,5 at least 90 child offenders remained on death row at the time of reporting, with several at risk of imminent execution. 6 9. Under article 91 of the Penal Code, child offenders may be exempted from the death penalty if a judge concludes that they did not realize the nature of the crime or if there is uncertainty as to their mental development.7 As the Secretary-General noted previously, United Nations human rights mechanisms have highlighted significant deficiencies with article 91 of the Penal Code and its application.8 Of particular concern is the discretion left to judges in applying article 91,9 including whether to request a forensic specialist assessment of the maturity of the accused and when to do so, sometimes requesting it years after the alleged offence,10 and to use any other method deemed appropriate to assess the mental development of the accused. Moreover, the Penal Code does not define what constitutes the non-realization of the nature of the crime, nor does it define or provide the criteria for assessing “mental development”, which increases the risk of arbitrary decisionmaking.11 3. Right to a fair trial 10. The Secretary-General remains concerned by reports indicating instances of denial of the right to a fair trial, including in cases in which the accused is charged with crimes punishable by the death penalty. OHCHR has received multiple reports of lack of access to lawyers and of lack of access to information about charges for both defendants and their lawyers, arrest and detention without charge and convictions based on confessions extracted under torture. On 9 September 2019, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted that, from the communications it had received regarding arbitrary detention concerning the Islamic Republic of Iran, such cases followed a pattern of arrest and ensuing 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A/74/273, para. 10. A/HRC/40/67, para. 56. A/74/273, para. 9. Ibid., para. 7. A/HRC/40/67, para. 60. A/74/273, para. 8; CRC/C/IRN/CO/3-4; and A/HRC/40/67, sect. III.E. See CRC/C/IRN/CO/3-4; and A/HRC/40/67. A/HRC/40/67, para. 64. See A/HRC/40/67. 3