Iran's Challenges in Acceding To the Convention against Torture

Torture is a clear violation of human rights and behavior against human dignity. Torture is one of the most serious crimes and is in fact an international crime. This crime, on the one hand, is of considerable importance and sensitivity due to its connection with government agents and, on the other hand, due to the desecration of human rights, especially in domestic and international law. The UN General Assembly has condemned the practice, and it has been banned by international law as well as domestic law. In addition, the Convention against Torture, which has been ratified in this regard, has been accepted by the domestic law of many countries. In this article, therefore, we seek to examine the legal, political, and judicial challenges to acceding to the Convention against Torture; this is while the prohibition of torture is accepted in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and there is a possibility of passing a law in this regard. In light of the above, the question that arises in this article is what challenges does the Iranian government face in acceding to the Convention against Torture? This descriptive-analytical article seeks to prove the hypothesis that differences in the views of legal authorities in agreeing in principle to accede to the Convention against Torture is one of the most important challenges. The findings indicate that the Iranian legal system, in accordance with Islamic law and with a glimpse at international conventions, has strictly prohibited the use of torture.