Does a 51 Million Toman Civil Claim Require a Two-Stage Trial, but an 830 Million Toman Criminal Fine Does Not?

Enjoying a two-stage trial (the right to appeal) is a fundamental right of every citizen, designed to protect the rights of litigants through an appellate mechanism against the rulings of courts of first instance.

In this regard, within the realm of civil disputes, the Iranian legislator has acted very generously. The vast majority of non-financial claims, and any financial claim with a value exceeding 50 million Tomans (Note for foreign readers: Toman is the super-unit of the official Iranian currency. 50 million Tomans is a statutory threshold set by Iranian law for the appealability of civil financial disputes), can be appealed.

Logically, when the legislator is so concerned about the violation of individuals' rights in private relationships and mandates a two-stage review, one would expect even greater protection for the right to appeal in the realm of crimes and punishments. Criminal law involves a direct confrontation between the state and the citizen, where a single-stage trial risks severely jeopardizing the defendant's rights.

For instance, if we worry that 50 million Tomans is a heavy burden in a civil dispute requiring appellate review, it seems obvious that a crime related to workplace accidents (e.g., Article 177 of the Iranian Labor Law) should also have a two-stage trial. This specific crime carries a "relative fine" equivalent to 300 to 1500 times the minimum daily wage—a figure that this year starts at 166 million Tomans and can reach up to 831 million Tomans! This is necessary so that the rights of the defendant (here, the employer) are not violated.

But surprisingly, according to the current procedure of the "Peace Courts" (Note: Peace Courts, or "Dadgah-e Solh," are a newly established tier of courts in Iran designed to expedite minor civil disputes and lesser misdemeanors), this massive fine is final and unappealable!

Why has this happened?

The answer lies in the intersection of a Precedent-Setting Judgment and the clauses of the new Dispute Resolution Councils Law:

According to Precedent-Setting Judgment No. 759 of the General Board of the Supreme Court of Iran (Note: The highest judicial authority for unifying legal interpretation), a crime punishable by a "relative fine" (meaning the amount is not a fixed number but is calculated based on a specific legal variable) was not locatable within the eight degrees of punishment. (Note: The Islamic Penal Code of Iran categorizes discretionary punishments into 8 degrees, with Degree 1 being the most severe and Degree 8 the lightest). Consequently, by virtue of the last part of Note 3, Article 19 of the Islamic Penal Code, it was classified as a Degree 7 punishment (a minor offense).

Meanwhile, the new Dispute Resolution Councils Law (Clause "Th", Note 5, Article 12), regarding the public aspect of unintentional crimes arising from work or traffic accidents, only allows appeals for cases where the statutory punishment is Degree 6 or higher (i.e., more severe).

As a result, because a relative fine is deemed a Degree 7 punishment based on the aforementioned interpretation, it does not meet the legal condition for appeal (which requires Degree 6 or higher). Therefore, the Peace Court's ruling, even for a staggering cash fine of 831 million Tomans, is absolute and final! This is despite the fact that if the exact same amount were contested in a private civil lawsuit, it would be fully appealable.

The scope of this challenge goes beyond workplace accidents!

An important point to consider is that relative fines are not limited to work-related crimes; they exist in various other penal laws. For example, Note 2 of Article 241 of the Amendment Bill to the Commercial Code prescribes a cash fine equal to the total remuneration received by company directors.

Using the reasoning in Precedent-Setting Judgment 759, this corporate crime is also considered a Degree 7 punishment. On the other hand, based on Clause "J", Note 5, Article 12, Peace Courts only allow appeals for intentional crimes if their statutory punishment is Degree 7 imprisonment (not a fine).

Consequently, even this corporate crime—where a director's conviction could amount to billions of Tomans depending on their earnings over years of activity—is considered a final, unappealable judgment.

Written by Reza Bastani Namaghi