[PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION FROM PERSIAN]
[Translator’s notes appear in square brackets]
[Personal information has been redacted.]
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
Decision number 364/B/2451
Date: 29/6/62 [20 September 1983]
Administered by: Preliminary Commission for the Restructuring of Human Resources of Bank Melli Iran
Allegation: Membership in the perverse Baha’i sect
Procedural synopsis: The allegation against Mr. Mohammad Jafar; surname: Rahmani Yeganeh; son of Abdol-Samad; born in 1286 [1907-1908]; birth certificate number: [redacted]; issued in: [redacted]; organizational position: retired; record of service: 27 years; location of work: Bank Melli Iran; employee’s personnel number ---; education: 9th grade; married, was examined by the Commission at its meeting of 29/6/62 [20 September 1983]. Having considered the evidence presented, the Commission delivers its decision as appears below:
The Decision of Commission
In light of the content of the file, the report of the investigating group, ⊠ and the accused’s admissions ⎕, the accused’s defence ⎕, the evidences of witnesses ⎕, expert opinion ⎕, statement of informants ⎕ and ……….and considering other provisions, circumstances and available evidence in this case, the charge/
charges brought against the accused is proven and well-founded, and his offence/ offences confirmed:
Membership of the perverse Baha’i sect.
As per section 1, article 19 of The Human Resources Restructuring Act, [applicable to] Government Ministries and Affiliated Organizations, enacted on 5/7/1360 [27 September 1981] in accordance with Clause 8, Article 29 of the above-mentioned legislation, the accused is permanently dismissed from public service. This decision, based on Article 46 of the above-mentioned legislation, may be appealed at the Appeal Division within 15 days of its service (either in person or via a substitute service) by the accused.
Preliminary Commission for the Restructuring of Human Resources of Bank Melli Iran – Tehran Province
This ruling has been issued pursuant to Article 29.