Saeed Razavi Faghih was arrested and then banned from leaving the country 2 months after his release, depriving him of continuing his studies in France. Rooz spoke with his wife, Mozhgan Modares Oloum, about her husband’s situation. She spoke of many violations committed by the judge in charge of her husband’s case. Read on for the details.
Rooz: Now two months have passed since your husband, Saeed Razavi Faghih, has been released from prison but because of the exit ban that has been imposed on him, he cannot return to France to finish his education. What is the latest situation with his case?
Mojgan Modarres Oloom (Mojgan): He came to Tehran last January 28th. On his arrival, security agents announced that he had been banned from leaving the country through a decree from branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court of Tehran and had to go to the branch immediately. He went to the court on the specified day and notices that a fat file had already been created for him relating to his arrest in the summer of 2003. The charges against him were actions against state security. He is also told that branch 26 of the Revolutionary Court had passed a sentence of 4 years prison plus 74 slashes against him. This sentence was related to his arrest in the spring of 2002 after the widespread protests in the universities against the sentencing of Hashem Aghajari, a university lecturer at Tarbiat Moalem (Teachers Training) University. The following February, the judge of the 15th branch of the Revolutionary Court issued an arrest warrant for him and he was sent to Evin prison where he remained for 16 days. During this period and through the efforts of a defense attorney, Saeed Razavi was released on a bail of 100 million Toman (about $100,000) until his court trial. Initially the judge agreed to lift his exit ban upon written guarantee of those who had put up his bail to the effect that they did not object to lifting the exit ban. The judge then also issued the release of his passport ordering it to be returned to him and to inform security officials of the same. This letter was signed on March 11 in the presence of Razavi Faghih and the defense attorney. But in reality, the letter was never sent to security authorities and instead found its way to the Chief Prosecutor. So Mr. Razavi Faghih continues to be in Iran without the possibility of leaving the country.
Rooz: What are the charges against your husband?
Mojgan: The case at the 26th branch of the Revolutionary Court, based on which my husband has been sentenced to four years of prison plus 74 slashes, was filed after national protests at the universities against the death sentence that was issued against Dr Aghajari. Since Razavi Faghih was active in these protests and even publicly spoke in many of them, he was arrested in the month of Azar in 2002 by the security unit of the Islamic Revolution Passdaran Guards (IRGC) and was under interrogation for the next 24 hours. The charges against him were actions against state security through illegal gatherings and insulting the leader. The second suit is about his arrest in the summer of 2003 which was illegal and also carried out by the security unit of the IRGC. In this case, he remained for 78 days in solitary confinement cell in ward 125 of Evin prison. He was under pressure throughout this period to confess of being a spy for the US and Israel, and say that he belonged to a network that worked to overthrow the regime. And since they could not find any real crimes, they added the same charges that existed in his previous suit in this case as well. Today, the two suits have been merged into one. I am confident that Mr. Razavi Faghih can defend himself against these charges.
Rooz: Do you think the court was following a political goal in dealing with Saeed Razavi?
Mojgan: Without a doubt this is the case. We have much evidence and indicators for this. We also have a lot of evidence to show that legal violations have taken place in the suit. The manner of arrest, the detention process, the indictment, the interrogation techniques, the way the default judgment was served, and other acts are all unlawful which we have objected to. The judge has even removed Saeed Razavi’s power of attorney from the file. There are many such violations and if we decided to pursue the violations and file a suit in the Judiciary Court asking for justice, the issue will then change altogether.
Rooz: Apparently a court trial has been scheduled for June 7. Do you think the ban on his exit and the forthcoming presidential elections are related to this?
Mojgan: As I said earlier, the manner in which the case is being handled is neither legal nor judicial, but political. I am confident that my husband’s trips to Iran displeased some powerful individuals who do not want him to remain politically active in the country. These are the same individuals who have forced the judge to commit illegal and unlawful acts, violating the rights of a citizen.
Rooz: Do you have anything to say to government officials who may hear your call?
Mojgan: I must express my disappointment that people who rule in the name of religion, violate the basic rights of people in society. I am sorry that people who are charged to provide security for the public, themselves deny security and peace fro citizens. With the knowledge that I have of my husband, I can say that the charge of acting against state security is not only baseless and void of any legal or judicial basis, but is also expressly unwarranted against political activism and patriotism especially for someone whose concerns were the security and progress of Iran.
