roozonline.com: Latest News

On the Non-Legal Letter Written by Jurisprudents

Sun, 19 May 2013 13:12:00 +0200

Shirin Ebadi

As Iran’s Guardians Council is processing the qualifications of the presidential candidates, the country’s media has reported that 7,456 jurisprudents have written a letter to it requesting that it disqualify those individuals who “in the past and in the course of the 2009 sedition had deviated from the path of the revolution.” A number of points must be noted regarding this letter. First is that why did the authors of this letter not identify themselves in the letter? Why are these people afraid to reveal their name and details? If they believe that their letter is lawful and their demands are legitimate and legal, then why is the letter published without any names? The second issue is that the letter has the least semblance of a legal document. Its authors, who have referenced some laws, must clarify where in the election law is there any mention of the term “sedition,” on the basis of which they have asked the Guardians Council to reject the presidential candidates. Not only is there no such mention in the election law, even the Islamic criminal code does not contain a crime called “sedition” which could be used to deem a person to be criminal and then disqualify him from the presidential race. So candidates cannot be denied their rights on these grounds. In reality, a jurisprudent cannot pass such judgment, punishment or deny the rights of a person by resorting to political issues or using concepts that have no legal foundations. This letter and the request for an unlawful action against the citizen of a country is unbecoming of any jurisprudent. Another issue to which these jurisprudents must respond is this: if the larger goal is to observe the rule of law, then the question that comes to mind is how does this relate to the illegal house arrest of Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Zahra Rahnavard and Mehdi Karoubi who have been denied their rights for over three years. This house arrest is illegal according to every legal principle because the charges against them have not been brought before any competent court of law. The only reason for their house arrest is, according to officials, their role in a “sedition,” a term that has no meaning in law. Every jurisprudent who has signed this letter is obliged to identify the specific law from which he has extracted the term “sedition.” Specifically, which law states that “sedition” is a crime and specifies the punishment for committing it? Which official body in the country or which specific law has defined “sedition” and the punishment for committing it? It is clear that when letters of this kind appear during electoral campaigns they are written merely for political purposes and in this situation unfortunately this letter brings the integrity of jurists under question.

Guardians Council Postpones Candidate Confirmation Date

Sat, 18 May 2013 10:27:00 +0200

Arash Bahmani

The ever-changing atmosphere of Iran’s election fever took another turn when the Guardians Council which vets candidates to all national elections announced that it needed another five days to review the credentials of the signed-up presidential candidates. At the same time, Tehran’s influential mayor Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who is also a presidential hopeful in the 2+1 coalition with Ali Akbar Velayat and Haddad Adel, revealed his violent oppressive actions during the 1999 and 2003 student protests. The spokesperson of the Guardians Council Abbas Ali Kadkhodai rejected the speculations that have been circulating about the disqualification of some presidential candidates and added, “Reviewing the qualifications of candidates has begun. The first 5-day review will end on Thursday and most likely the deadline will be extended for another five days, after which the results would be announced to the ministry of interior. We hope to complete the review of all the presidential candidates in 10 days.” A number of websites had published reports claiming approval of some candidates and even quoted “reliable sources” for their stories, none of which have been confirmed. According to the rumors, Mohsen Rezai, Gholam-Ali Haddad Adel, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Saeed Jalili, Mohammad-Reza Aref, Ali-Akbar Velayati and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf had been approved by the Guardians Council. Hardline conservative cleric Mohammad Yazdi, who is also the head of the teachers society of the Ghom Theological Center and a member of the Guardians Council told ayatollah Janati that deciding on the presidential candidates was more important than prayers during the month of Rajab. Another senior cleric, close to the principlists, ayatollah Makarem Shirazi expressed fears that some candidates may not have the qualifications for the office and that their disqualification would result in actions against official agencies. While these reports were not confirmed by any official person or agency, principlist media published a document according to which Manoutchehr Motaki, the former minister of foreign affairs and a presidential hopeful, only has a high school degree, thus making him qualify to be disqualified by the Guardians. Another candidate, Kamran Bagheri Lankarani from the Steadfast Front (Jebhe Paydari) was also reported to be disqualified because of political incompetency. In the meantime, Majlis representative Mohammad-Reza Tabesh announced that eight individuals had been approved as of Wednesday by the Guardians Council. He did not disclose his source of information. Since Rafsanjani signed up as a presidential candidate, hardline principlists have increased their attacks on Rafsanjani. Majlis representative Javad Karimi Ghodoosi announced the submission of a letter signed by a hundred deputies to the Guardians Council in which the authors request the rejection of Mr. Rafsanjani and Mr. Mashai as presidential candidates. He also said that the letter had been delivered to ayatollah Yazdi by a Majlis representative. He said that they were different from the earlier letter that had been written against him which asserted Rafsanjani had been confronting the supreme leader and against challenging Israel. This letter accused Rafsanjani of being part of the instigators of the 2009 unrest and said his children had been at the leadership level of the events. Raja News which is close to the hardline Steadfast Front wrote a piece questioning those who claimed that there were no legal documents that disqualified Rafsanjani’s presidential credentials by pointing to a report by Majlis’s Article 90 committee. It wrote that the public’s demonstrations in support of the official 2009 results of the presidential elections indicated their rejection of Rafsanjani who had supported the leaders of the Green Movement and those who did not accept the official results of the 2009 elections. In a related development Tehran’s mayor Ghalibaf revealed through a number of public speeches to students and the Basijis that in 2003 and after a Tehran University dormitory was set ablaze, and the Tarasht incident, he had gone to the country’s national security council and threatened that he would “crush” anyone who came out into the university dorm and engage in any activity. He said in 1999 and following the dormitory incident, he beat people up with a stick while riding a motorbike. He also revealed that he was the author of a threatening letter signed by a number of Revolutionary Guards commanders in 1999 which was sent to then president Khatami.

Consensus on Rafsanjani Did Not Come Easily

Thu, 16 May 2013 00:41:00 +0200

Fereshteh Ghazi

Hashemi Rafsanjani’s official last minute registration as a presidential candidate has not only disrupted the many political alignments in the country but has raised as many questions as well. Since reformist leaders declared their support for Rafsanjani’s registration many ask what happened to the conditions that a leading reformist Mohammad Khatami had set for participating in the presidential race. What about the demands of the public? What led reformists to agree on Rafsanjani and what do they expect from the elections? Hamid-Reza Jalaipour is a leadership member of the Jebhe Mosharekat reformist group (Participation Front) and in an exclusive interview with Rooz responds to some of these questions. The Front issued a statement yesterday calling Rafsanjani’s action “brave” and declared its “unconditional” support for him. Sazemane Mujahidin Enghelab Eslami (the Organization of the Islamic Revolution Mujahedin), another reformist organization, also issued a statement in support of Rafsanjani’s candidacy. Jalaipour revealed that reaching an agreement over Rafsanjani was not easy for reformers. “This was not a joke. They talked about it for months before reaching an agreement on a candidate so they could pursue the demands of the prisoners, detainees and the public.” Here are the excerpts of the interview. Rooz: What made the reformers decide to participate in the elections and then how did they decide on Rafsanjani? Jalaipour: Elections are important for reformers because they connect ordinary people to public issues and the decisions of the rulers. These elections are particularly important to them because of the serious issues facing Iran which elections can help resolve. Reformers have been under very difficult conditions where they were subjected to interrogations for things such as mere survival. So they decided to take a step to pull society out of this situation. Reformers were in agreement on a number of issues from many months ago one of which was the importance the upcoming elections and the other was the need to participate in them. They also realized that they had to support a candidate who would be supported by the majority of reformers. They were not after just anybody. It had to be somebody that was well known to all and accepted by all. Two people had these qualifications: Rafsanjani and Khatami. Khatami insisted on Rafsanjani which resulted in complete support for him by all reformers. I think Mr. Rafsanjani’s acceptance is the first success for reformers who have been under intense pressure for the past four years. The second will hopefully be his victory in the race. I am very optimistic because self-centered groups inside the country are now very angry which indicates that what reformers did was right. Rooz: Mr. Khatami and other reformers had set specific conditions for participating in the elections, such as release of political prisoners, the lifting of the house arrest on Mr. Mousavi, Mr. Karoubi and Ms Zahra Rahnavard and free elections. But none of them have been attained. Jalaipour: The conditions that Mr. Khatami had set were for the elections not for the reformers. These included free elections, access to media and to the public etc. Rooz: None of them were attained. Jalaipour: One of their demands is the strengthening of democracy and popular will. They want democracy to be institutionalized. There are two practical ways for this: Some argue to stay away because of the restrictions. Others argue that reformers should participate to strengthen what is available. There are still others who are holding back. So it was not easy for reformers to reach to an agreement on this. They talked for months until they agreed to enter the elections with an all-acceptable candidate so they could then pursue their demands to free the prisoners, detainees and other issues. They realized that they would not be able to pursue these by staying out. Rooz: The issue is that reformers in the past had engaged in activities to destroy Rafsanjani and during the sixth Majlis, … Jalaipour: That is not correct. Those who are supporting Mr. Rafsanjani today did not abandon him at that time. There was freedom during the reform period (Khatami’s administration). Two individuals wrote harsh commentary against Mr. Rafsanjani and went to prison. Rafsanjani himself tolerated them. It is the opposition today that is exaggerating this issue. We must be careful not to fall into their trap. When did Mr. Khatami during his 8 year presidency abandon Rafsanjani? Rooz: In 2005, reformers pinned Dr Moin to challenge Mr. Rafsanjani and even today the talk is that Ahmadinejad won because of this destructive action. His image was tarred then by reformers and by confronting him through their own candidate. Jalaipour: Our experience has shown that we should have had a single candidate at that time and reformers should not have allowed this split. This was a mistake by them then which took time to be realized. Rooz: There is some talk of a rejection of Rafsanjani’s candidacy. Others even say that as an elder statesman he should stay at the Expediency Council and mention his age. What do you think? Jalaipour: Those who have no belief in the rule of law use threatening language for their ends. They used to write these lies about him until 5:30pm on Saturday (at about which time Mr. Rafsanjani registered his candidacy). Mr. Rafsanjani and the reformers had either to succumb to these attacks or think about the country and state it is in. Reformers did not surrender to this and have accepted all criticism. The last four years were very unpleasant for them. Rooz: How optimistic are you about Mr. Rafsanjani’s victory? Jalaipour: The elections are 30 days away. Conditions in Iran require a daily assessment. Still, we must be optimistic. Why not? Look at what the country has been subjected to in the last four years. There are people who are in absolute poverty now and cannot provide for their dinner. Seven or eight million people are on the periphery and some ten million are on anti-depressants. Some 3.7 million people are addicts; large number of young people are unemployed while many are now in Europe but want to return even as they are threatened. Look around you, people are threatened. There is pressure on them. We are optimistic that Mr. Rafsanjani will win and end this destructive situation. He cannot of course create miracles but the destructive path (in the fields of economy, foreign policy, and domestic policy) will be stopped. There are two important points about Mr. Rafsanjani. If he had not been in the country, Talibanism would have by now taken over everything in the country. He has had an effective role in advancing a moderate form of Islam. The second begs the question who in the last four years loudly voiced the people’s concerns? If I take the side of people, it is not important because I do not hold any public office. But when someone holds such an office, it becomes an important issue. Two people defended the public and the prisoners: Mr. Rafsanjani and Mr. Khatami. One must be reasonable about these things and the situation.

The Alignment of Political Groups Disrupted!

Tue, 14 May 2013 10:30:00 +0200

Fereshteh Ghazi

“Just like a soldier who puts his life on line, I too take the honor and credibility that I have acquired from the Islamic revolution and the people into my hands for the service of Islam, the revolution, people and the revival of the motherland, and step into a field that I have known in the period after the 8-year Bath party war against Iran, which resulted in the destruction of five provinces of the country and the destruction of its infrastructure and resources, by stressing Shiite moderation which views the left, the right, and extremism to be deviation and going astray.” These are parts of the statement that Iran’s veteran politician and two-time president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani issued after he officially registered to participate in the June presidential election. His official entry into the race has already upset the political calculations and alignment of political groups inside the country. Rafsanjani is certainly not new in these waters. He was a close confident of the founder of the Islamic regime ayatollah Khomeini, and during the 34-year life of the Islamic republic has been a member of the Islamic Republican Party, the care taker of the ministry of the interior, the head of the parliament, the Majlis, a temporary Friday prayer leader for Tehran, deputy commander in chief of Iran’s armed forces, vice-president of the assembly of experts on the constitutional assembly, president, the head of the supreme council of the cultural revolution, the head of the supreme council on national security, and the head of the Assembly of experts. At the age of eighty, Rafsanjani is stepping into the race as many of his former critics in the reform camp are now throwing their support for him. Some have called his decision to enter the race to be his turn into the last chapter of his life and have tied Iran’s fate to this chapter. Others view him to be among the opposition that ruling circles call seditionists and call for his disqualification. Military leaders are issuing warnings, Majlis representatives are signing resolutions and some media issue secret bulletins against him. At the same time, some presidential hopefuls have stepped aside in his favor or taken position against him. And all of these posturing have taken place less than 24 hours after his put his name down as a candidate for the scheduled June 14 elections. Alef website associated with parliamentarian Ahmad Tavakoli, has called Rafsanjani to be the leader of the dialog with reformists. “Hashemi has entered the race because if he had stayed out, critics who had remained outside the government and power structure for years would have been kept out for the next eight years. Khatami did not join the race, but contrary to what Kayhan newspaper – whose editor is directly appointed by the supreme leader – predicted, Rafsanjani has entered the race. People have a right to elect or reject me,” it wrote. Mashala Shamsolvaezin, a well-known journalist and the editor of a number of now-banned newspapers such as Jame, Toos, Neshat and Asr Azadeghan, predicts that Rafsanjani will actually win the election and says his entrance into the race stems from the “responsible commitment” he feels he has to the fate of the country. He praised him for his decision. “He is using the last chapter of his life to the best. This decision is tied to the fate of the country,” he wrote. Talking to Asre Iran website, Shamsolvaezin said, “Rafsanjani is the only person over whom there is agreement among various groups and factions and who can return the conditions of the country to what they were prior to Mr. Ahmadinejad’s presidency. We hope to return to the conditions of 2005 and not repeat the losses that we have been paying. Mr. Ahmadinejad’s performance has shown the people of Iran that we need not waste our resources for empty slogans.” Abbas Abdi, a political analyst in the reformist camp believes that Rafsanjani has not stepped forward to stay in the race but to push for an arrangement that would satisfy his concerns and goals. Speaking to Faroroo website, he said, “Since the government candidate has registered to run in the race, Mr. Rafsanjani may now decide to stay till the end because he rightly believes that nobody can successfully stand up to the government’s candidate. The presence of both candidates at the ministry of interior at about the same time was symbolic demonstrating the arrival of two main contenders at the battlefield. His second condition to step down is that a clear agreement is reached over the political situation in the country. It would have been better if this agreement had been reached before he had registered and before the elections take place. That would have settled the issue of who should be elected, i.e., people vote for, which would have required Rafsanjani’s blessings. The reality is that the only way for him to step down now is to reach an agreement with him: an agreement that will take his political interests into account. In the absence of a government candidate however, Mr. Rafsanjani is a certain winner in the race.” Immediately after Rafsanjani registration, Mohammad Khatami and the reformers’ consultation council issued a statement supporting the candidate and termed the decision “self-less” and “above factionalism.” Will He Be Approved? Just a day after Rafsanjani’s registration, conservative websites published a critical letter that 150 Majlis deputies had signed against him. A group of representatives led by Ruhollah Hosseinian, Mehdi Kootchakzadeh and Vahid Rasai – all pro Ahmadinejad administration representatives in the Majlis – had worked to get the signatures. The letter criticizes Rafsanjani’s stance on Israel, the supreme leader, and the state of the country. Raja News website asks the question: Does Mr. Rafsanjani Qualify to Run in the Election? It then claims that Rafsanjani had played a key role in the post 2005 election unrest in the country. It also charged reformists that their tactics remained to fight battle in the streets of the capital and other cities. Mohammad Hadi Salimizadeh, the head of Tehran University student Basij para-military force affiliated to the Revolutionary Guards responded to Rafsanjani’s registration by saying that there was the odor of the 2009 “sedition” (public’s rejection of the official results of the 2009 elections) in Rafsanjani’s actions. Military Circles Military circles have drawn lines for both, Mashai and Rafsanjani. Mehdi Taeb, the commander of the Ammar military base responded to Rafsanjani’s registration by saying, “Mr. Rafsanjani is 79 years old and he knows that he cannot muster the votes and physically he is not suited for the job.” On the possibility of his disqualification, Taeb said that ayatollah Khomeini had said that the current position of a person was the criteria for determining his credentials, and not his past. Hassan Firuzabadi, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff also responded and without naming anyone said, people should not vote for someone who has tendencies towards the US and Britain, or has shown such tendencies in the past. Another military official, Gholam-Hossein Gheib-Parvar, the commander of the Fajr Revolutionary Guards Force in Fars province, responded by saying, “According to our criteria, we do not vote for people who sign up at the last minute or those whose registration is first announced by foreign radio stations who rejoice at this.” Other Candidates Figures who immediately withdrew their candidacy after Rafsanjani registered his intent to run are Hassan Rowhani, the former head of the supreme nations security council, and Masoud Pezeshkian, a Majlis deputy from the city of Tabriz and a cabinet minister in Khatami’s administration. Akbar Elmi, who had earlier said he would not step down for Rafsanjani, criticized those who had stepped down and said he was not happy that Rafsanjani had registered for the race. Ali Akbar Velayati, the supreme leader’s advisor on foreign affairs who is also a presidential hopeful, criticized Mr. Rafsanjani adding that the former president had taken a wrong stance over the post election unrest of 2009 and had abandoned ayatollah Khamenei. He warned, “We shall not diminish our resolve and have decided to not allow those who have an issue with the supreme leader to run the country.”

Elections

Sun, 12 May 2013 00:17:00 +0200

Touka Neyestani

انتخابات، طرحی از توکا نیستانی

Wave of Arrests Following the International Labor Day

Sat, 11 May 2013 10:30:00 +0200

Kaveh Ghoreishi

Following the arrests of workers that followed the international Labor Day activities, news reports and human rights announcements indicate a rise in the arrest of labor activists and workers. Speaking to Rooz, Mahmoud Salehi, a labor rights activist, described the recent confrontations with workers and said the pressure on the labor force this year was significantly greater than what they witnessed in previous years. Most of the arrests this year took place in Tehran, Karaj and the Kurdish city of Sanandaj. The website of the Human Rights Reporters announced the arrest of Mohammad Ehyai, a labor activist with one of the automobile manufacturers near Tehran on Nay 5^th and wrote that this worker was summoned to return to the plant’s office as he was leaving the workplace where he was asked questions and then arrested by plain-clothes officers. Ehyai along with a number of other worker activists had been protesting the non-payment of the wages of workers and the transfer of factories to specific state agencies and intended to go on strike over these, for which they were confronted at the plant and stopped. The group also reported that Mohammad Ghasemkhani and Bahram Saeedi, two other labor activists were arrested on May 3^rd, a day after their sit in in front of the Majlis. They were employees of the Iran Khodrow auto manufacturing plant, who were arrested as they entered their workplace. In recent weeks, the following labor activists, Aram Zandi, Fardin Ghaderi, Shahpour Hosseini, Jalil Mohammadi, Hamed Mahmudinejad, Nastaran Mohammadi and Bakhtiar Chantani were arrested in the Kurdish town of Sanandaj. The committee for helping create labor unions issued a statement condemning the arrests. It also announced that among those who were detained Nastaran Mohammadi, Bakhtiar Chantani and Aram Zandi had been released, each on a 50 million Toman bond (the market exchange rate stands at about 38,450 Rials to a US Dollar). Salehi told Rooz that the arrest of Mohammadi and Mahmudinejad was not related to the independent Labor Day events in Sanandaj. Mahmudinejad who had been recently released from prison after serving his term, and Mohammadi were arrested by security officials as they were going about their normal daily routines, and taken to the ministry of intelligence offices in Sanandaj. The international Labor Day was celebrated in Iran on May 1, as it was in other parts of the world. This was the sixth year when the annual labor march was banned in Tehran which forced workers to gather at a sports complex in southern Tehran in the presence of government officials when they also announced their demands. At this meeting, Alireza Mahjoob, the secretary general of the state-run Khane Kargar, a labor group, declared controlling inflation and raising the daily wage to be the leading demands of the workers in the country. At the same time, a small group of workers gathered in front of Iran’s parliament, the Majlis who called on officials to investigate their unpaid wage situation and inflation. Other towns in Iran, such as those in Kurdistan, also witnessed independent labor gatherings of their own on the occasion of the international labor day. While saying that security measures had increased this year, Salehi also indicated that two plain-clothes agents were present at the street where he lived and monitored his whereabouts through binoculars.

Explosions Were ‘Routine’ Demolition of Munitions

Sat, 11 May 2013 10:23:00 +0200

Shirin Karimi

Following Israel’s attack on a Syrian munitions depot last week, western Tehran witnessed a number of massive explosions which the security deputy at the Ministry of the Interior termed “routine” and added that officials had implemented plans to destroy obsolete munitions at the arms depot. His words conflicted with those of the spokesperson for the country’s Help and Rescue Organization who said that the explosions took place at a chemical plant. Ali Abdollahi, the deputy minister of the interior for security told ISNA student news agency, “The explosions that took place last night in western Tehran were for the purpose of demoliting obsolete munitions.” A BBC report on the incident said three explosions took place at a missile depot and center in western Tehran. Independent observers have questioned the “routine” explanation of the explosions since such practices are always carried out outside populated centers and towns. These explosions come a week after reports indicated that Israel had destroyed a Syrian arms depot that housed missiles transferred there from the Islamic republic of Iran and which were intended for Lebanese Hizbullah, a para-military group supported by Iran. A senior official from Iran’s joint chief of staff denied these reports and said they were propaganda. Four months ago reports were posted about massive explosions at Iran’s underground Fardo nuclear site. Iranian officials immediately denied the reports. The massive explosions at a missile site operated by the Revolutionary Guards in Malard about two years also were initially denied by military and government officials, but later Guards officials acknowledged the explosions at the ballistic missile site. Those explosions took the lives of 17 Guard personnel including general Tehrani Moghadam, considered to be the father of Iran’s missile program. A year prior to the Malard base explosion, Imam Ali military base in Khoramabad was the scene of explosions. The base was reported to house long-range Shahab-3 missiles. Iranian officials attributed that incident to an accident as well. Israel has said in the past that it had plans for damage Iran’s nuclear and missile programs.

What Has The Work of Heavens Come Down To?

Thu, 09 May 2013 01:06:00 +0200

Nooshabeh Amiri

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s presidential nominee has said, “I have received my approval to run for the post from the Heavens. Imam Al-ASR will force the Guardians Council to approve my qualifications.” Following that someone wrote me that the heavens and the imam are the new names for fraud and the purchase of votes! What I wonder is what have those who rule over Iran done with the “heavens” in the name of Islam and religion to relegate their work to screening candidates? Or what has happened in the world of Islam that has resulted in a battle between the missing Shiite imam and the Guardians Council, particularly if the imam is supposed to arrive soon – as heralded by the rulers – and save the world! When I see the officials of the Islamic republic beating their chests to reach out to God and the Heavens, I honestly wonder what they are asking from God. Who or what do they see in Him? What do they expect from this revered imam whom they have brought down to earth to a corner of Tehran from the Heavens? So what is this imam whom they have pushed down into the deepest point in a well near the city of Ghom – as officially reported to be in the Jamkaran well, over whom they sell visitation tickets to the public, and from whom they have obtained the stamp of approval for the electoral coup expected to do now? There are many who are glad that this heaven and the imam have been pulled down to earth, thus shattering the image the heavens held. This is the time for liberation, they dream. My surprise is at the silence of those who are called senior clerics and sources of emulation, those who have a long cloth wound their heads and whose foreheads speak of long hours of praying. I am surprised at those who are said to be connected to the heavens. Those very individuals who in the name of the heavens and the missing imam preach what is right and wrong to people, Those who wear their death coffins protesting the insults to the imams. Don’t they see that heavens and the imam that are called in to arbitrate between the elders of the Guardians Council and force them to approve a presidential candidate, or reject one, are sacrosanct and will stop being respected? Don’t they realize that if the imam is brought down to earth and desanctified then the days of their games and field will be over? Are they not concerned about their own future? Don’t they want to distance themselves from these games and thus protect their tents? Don’t they want to open their mouths and separate themselves from these? The work of heavens which had remained out of reach, has now been brought down to earth. One can now imagine a person in every street and corner who has suffered from the rule of these men.

Five Prisoners Are Awarded Forty Five Years of Prison

Wed, 08 May 2013 00:38:00 +0200

Fereshteh Ghazi

Family members of the five political prisoners who recently received sentences of 45 years of prison declared their protests against the heavy and unprecedented judgments. Mehr Ali Bigloo, Latif Hassani, Mahmud Fazli, Behbood Gholizadeh and Shahram Radmehr belonged to a group known as the Reawakening National Movement for Southern Azerbaijan and each was sentenced to nine years of prison for belonging to an illegal organization and engaging in propaganda against the regime. Speaking exclusively to Rooz, Sona Farajzadeh, Mehr Ali BIgloo’s wife said that her husband and Latif Hassani had been arrested on the same charges in 2010, were tried and received prison sentences. She acknowledged that the group did not have a license and that the prisoners were released after which they changed the name of the group and wrote up a charter and launched efforts to get a license. But in the process they were arrested again. But she also said that since the release of the members, they had not engaged in any activity other than those related to getting a permit and writing their charter. Farajzadeh explained that until recently all 5 prisoners were not allowed visitations and needed special permission from the public prosecutor for this. Now they have monthly visits, she added. She elaborated that her husband had spent seven months in solitary confinement and then another two months in the general ward before he was released the first time. “When she was arrested the second time, we thought they were going to have him serve the remaining of his 1.5 year sentence. Instead, they charged him against and sent him to trial for actins that he had already been tried and for which he had already seen prison.” Azam Piri, Latif Hassani’s wife also spoke with Rooz and called her husband’s case unprecedented because he was tried and sentenced for the same charges for which he had already seen prison. According to her, the prosecutor had first told her that her husband had committed new unlawful actions, but when we saw the charge sheet, the list was the same as the old one. She said her husband was not doing well health wise and needed medical care. He had been a teacher at a high school but was barred from continuing his higher education, after the first prison incident. Fatemeh Heydari, Mr. Fazli’s wife told Rooz that her family thought that her husband was arrested and would be serving the rest of his previous prison term. But as it turned out, they retried him for the same charges and issued a new 9 year prison sentence against him. His previous arrest was in relation to the situation with the Orumie Lake for which he had been acquitted. Shahram Radmehr who was arrested in Meshkin Shahr in connection with the group was also tried and given a 9 year sentence.

Torture and Modern Government

Wed, 08 May 2013 00:36:00 +0200

Mehrangis Kar

The latest news on torture in Iran is related to attorney Javid Hootan-Kian who has been imprisoned and tortured because as the defense attorney for Sakineh Ashtiani he strived to free her from facing execution through stoning in the Islamic republic of Iran. In another part of the world, human rights organizations in the United States have been providing news agencies with their latest reports on merciless acts of torture committed at the Guantanamo prison. In both of these cases, human rights are brutally violated. They both indicate that torture continues under a modern accountable government as it does under a traditional and an unaccountable regime. The efforts of United Nations organizations have not succeeded in changing this picture in countries where governments cover their acts of torture under the guise of “protecting national interests.” But what does differentiate the behavior of governments in this regard is their definition of “national security.” If the definition is so wide and loose that it includes the legal defense of a woman sentenced to death by stoning and whose defense attorney is himself charged with acting against the security of the regime and national security then one must certainly reappraise that definition. By promising to close Guantanamo prison, Barak Obama attracted many voices and votes. And five years since his pledge, which he has not fully accomplished, he continues to be incessantly grilled about his promise while he demonstrates his desire to fulfill his commitment. These days this pressure has resurfaced in the media and human rights organization as the American public demonstrates its displeasure with the state of the prison. Now let’s take a look at how things look like in Iran and how its leaders treat the issue. Even a cursory look at the conversations and talks of the presidential candidates who dream of winning the public vote, none of them have uttered a single sentence regarding what the young attorney revealed about torture, illegal activities in prisons, executions, etc as he had witnessed while being wrongfully incarcerated. Of course there are those who occasionally talk of the rights of prisoners or detainees and make some token gestures about the house arrests of Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Zahra Rahnavard and Mehdi Karoubi. But none of them have the courage to echo the words of the young attorney out of fear of what the editor of Kayhan newspaper Hossein Shariatmadari may accuse them of. They cannot even mention that many honest and educated Iranians are behind prison bars for defending the rights of their compatriots. Looks like torture and injustice that take place in Iranian prisons are not worth mentioning by the presidential hopefuls who have lined up to take their residence in Tehran’s Pastor Avenue, the presidency. Even the economic plight of Iranians, the dismemberment of people’s body parts through inhuman and senseless punishment and hangings are too insignificant to be mentioned in the campaign. Discussing any one of these issues would be crossing the red lines creating by the supreme leader of the land, they have come to believe. So out of fear for being rejected by the Guardians Council, these presidential candidates prefer to engage in direct and indirect personal attacks against each other and thus avoid making any pledges to the people whose votes they desire. While one cannot and should not overlook the atrocities that are committed against human beings across the globe, one cannot underestimate the editorials and articles that are published in the American media over Guantanamo where the writers hold their government responsible for such acts in the prison which gets them in trouble with prominent political, judiciary and police officials. They do this and call for the closing of the prison regardless of the consequences. This is what freedom of speech is about. It is the power of people. A free press is what the citizens of modern states have attained through hard work whereas Iranians who are on the brink of hunger cannot even dream of it. Those who rule Iran today and who came to their positions because of the revolution of the Iranian nation panic and fear such achievements in other countries and so deny their fruits, calling them “propaganda against the regime and national security.” But among the presidential candidates in Iran, there is one exception who has risen above the shoulders of others. He has sent message to the prisoners through media interviews as he announces that his students had all been in prison at one time. Ghasem Shole Saadi knows the pains of the Iranian people whose sufferings have been pushed to the sidelines because of the regime’s deliberate creation of economic crisis. It is uncertain how the regime will deal with him, but whatever his fate, the voice of the sufferers will gradually add up.

The High Monetary Council Paralyzed

Wed, 08 May 2013 00:31:00 +0200

Firoozeh Matin

With the sharp rise of prices in Iran - most recently announced by the Iran Statistical Center to be at 39 percent even though Donyaye Eghtesad (World of Economy) pins it at 41.5 percent - and as the government debates the launching of the 2^nd phase of the subsidies program which would hand out more cash to ordinary citizens and talks of raising the price of gasoline to 2,000 Toman per liter, holding down the interbank-rate at zero has created some serious issues for the Iranian economy. The new wave of price increases has been not just watched by the politicians but has in fact alarmed Majlis deputies who have called for a discussion of its economic-political-security implications of the rapidly changing economic terrain. A special closed session of parliament has been scheduled for next Tuesday with the participation of the minister of intelligence, the chief of police, and a member of the supreme national security council, along with the minister of economy to discuss the impact of the rampant inflation that is eating into the pockets of citizens across the country. The Majlis has indicated in the past that it favors a reduction in the direct payout amounts to the public and a price ceiling of 1,000 Toman per liter on gasoline while Ahmadinejad wants to hand out 250,000 Toman to every Iranian and raise the price of gasoline to over 5,000 Toman per liter. The uncontrollable inflation in the country has forced the Majlis to rearrange its normal schedule and call for an extra-ordinary session to look into the implications of the rising prices and possible public discontent. According to Iran’s ISNA student news agency, two days ago Majlis deputy Mohammad Hassan Abutorabi said, “Majlis shall have a closed session to discuss the rise in the price of basic goods. This meeting will be held in the presence of responsible officials to examine the impact of the rising prices.” He did not mention that security officials would also be present at the meeting, but a parliamentary journalist who was present at yesterday’s Majlis session told Rooz, “Majlis deputies talked about rising prices all day yesterday and expressed their concerns about possible social unrest because of this. They believe that the passage of the annual budget and the increase in the price of gasoline will result in public discontent which could bring about unprecedented security issues. The deputies stressed that all ministers involved in economic affairs would participate in Tuesday’s meeting, along with security officials which include the minister of intelligence, chief of police and a representative from the supreme national security council.” The decision to hold this extraordinary session comes days after Iran’s Statistical Center issues economic indicators, including details of inflation for the Iranian month of Forwarding (March 21 to April 20). According to its report, the average increase in prices compared to the same period last year stood at 38.7 percent, while this figure for the last 12 months for urban areas stood at 29.8 percent. The report also indicated that the price of bread had increased by 35 percent, red meat by 53 percent, white milk by 64 percent, milk by 50 percent, cooking oil by 45 percent, vegetables by 70 percent, fruit by 45 percent, tea by 54 percent, tobacco products by 87 percent, housing rents by 32 percent and cost of housing by 40 percent compared to the previous year. At the same time, a member of the High Monetary and Credit Council of the Central Bank Mohammad Hassan-nejad told Radio Farhang that while the body had met to decide on the new inter-bank rate, it adjourned without making any decision. He said “The Council was paralyzed. We do not know what to do. If we increase the rate, there will be greater liquidity which will result in greater unemployment and then a reduction in industrial production following which we will have greater inflation. If we do not increase the rate, then with the current 50 percent loss in purchasing power and the devaluation of the currency by 80 percent, people cannot survive. The Council is really at a loss as to what to do.” “If we look at the problem from an economic perspective, there is one solution. But if we look at it from a political angle then that is a different issue. While the Iranian economy has seen a sharp deterioration since new round of international sanctions hit its oil, banking and shipping sectors, some Iranian officials continue to talk of “administration of the world,” “administration of the region,” and other grandeur visions. These illusionary aspirations are not confined to the president and even ayatollah Khamenei is affected by them. In his last speech at a gathering titled “The Ulema and the Islamic Awakening” he talked of moving towards the grate Islamic civilization. Words that were clearly reminiscent of what the last monarch of the Persian dynasty, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi used to say during the last months of his regime.

Need a Gathering to Examine the Independence of Lawyers

Sun, 05 May 2013 23:52:00 +0200

Shirin Ebadi

On April 29^th Mr. Mandanipour, the head of Iran’s bar associations announced, “Bar associations have the duty of defending the national interest and the highest expediencies of the country in addition to defending the rights of individuals. In view of the knowledge that members of bar associations have regarding legal issues at the domestic and international levels, it is their duty to carry out their role regarding this issue and so it has been decided that a legal and historic study on the status of the three islands will be put up for a discussion at a civil forum.” Undoubtedly the associations’ examination of legal issues at the international level is most appropriate but the greater issue at stake is that a number of members of these very bar associations that Mandanipour leads are behind bars for defending their clients. Examples are Nasrin Sotudeh, Abdol-Fattah Soltani, and Mohammad Seyfzadeh. They are in prison for the same reason that Mandanipour refers to as the duty of lawyers, i.e., defense of the rights of people. But since their clients were political and ideological detainees facing state charges, and because judiciary courts in the country have lost their independence and they do what government security agents ask them to do, these defense attorneys are in prison today. They are seen as accomplices in the state’s cases against their clients. Security agents and the Revolutionary Court have set the premise to be that these attorneys are in line and of the same views as of their clients they were trying to defend. But defending the client’s rights is the first duty of an attorney, something that takes priority over holding a seminar and providing international documents. So the question that is pertinent is this: Is it right to accuse an attorney of being an accomplice in the charges that his clients are facing? If not, they why are these attorneys in prison or why were other attorneys who were forced to leave the country after serving their sentence for the same conspiracy charges imprisoned? Examples of the latter are Ms Mahnaz Parakand, Mr. Khalife Loo, Mr. Mostafai, and Ms Shadi Sadr. The outcomes that security officials have demonstrated for attorneys who had accepted to defend individuals facing political and ideological charges have been noted by other attorneys who are no longer willing to defend individuals facing similar charges. A good example of this are the cases where American hikers were unjustly accused of espionage and who were eventually released after the payment of $500,000 but no independent attorneys were willing or courageous enough to take up their defense. In all the cases since June of 2009 where defense attorneys – more than 50 of them - were charged to be accomplices in the accusations facing their clients, the bar associations have failed to perform their most important role, which is none other than defending the rights of their members. They have done absolutely nothing in this regard. So what is the problem with this scenario? The issue is a specific law that cannot be openly discussed by Mr. Mandanipour and other presiding members of the bar associations. According to this rule and procedures, presiding members of the bar associations have to be ultimately vetted and approved by Iran’s ministry of intelligence which passes is judgment onto the judicial administrative tribunal which appoints or confirms the presiding members of the bar associations. In the past, the judicial administrative tribunal has acted like the Guardians Council, i.e., it has rejected the competence and qualifications of individuals without presenting any cause. Examples of this are the disqualifications of Abdol-Fattah Soltani and myself. So while the bar association is supposed to be run by attorneys chosen by its members, it is in fact run by individuals acceptable to the state judiciary and the ministry of intelligence. It is thus not surprising that attorneys have no one to defend their rights. We have witnessed that when a cinema actor is arrested, his or her colleagues and fellow artists protest, or that when a worker is detained, other workers sign petitions protesting the act. But when an attorney is arrested and detained, other attorneys do not protest and remain indifferent. So rather than congratulating Mr. Mandanipour for convening a gathering to examine the legality of the Persian Gulf, we request that prior to that he convenes another gathering to examine the independence of attorneys and discuss why representatives of attorneys must be selected by the ministry of intelligence and not their own peers.

Khamenei’s Representative: Stop People’s Nostalgia

Sun, 05 May 2013 11:57:00 +0200

Bahram Rafiei

While a number of reformist and critical political groups and personalities are still talking with Ali Akbar Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami about their candidacy in the June 14 presidential election, ayatollah Khamenei’s representative in the Revolutionary Guards corps, the Passdaran, exposed his concern about the possible presidential candidacy of these two former presidents and called on the ideological-political commanders, members and executives to prevent people from returning to the two politicians. Speaking to the members of the ideological-political office of the Passdaran force, Ali Saeedi said, “A return to the dangerous past may create doubt, uncertainty, threats and deviation for the Islamic society.” He specifically said that return to the past could mean return to the era of the “constructionists and reformists,” terms that are associated with Rafsanjani and Khatami’s presidencies respectively. He continued, “Preventing people from going back is much easier than confronting deviation by people.” In mid-April too cleric Saeedi had expressed concern about the upcoming elections and had criticized Rafsanjani and Khatami’s administrations while saying competition in the June campaign will be between principlists, reformists, workers and government supporters, implying Khamenei’s desire for the continued presence of principlists in the government. He then praised principlists, a group of ruling politicians and activists who claim loyalty to the original principles of the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled the country’s monarchy. Rafsanjani and Khatami’s Latest Remarks In his latest remarks Rafsanjani said that he never withdrew from public service and added that he had never said that he would not run, thus keeping the possibility of announcing his candidacy open. These remarks brought about sharp criticism from his critics and the principlists in Ahmadinejad’s administration who labeled Rafsanjani’s possible candidacy a “dangerous game.” Khatami too spoke about his views about two weeks ago and said that if the policies that had brought about the current situation in the country changed, then it was possible to do something, adding that he did not see signs of such a change. In his most recent remarks Khatami said that reformists needed to work on a win-win formula and added that they were currently under threat. He specifically said that he feared that problems would not be solved if a new reformist government was challenged by other state agencies and institutions and he refrained from providing a direct response to a question about his plans and has therefore kept the possibility of his candidacy open.

America’s Knife Has Become Blunt

Sun, 05 May 2013 11:49:00 +0200

Fars News Agency Speaking to members of the Basij para-military force at a seminar dubbed “Political Epic Makers – Basiji Bravehearts” in the city of Mashhad, the head of Iran’s Basij force – affiliated to the Revolutionary Guards – asserted that the resistance of the Iranian nation had taught lessons to the enemies of the country and had created fear in them. “The West has learned that it can not militarily eliminate the devotion and dedication of this nation,” he said. He said talks with the US had resulted in a 10-fold jump in the inflation rate and added, “Those who call on us to talk with the US and make a deal with it are either traitors or thoughtless.” He continued, “They have put sanctions on our oil and increased the price of the Dollar, and precious metals such as gold. Under the conditions they have imposed on us, is it in Iran’s interest to sit at the negotiations table with them?” He said the only area where the West had not imposed sanctions on Iran was food which he said was not done out of sympathy but because it wanted Iran to remain dependant. “Their actions demonstrate their enemosity towards us,” he asserted. “We declare,” he announced, “that America is not our friend and any talk with it is a demonstration of treason or unthoughtfulness.” “America’s knife has become blunt around the world and we must realize that we need an uprising and not talks and agreements,” Naghdi asserted. Naghdi said the West was also enemical with the Iranian people in the area of the arts which he claimed was demonstrated at the Oscars. “We have witnessed that in the last two years they have been awarding weak anti-Iranian films. Without any doubt, it is the White House that decides which film should be awarded at film festivals,” he alleged. Sports is another area that Naghdi mentioned where the West was against Iran. “They realized that wresting is a sport at which Iran excels and immediately removed it from the Olympics.” He concluded, “They know that they cannot defeat us militarily and so are using their other capabilities against us.” Naghdi emphasized that the Basij was the front runner in defeating the economic sanctions and creating what he called the “political heroism” or “epic;” terms that are now regularly used by Iranian officials after the country’s supreme leader ayatollah Khamenei in mid March said the next presidential elections in June should create an epic, to contrast it with the last elections that brought forth national protests and bloody confrontations. Naghdi also claimed that a populist movement had been created in the United States. Naghdi is a well-know military strongman with a violent record, especially during the 2009 post-election events. He gained notoriety earlier during Mohammad Khatami’s presidency when he cracked down university student protests, particularly in Tehran, when he was the police chief of the city. The US Department of Treasury has imposed a travel ban on Naghdi for being responsible for severe human rights violations, including torture and has also imposed sanctions on transactions with and/or related to him. He is among those who believes that the 2009 popular protests against the official presidential election results were orchestrated and directed by the West.

What Does Epic Elections Mean?

Thu, 02 May 2013 01:04:00 +0200

Bahram Rafiei

In his March 20^th message to the Iranian nation, ayatollah Khamenei declared that the next presidential elections in the country would be an “epic” event. He also at least verbally opened up the candidates’ field by saying, “Anybody who feels they have the ability (to take up the job) should come forward.” Following that, Revolutionary Guard commanders, among others, welcomed the large number of unofficial candidates for the June presidential election and predicted that there will actually be “competitive elections” next month with an “increase in the number of voters.” Speaking to Fars news agency which belongs to the Revolutionary Guards force (the IRGC), general Yadollah Javani, the former director of the political bureau of the IRGC, repeated ayatollah Khamenei’s Nowruz remarks and said the first step was the talk of “wide public participation.” Javani added that since the ruling establishment had created the means for wide participation, it would be natural to expect “competitive elections” to take place. Javani is currently an advisor to ayatollah Khamenei and in his remarks also said that “enemies did not want such [healthy] elections to take place.” But Javani made perhaps a more important announcement in his remarks. This year’s first issue of the IRGC’s official magazine Sobh Sadegh published by its political bureau went further and identified what the criteria for the elections to be epic were. The article in this month’s issue wrote that the two conditions for epic elections were, the competitive nature of the event and the public’s wide participation in them. These remarks are important because they conflict with one of the two main views that have dominated the IRGC and Khamenei’s representatives on the issue of a large number of presidential candidates. Some of the ayatollah’s advisors had criticized the large number arguing this would make it difficult for the public to recognize the better candidates and would create a “challenge for the Islamic republic.” Others had welcomed the development. Ali Saeedi for example, who is Khamenei’s representative in the IRGC had called on the principlists to close ranks behind a shorter list of presidential candidates, while criticizing the division within the principlists’ faction. Another cleric, Mohammad Ali Jafari also expressed dissatisfaction about the number of candidates when speaking to a group of Basiji militiamen.

Speculations Have no Legal Foundation

Thu, 02 May 2013 00:55:00 +0200

Hossein Mohammadi

While former president Mohammad Khatami has not yet officially announced his decision about running in the June presidential race in Iran, ayatollah Khamenei’s representative at the Kayhan group of newspapers, Hossein Shariatmadari, called the reformist president a “traitor” and “corrupt,” and predicted that the Guardians Council would reject his qualifications to run in the race. But these words were objected to by none other than a member of the Guardians Council who said, “speculation” about the disqualification of presidential candidates “had no legal basis and would not impact the Council.” Shariatmadari wrote in an editorial in Kayhan, “In which country do they allow the fifth column of the enemy to breathe?” He continued his criticism by saying that the agents of sedition – a term Iranian rulers use for the Green Movement and protests that followed the 2009 official election results did not offer even symbolic gesture of being against the United States and did not offer a simple apology for their actions. He continued that the leaders of the Green Movement not only lacked the credentials to run in the elections, but should in fact be punished. Shariatmadari is directly appointed by ayatollah Khamenei to run the newspaper group and is a staunch supporter of the ayatollah. This is not the first time Kayhan or Shariatmadari attack Khatami and the reformists in the harshest terms. Specifically, he and his associates accuse Khatami of meeting and following “instructions” from George Soros, a Hungarian born American who supports progressive-liberal causes around the world. Khatami on the other hand recently questioned the wisdom of running for presidency under the current conditions when he said how he could run when he was under threat from various sources. Shariatmadari has predicted that if Khatami decides to run he will be disqualified by the Guardians Council. It is this prediction that raised the eye brows of one Guardians member, Mohsen Ismaili, a jurist on the body who said, “Nobody can pass a judgment on behalf of the Council. The speculations have no legal basis and will not impact the Council. Such remarks may also not be right for the political environment of the country. No discussions have been held over any candidate and the review of the qualifications will take place after the candidates have submitted their applications.” But while Khatami has not announced a decision about running, many reform groups have called on him to run and in fact such calls seem to be growing. Some reformist political prisoners too have supported the idea of Khatami’s candidacy and among them is former deputy minister of the interior Mostafa Tajzadeh who remains in Evin prison. Other political prisoners from the reform camp too have publicly made similar calls. But calls by reformers have not remained confined to Khatami and some leading reformists have said that even if Khatami does not get in the race, they would support Hashemi Rafsanjani. Ali Shakurirad, for example, a member of the reformist and banned Participation Front has told ISNA student news agency that all Khatami has to do is announce his candidacy. But if that does not take place, he declared that Rafsanjani would be the next best candidate with sufficient public support. Shakurirad’s interview displayed the problems reformists have as he said if both of these veteran political figures decided not to run, there would be nobody else from the reformist camp who would stand a change in effectively winning the support of the public.

The Start of a Dangerous Game

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 16:20:00 +0200

Arash Bahmani

Hashemi Rafsanjani’s recent remarks criticizing Ahmadinejad’s administration and the possibility of his presidential candidacy in the June election have met strong reactions from the ruling principlists and their media. One media outlet called his remarks “a dangerous game” that had been anticipated. Speaking to a group of visiting journalists, students and reformist clerics who have called on the head of the state expediency council to run in June’s presidential race, Rafsanjani clarified his earlier comments about the election and said that he had not said he was not running in the race. While most of the questions and talk in this meeting were on the upcoming elections, reference was also made to Rafsanjani’s criticism of Ahmadinejad’s policies and administration. “The next administration will have to deal with a large debt, the government owes the public 500 billion Toman, 200 billion to the banks and 50 billion in bonds,” he told his audience. In a part of the talk Rafsanjani said that while Ahmadinejad’s administration had initially rejected the fourth development plan of Iran – which had been developed during Rafsanjani’s presidency – it was announced subsequently that some 23 percent of its plans had in fact been implemented, adding, “this would have been accomplished even without the administration and perhaps even more because farmers, teachers and other workers do their job regardless.” He also attacked Ahmadinejad’s foreign policy and called it “badly practiced.” He said it called for conflict and a fight. “They initially said that Security Council resolutions were nothing but a piece of trash but then called on them to suspend them. This has cost the country much,” he said of the government’s policies. Rafsanjani accused Ahmadinejad’s government of getting rid of the professional and experienced cadre of the country, while promising to bring in fresh blood. “I know Ahmadinejad as he was a governor in my administration and his policy had been to drive out revolutionary people and defame them. Today, we see that our policies lack any planning and are driven by daily events,” he said. He also made a reference to a tape recording that he possessed from a 2008 meeting with senior officials who agreed with his predictions over Ahmadinejad. The meeting was purportedly arranged to reduce the conflict between Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani after the former had made direct accusations against Rafsanjani during the presidential debates with presidential hopeful and former prime minister Mir-Hossein Mousavi. Rafsanjani also talked about the sovereignty of people and their right to govern themselves, a touchy subject after many clerics openly negate the principle which is recognized even in the current constitution of the country and who say ultimate sovereignty and rule rests with God and his representative, a reference to the supreme leader. “You cannot have a situation where any person can do whatever they want and expect people not to protest. People own the government. God has given the right to government only to the 12 saints and after that to anyone who gets the people’s vote. We expect that those who are qualified will not be rejected because people know who is suitable and will not let the country go to ruin,” he said in a reference to the disqualifications that the Guardians Council engages in vetting presidential candidates and the fear that reformist and even centrist candidates may be eliminated by the powerful clerical body. Rafsanjani’s remarks were immediately met with criticism by the principlist media. Raja News that is close to the principlist Steadfast Front said Rafsanjani was trying to regain his lost popularity and credibility and that “most active political groups” rejected him because of his posture in the 2009 unrest. Principlists accuse Rafsanjani to be part of what they call the 2009 sedition – the massive protests against the official results of the 200 presidential election that reinstated Ahmadinejad as president. Vatan newspaper close to Mehrdad Bazrpash, a close associate of Ahmadinejad and his supporters in the Majlis, also wrote against Rafsanjani arguing that the head of the expediency council had changed tactics to return to power, and questions whether he had abandoned his goal of regime change through the sedition or velvet revolution. One editorial in the newspaper said that an event larger than the 2009 sedition was on its way through Rafsanjani. Jahan News affiliated with Alireza Zakami, a presidential candidate, also criticized Rafsanjani’s comments and accused him of leading the 2009 sedition.

Stoning Returns as Punishment

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:25:00 +0200

Firoozeh Matin

The controversial “Islamic Punishment” law that was rejected by the Guardians Council returned and eventually was passed last week. To the disappointment of human rights activists and the promises of some Majlis representatives, not only stoning is not negated in the law, it is in fact emphasized. Hamid-Reza Tabatabai, the vice-chairman of Majlis’s judiciary committee told the press, “Stoning is not negated in the new “Islamic Punishment” law. Its execution has been modified. This was requested by the Guardians Council. According to the law stones do not have to be used to implement the law and hanging, or other innovative methods by the judiciary, can be used to accomplish the same goal.” He did not provide details about what those “innovative methods” of the judiciary could be. But recently, an extremist Muslim group in neighboring Iraq used an innovative method of the act by throwing blocks of cement on the head of the victim. Recently the judiciary of the Islamic republic of Iran in the city of Shiraz unveiled an apparatus that had been built to dismember a person’s body organ. As reported by ISNA the tool is nothing but an electric saw made to cut off a person’s fingers. French news AFP compared the tool to the medieval torture tools. With the new law in place, the judiciary is expected to come up with new “innovative methods” killing people. The newly passed law had originally been drafted during ayatollah Hashemi Shahrudi’s term as the head of Iran’s judiciary and sent to the executive branch. It was subsequently rejected by the Guardians Council and sent back to the Majlis for changes, which were ultimately made, paving the way for its implementation. In an interview during his term, Shahrudi had said at one point that the punishment of stoning had been removed from the law and that stoning had stopped being used as judges ruled on other methods of punishment. Just a few months ago on February 17, Shahrudi told Fars news agency that stoning had been removed from the new Islamic punishment law because of its negative international impact and that the final decision lay with the Guardians Council. He also restricted its legal basis to be only used against the most severe offences of adultery and applied only to women. The spokesperson of Iran’s judiciary also acknowledged the negative domestic and international reaction to the practice. “The eight Majlis removed stoning as a judicial practice and this form of punishment was removed from the new Islamic Punishment law,” he is reported to have said. He did however qualify his remarks by saying that this was a divine concept that existed in the Sharia law.

The Long List of Executions During Larijani’s Term

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 10:44:00 +0200

Fereshteh Ghazi

“We have absolutely no political executions in Iran and those executed are related to individuals who have taken up arms against the regime. This is not political activity. Furthermore, according to the laws of the Islamic republic, execution is not the only punishment for those who have engaged in acts against the national security of the country. If you assert that we have executed individuals solely because of this, you should publish their names.” These are parts of remarks made by Sadegh Larijani, the head of Iran’s judiciary branch of government during whose term tens of political prisoners have been executed and many more remain on the death row. The execution of political prisoners and opponents of the Islamic republic began right after the victory of the 1979 revolution when those associated with the previous regime were executed. This included those who held senior posts in the ancient regime to those who held no posts or were in some way affiliated to the monarchy. This also included some who had fought for the victory of the 1979 revolution along with people who attained official posts in the newly-created Islamic republic but who had turned into critics or opponents of the policies of the new rulers. They all faced the firing squads. In the first years of the Islamic republic, news and images of those who were executed filled the pages of the local media. But coverage of the executions gradually dropped and reached a point where officials at different levels would actually even begin to deny them or prevent their publication. It is in this light that Mr. Larijani claims that “there are no political executions” in Iran. The80s are generally labeled as the decade of executions in the Islamic republic. This is the period when thousands of political activists, including critics and opponents of the Islamic republic were sent to the firing squads. The height of these massacres came in September of 1989 when hundreds of political prisoners were executed en masse, according to narratives provided by eye witnesses or family members. Officials and authorities of the Islamic republic, then and subsequently, have remained silent on these executions and have refrained from announcing their position on the killings. Such executions continued into the next decade as well so that today there is a list of political prisoners among the prison population who have been sentenced to death. In the south of the country individuals such as Mohammad Ali Amvari, Hashem Shabani, Hadi Rashedi, seyed Jaber Alboshoke and his brother seyed Mokhtar Alboshoke have been sentenced to death on charges of “acting against national security” as they await their fate in prison. These five were members of a cultural organization, Alhavar, that in obtained its operational licence during Mohammad Khatami’s presidency in 2002. It even chose its name - which means dialog - because that is precisely the message that Khatami spread domestically and internationally, his famed dialog of civilizations idea. Their activities were cultural, aimed at preserving the Arabic language through poetry gatherings and the recitation of chants in Arabic, organization of classes and ceremonies, including staying in touch with families who did not allow their female members to pursue their education. In Tehran’s notorious Evin prison, Mohsen and Ahmad Daneshpour Moghadam are among those arrested on the day of Ashoora of 2009 (the day Shiites commemorate the historic killing their imams some 1400 years ago) and have been sentenced to death on charges of fighting God and cooperating with the Mujahidin Khalq organization. But in interviews with Rooz, Mohsen’s son Meysam said, “Members of my family have had no [political] activities. Unfortunately one of my brothers is in Iraq and we have no contacts with him. We are not only disinterested in the Mujahidin Khalq, but even view it as a terrorist organization. Our only contact with our brother in Iraq was when my mother travelled there. During her trip or even after her return, no issues were raised by authorities and she was not asked anything about this. On Ashura day however, our mother, father, brother my father’s close friend and another relative were unexpectedly arrested. When I returned home one day, I found a note that simply said the ministry of intelligence had arrested them.” Vahid Asghari and Ahmad-Reza Hashempour are also political prisoners sentenced to death who contrary to the assertions of the head of the judiciary have not taken up arms against the Islamic republic. Vahid has been in prison for the past five years and as explained by his family members, had been a student in India. He came to visit his family but on his return was arrested at the airport. He, along with others, has been charged with operating anti-religious websites. Zaniar and Loghman Moradi are two political prisoners in Rajai Shahr prison close to Tehran who also, contrary to the claims of the head of the judiciary, never took up arms against the Islamic republic but who face the death sentence. Along with Majid Bakhtiar and Hojabr Ibrahimi, they are accused of having a hand in the killing of Saeedi, the son of Marivan’s Friday imam in 2009. They are also accused of being agents of Britain. A video was aired on the English television channel of the Islamic republic which a number of individuals including images that appear to be that of Zaniar and Loghman claim responsibility for the murder of the imam’s son. But their family members say that the videos are fake and fabrications, and that their children made incriminating statements out of duress. Soon after this, Zaniar and Loghman published an open letter from the prison announcing that their self-incriminating statements were made under torture and that they had been raped by their interrogators. In Kurdistan, Habibollah Golparipour, Habibollah Latifi and Shirkoo Moarefi are among political prisoners who have been sentenced to death on charges of moharebe (enmity with God). Their father rejects the charges who told Rooz that he was active in cultural activities and that when he was arrested the books that he had on him were confiscated as well. There were no fire arms and he had not engaged in any armed activity, the father said. “My son’s crime was the possession of a few books. I do not know on the basis of which law they have made these accusations against my son,” he lamented. Shirkoo Moarefi was a Kurdish political and civil activist who was arrested in 2008 in the Kurdish town of Saghez. He has been sentenced to death on charges of “acting against national security” and being a member in the Komele party. His defense attorney says Shirkoo was not a member of Komele, only a sympathizer. The attorney said because his client had surrendered his weapon to authorities and had voluntarily gone to the authorities, he did not qualify to be a mohareb, as is claimed by the state. These are just some examples of political prisoners sentenced to death. These prisoners have not had public trials and their defense attorneys were not given the opportunity to defend their clients. Most of them have said that their self-incriminating statements were extracted from them under torture. So contrary to Mr. Larijani’s assertion, many executions of political prisoners have taken place during his own tenure as judiciary chief. In many cases even the bodies of the victims were not returned to family members. Among these are Farzad Kamangar, Shirin Elmhooi, Jaafar Kazemi, Ali Aghayari, Ali Saremi, Arash Rahmanipour, Mohammad Alizamani and Zahra Bahrami.

Eight Million Votes Were Fraudulently Added To Ahmadinejad’s Vote Count

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:49:00 +0200

Hamid Ahadi

A website close the principlists and a former Revolutionary Guards commander revealed that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad intended to threaten to publish a document that would prevent the Guardians Council from disqualifying his presidential hopeful for the June elections. An hour later, the website was forced to take down the document. Baztab, a site closely associated with former IRGC (Revolutionary Guards) commander Mohsen Rezai used the pretext that only ten days were left for the start of the official registration of presidential candidates for the June elections and the speculations about Ahmadinejad’s reaction to the disqualification of Esfandiar Rahim Mashai – the president’s leading contender – wrote about Ahmadinejad’s possession of an audio recording about the disputed 2009 presidential elections which resulted in massive and bloody unrest in the country. Baztab website is known to have access to the state’s classified bulletins and has on a number of occasions posted news reports that either subsequently materialized or were initially denied but were later proven to be true. On Friday morning the site posted a news report that claimed that Ahmadinejad was in the possession of a recording in which officials inform him that he only had 16 million votes (which means that he and Mir-Hossein Mousavi had to go into the second round of voting) but that they intended to increase the number to 24 million. The recording shows that Ahmadinejad repeatedly protested about this and had asked that his real vote count be announced. Political analysts view this document to be the magna expose that Ahmadinejad has been threatening his opponents with which has raised concerns among IRGC commanders and the supreme leader forcing them to issue a number of warnings. Ahmadinejad has been threatening to reveal documents in his possession that would expose senior regime elements of corruption and scandal as a way to prevent official organizations such as the Guardians Council from disqualifying his presidential choice. According to Baztab, the exposes that Ahmadinejad has till now revealed against the family members of the head of the country’s judiciary and legislative branches of government, and also against the head of the state expediency council, have lost their impact, forcing him to engage in other exposes or acts involving even more senior personalities of the regime. According to the report by Baztab the conversations between Ahmadinejad and various government and state officials are on the recording and indicate that he was not in favor of announcing the fake results of the voting and that he wanted that actual 16 million to be publicly and officially announced. The website then presents three scenarios for the recording: It does not exist altogether; there is a recording but the government is exaggerating its contents with its interpretations to show that Ahmadinejad received the highest number of votes, and lastly, there in fact is such a recording directly implicating others. The report reminds its readers that the issue of 8 million votes that were not accounted for was initially mentioned by a current presidential hopeful Alireza Zakami who quoted Mohsen Rezai on this, making it a primary source for the 2009 presidential controversy. Speaking at Imam Sadegh University after the 2009 presidential election, Zakami who was a Majlis representative from the principlist faction then quoted Rezai to have said that 8 million votes in the election were fabricated. According to Zakami, Rezai had said that until 5pm there were only 17 million votes cast and it was not possible to believe the 21 million votes that were suddenly announced after that.