Home | English | Publications | Reports | Ctrl+Alt+Delete: Iran's Response to the Internet

Ctrl+Alt+Delete: Iran's Response to the Internet

A few interesting points:

1- Mojtaba Saminejad’s charges were based on [the content] on his weblog. The blog’s password was taken from him by force after he was arrested and the content was manipulated in order to fabricate charges against him. In all three courts, the technical aspect of the situation was analyzed and it was established that a blog is a person’s private journal, and with a password the content of the blog may be accessed and observed. Without the password, it would have been impossible to access those articles. Therefore, since all the aforementioned “crimes” occurred inside the blog, the actual crime – which is publishing and disseminating – never took place and the accused should not have been prosecuted. This matter was not paid any attention to in Branches 13 and 1084 of the lower courts and Branches 1084 and 36 of the appeals court. But Branch 78 accepted this defense – that it was only after the Prosecutor’s Office gained access to the articles’ password that Mojtaba Saminejad’s blog came under review, and was altered and tampered with.
2- In all the trials, judge Moqaddas would present an interrogator in court, claiming that he was an expert. In addition to acting as the Prosecutor’s representative, this person also testified against the accused. This matter was objected by the [defense] attorneys because it upset the balance and impartiality of the trial in favor of the Prosecutor’s Office, but the courts rejected this argument. However, due to the [attorneys’] objections, Branch 78 of the Provincial Criminal Court did not allow [the interrogator] to speak, although he was allowed to be present in court.
3- Despite the fact that it has been years since I’ve expected the Judiciary to administer justice and follow the rule of law, I will appeal the two convictions of my client to the Discernment Committee and the Appeal Court of Tehran Province in accordance with my client’s wishes and rights.
For a while now [we have had to deal with] the terrible reality of [attempted] assassinations of judges in this society. This matter has caused people great worry. While I am writing these lines, there was an unsuccessful attempt on the life of the Chief Judge of the Malarad Court. We hope that the Judiciary acts effectively, and without creating havoc clarifies the motivations behind these assassinations and reports [its findings] to the nation. And that those responsible for such revolting acts are revealed to the people without the involvement of political dishonesty.
As someone who has served in prosecution and investigative posts for many years and has investigated and unlocked the secrets of thousands of criminal cases, I believe that these assassinations are not linked to a particular political agenda, but are based on personal vendettas. In this regard, it is perhaps useful to pay adequate attention to the defense of Mojtaba in light of his honest and decent past. Judge Moqaddas has exhibited a very harsh and tough attitude toward those who enter his office, and has refused to pay any attention to fundamental rights according to the rule of law and Shari’a law. His life has now been cut short, and he must answer for his actions in the presence of God, as He has said:
“On the day, we will seal their mouths and their hands will talk and their feet would bear witness to what they have done.” [Surah Yasin, Ayih 65]
When he looked closer, he saw his own feather on it He said, of whom shall I complain, as what is done unto us comes from us.
Today, the Judiciary’s decision to arm the prosecutors will not only irreparably damage the grace and authority of the Judiciary, but will take the Judiciary to the point of no return. Judges are simply not informed regarding the proper use of arms pursuant to the relevant procedural code and will likely shoot as soon as they detect the slightest evidence of foul play. If, God forbid, this leads to even a nosebleed, the Judiciary will face widespread condemnation. The only solution to this is the complete protection of the judges by the LEF. And these judges must have respect for the law, the moral code and the principles of justice. They must employ the everlasting weapons of forbearance, knowledge and law instead of relying on the ineffective weapons of anger [and revenge].
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51
  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

Free Speech, Right to Protest, Cyber Journalism, Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment, Punishment, Due Process, Right to an Attorney, Free Association, Political Freedom, Equality Before the Law, Discrimination