So the Iranian regime has once more put Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the woman condemned to death for adultery and complicity in her husband's murder, on a pedestal of headlines.
On Monday night, Ashtiani --- or a woman, with face blurred and statement voiced over, claiming to be Ashtiani --- "confessed" again on national television, "I am a sinner." And she had company: there were also alleged confessions from her son Sajad Ghaderzadeh, her lawyer Houton Kian, and the two German journalists detained while interviewing Ghaderzadeh and Kian last month.
Hours later, there was a sequel: state media, quoting a judiciary official in East Azerbaijan, said the Germans would be charged with espionage.
On the surface and viewed at a distance from Tehran, the decision to flaunt Ashtiani and Company on prime-time television and to follow up with the arrests of the journalists is a curious one. The Iranian public-relations machine had been pushing the story of Tehran's strength, amidst a possible renewal of talks with the "West", in five days of military exercises.
That flaunting of weaponry was swept away on Tuesday by the Ashtiani story. The Guardian of London, which has been keen to keep the case in public view, soon had a detailed report. Reuters sent out a story from Tehran on the charges against the two Germans; the new development soon raced around the world, from The New York Times to Australian radio and television. The US State Department issued a brief statement about detentions.
Why would Tehran put Ashtiani back before the television spotlights, ensuring that the human rights issue would be pushed back up the agenda of the international media? Why do so, even as a delegation from the Iranian judiciary, including the head of the human rights division, Mohammad Javad Larijani, was in New York trying to highlight the failings of the West?
Because, of course, the "confessions" of Ashtiani, her son, her lawyers, and the Germans were not for the world. They were for a domestic audience. It is the Iranian people who were to be reminded that not only of the need for justice against "sinners" but of the role of duplicitous lawyers --- Ashtiani condemned Kian for telling lies to her and others --- and of foreigners in trying to unsettle the Iranian system.
Still, that is only a partial answer. The condemned woman had previously "confessed", on at least two occasions, on Iranian state television. Many Iranians are already convinced that she should be put to death for her alleged crimes, whether that execution is by stoning or hanging. The Iranian regime would appear to be pushing an open door, at least on the specific case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani.
But Monday night's episode was not primarily about Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. She was only a prop and a decoy.
Ashtiani was a prop to support the Iranian campaign against activists. The Guardian's account picked up on an important dimension of the performance: the "confession" attacked Mina Ahadi, who has been prominent in the campaign to get the international community to notice Sakineh, for her supposed deceptions and manipulations.
Tear down Ahadi's reputation and you also tear down the reputation of all activists who claim to be fighting for justice and fairness in Iran. And when you tear down their reputations, it is a lot easier to act against them, say through imprisonment.
Which brings us to Ashtiani as a decoy and the story behind this broadcast. Throughout the post-election crisis, the Iranian regime has been putting defence attorneys in jail, but in recent months this has devolved into a strategy to shatter the community. As Josh Shahryar and EA readers highlighted yesterday, many prominent lawyers are now in prison or in exile --- five more were detained this past weekend. (The arrest of one of those five, Sara Sabaghian, means that all of the Ashtiani defence team are either in prison or sheltering abroad.)
However, throwing all the lawyers in jail or forcing them to flee the country presents public-relations problem. How can the Iranian regime claim to be one which promotes and upholds justice at the same time that it is breaking that system by removing the possibility of defence? How can it present itself, not only to the world but to its own people, as legitimate when a Nasrine Sotoudeh --- detained in early September for no apparent reason other than that she is a determined and capable lawyer --- goes on hunger strike?
It can't. Indeed, the US State Department statement seized upon this:
The United States remains gravely concerned about Iran’s continued harassment, detention, and imprisonment of human rights defenders. For example, we understand that the trial of human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh is reportedly underway, but it is proceeding without the transparency and due process guaranteed under Iranian law.
Iran’s leaders should know that their efforts to silence those Iranians who stand up for the rights of their fellow citizens do not go unnoticed. We once again join the international community in calling for the immediate release of all political prisoners, including those imprisoned for defending detainees or speaking out against human rights abuses, and urge Iran to afford its citizens those rights that are universal to all people.
So Sakineh Mohammad Ashtiani --- whether or not she was played by an actress on TV on Monday night --- is an actress herself. She is placed before the cameras to give a performance both of justification and distraction.
Justification that any measure, even if it bends the judicial system, is OK because it is "justice" for her crimes and those of others. Distraction because the Iranian regime does not want its people to look off-stage as, to maintain its authority, it breaks that judicial system and puts it behind bars.