Iran's Executions: The Reformist Participation Front Questions to Sadegh Larijani

On Friday, the leading reformist group, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, wrote to the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, seeking answers over the executions of Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Ahmadipour.



From the Facebook page supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi, via The Flying Carpet Institute:

Dear Mr. Larijani, the honorable Head of the Judiciary,

The news of the execution of two prisoners accused of being Moharebs warriors against God) created a spark of surprise and astonishment amongst the nation of Iran. During a time when the political atmosphere is one of fervent hope to wipe out the dark clouds of hatred and vengeance, this faulty action by the judiciary system was only further proof that there is no willingness and desire to create calm in the country’s political atmosphere.

Iran Analysis: The Regime’s Ultimate Challenge “We Will Kill You”

The judiciary, already accused of political maneuvering and ignoring justice and fairness because of its illegal and doubtful behavior towards reputable political forces arrested and jailed unfairly after the elections, will now be questioned even more after issuing suspicious death sentences for nine people and hastily executing two others.


A death sentence is regretful regardless of whom it is issued against, or whether or not that person deserves the punishment or is guilty of the crime. Even though we have no intellectual or actual kinship with these people, we are worried that the judiciary system is under the influence of forces that continue to move towards ordering further bloodshed and executions.

You are well aware that the death sentence is the only sentence that is irreversible. The legislators have therefore deliberately and knowingly created bureaucracy intended to lengthen the process between issuing and implementing a sentence in order to minimize any possible errors and unfair sentencing. The hasty executions of Mr. Rahmanipour and Mr. Alizamani have created much ambiguity and many open questions.

These two young men were naturally executed with your approval. In order to provide clarity to a highly inflamed public --- in particular the supporters of the Islamic Revolution, who view this type of behavior against Islamic principles --- to enlighten the public and eliminate any unnecessary advertising and propaganda against the system, and, more importantly, to protect the dignity of the judiciary and make sure that it is not compromised, it is important that you respond to the myriad of open questions which have been raised, some of which we will present in this letter.

If these sentences were fair and based on the law then calm will return to the political atmosphere. If God forbid, it is determined that unknowingly, these sentences were unfair and wrong, then you need to make it clear who will take responsibility for this heinous act, so that we eliminate the need to create committees such as those created to deal with the crimes at Kahrizak [Prison, where post-election detainees were abused and killed].

1) When were these individuals arrested? What was the reason for their arrests?

2) What was the logic for trying these individuals in the courts dealing with the aftermath of the elections, when they were clearly arrested a few weeks before the elections?

3) How were confessions obtained from them? In addition to their confessions, what other valid evidence was used to document their crimes?

4) Were fair judiciary procedures observed in their proceedings? Did they have access to legal representation? Were their lawyers allowed to visit them? Were their lawyers provided with sufficient time to review their case?

5) Is there any validity to the claims that the defendants were encouraged by interrogators to provide false confessions with the promise of lighter sentences? If true, does this not undermine the foundation of such a court?

6) Can the confessions given at the show trials, directed by those who committed the crimes at Kahrizak and who were also responsible for interrogating the accused, be the basis for issuing such heavy sentences?

7) Was the minimum Islamic compassion shown towards the accused, allowing them to meet with their families one last time before their execution?

Mr. Larijani, these questions and many more that have remained unanswered, have led the public to believe that the issuance and implementation of these sentences had no legal basis, was politically motivated and without logic and, God forbid, used to create political pressure and generate fear amongst the nation.

Mr. Larijani, we are aware that many of the penal codes based on constitutional principles were ignored in the the issuance and implementation of these sentences, in particular Rules 168, 165, 38, 35, 32. The lack of response to these ambiguities will cause irreparable damages to the country and the system.

"I will share the truth with you / You can either learn from my words or take offense"

The Islamic Iran Participation Front
29 Jan 2010

Iran Analysis: The Regime's Ultimate Challenge "We Will Kill You"

Sometimes a story doesn't take shape immediately. Sometimes words are put out for the public, their possible significance only emerged when they are repeated, reprinted, recycled. Sometimes the speaker may not even realise how "big" his declaration is going to be.

Sometimes, even when two people have their lives cut short for reasons far beyond their specific place in this world, the act is only fulfilled in days and weeks to come.

So it may prove with the hangings of Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour, two men whose arrest for alleged membership of a "monarchist" group took on its imposed meanings in the conflict which began two months later and is still ongoing. So it may prove with the speech of an Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, a man whose long, confirmed membership within the Iranian regime reaches the point where he argues that Iranians could and should be put to death.

It may prove so for, twelve days before the anniversary of 22 Bahman (11 February), Jannati --- as not the speaker at Tehran's Friday Prayers but as the head of the Guardian Council, the body that supposedly gives legitimacy to Iran's elections --- saw not the ballot box but the coiled noose, the cocked trigger, the unsheathed blade and said, "Do it!":

God ordered the prophet Muhammad to brutally slay hypocrites and ill-intentioned people who stuck to their convictions. Koran insistently orders such deaths. May God not forgive anyone showing leniency toward the corrupt on earth.

Only weeks after the Presidential election in June, another Friday Prayers speaker, Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, had held up the possibility of death for "rioters", albeit less dramatically than Jannati. The regime, however, did not opt for executions. It tried the security measures to disperse and even beat demonstrations out of existence. It tried the mass, loudly public trials of August. It tried hundreds, thousands of arrests in the night. It tried the expulsion, "filtering", detention of those who might provide information that the protest continued. It tried firings and termination of studies.

Still the protests continued. Even in the "lull" after 13 Aban (4 November), the university campuses maintained the show of resistance. Then, when the regime may have convinced itself that it was primarily the students who were troublemakers and they could be contained and separated from "good" Iranians, tens of thousands (how many tens of thousands?) who were not students came out on the streets of Tehran and other cities on Ashura (27 December). They demonstrated and, in some case when they were confronted, they pushed back the security forces who had tried to remove them from visibility for the past six months.

When the history of this conflict is written, Ashura may take its place --- alongside the march of millions of 15 June and the demonstration five days later which ended in more lives lost --- amongst the most symbolic moments. For if 15 June showed the possibility and 20 June the danger, Ashura revealed the endurance of the challenge to the regime. The regime --- frustrated, concerned, panicked --- initially responded by calling from the highest levels for "good" Iranians to demonstrate their loyalty. And even after tens of thousands (how many tens of thousands?) responded, the regime was possibly still frustrated, concerned, panicked.

It did so in the thought that this might not be enough. This Government, this Supreme Leader had to prevent the mantle of the 1979 Revolution from being wrested from its grip on 11 February.

So more, many more detentions during the demonstrations and during the night. More disruptions of communications. More finger-wagging and shaking of the head from the Supreme Leader. More, shriller declarations of the "foreign menace".

But this might not be enough. So on Thursday, less than two weeks before a public display which may or may not signal that this regime will never again be legitimate, its officials put to death two men. And even those two men had no connection with the post-election events, they were bound to it --- as they had been with their "confessions" during the Tehran trials of August --- by the pronouncement that nine others, some of whom were Ashura demonstrators, had been sentenced to the same fate.

So on Friday, an Ayatollah who has claimed leadership in this system since 1979, who is a staunch supporter not only of the "system" but of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the "head of the system", defined that legitimacy not by elections, freedoms, discussions, public and private compassions but by the shout:

"Do It!"

He does so, I think, without the full recognition of the challenge he has set, not to those whom he opposes but to those whom he is nominally defending. For now, to make the warning real, the regime must put to death a few representatives not only of the pre-election "threat to national security" but of the post-election resistance and even of the specific defiance on Ashura. It must act before 11 Bahman, hoping that it suppresses the opposition rather than supporting it with more martyrs, more symbols of injustice and abuse.

To make the warning real, it cannot come just from an Ayatollah Jannati. It must also come from the head of Iran's judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, whom Jannati called out yesterday. And it must be endorsed by the Supreme Leader. Ayatollah Khamenei may wish to stand aside from this ultimate threat but this week he has faced his own challenge --- Mehdi Karroubi speaks, speaks again, clarifies, reiterates a different "Do It": get rid of this President and this illegitimacy that threatens to crumble not just a Government but an Islamic Republic.

For what Jannati set out --- not only to the Green movement, not only to Mssrs Mousavi, Karroubi, and Khatami, but also to his Government and Supreme Leader --- was this command, a command that defines how far this regime has advanced since June 2009:

To Assure Your Legitimacy, You Must Kill.

The Latest from Iran (29 January): Sideshows and Main Events

2320 GMT: The Committee of Human Rights Reporters has issued a statement on recent allegations against its members, many of whom are detained:

The civil society’s endurance depends on acceptance and realization of modern norms and principles. When a ruling establishment with an outdated legal system tries to impose itself politically and ideologically on a modern society, the result will be widespread protests.

2315 GMT: Correction of the Day. Although it was not widely noted, there were 40th Day memorial ceremonies for Grand Ayatollah Montazeri in Qom.

2310 GMT: Diversion of the Day. From Press TV:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's top aide said Friday Tehran is concerned about the direction of the US administration after President Barack Obama delivered his first State of the Union address.

"We have concerns Obama will not be successful in bring change to US policies," Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai, the senior aide to President Ahmadinejad and his chief of staff, said.

With respect, Esfandiar, I don't think President Obama is your biggest concern right now.

NEW Iran Patriotism Special: Wiping the Green From The Flag
Iran Document: Karroubi Maintains the Pressure (28 January)
Iran Document: Resignation Letter of Diplomat in Japan “Join the People”
Iran Document/Analysis: Karroubi’s Statement on the Political Situation (27 January)
Iran Analysis: Leadership in the Green Movement
The Latest from Iran (28 January): Trouble Brewing

2300 GMT: Yawn. Well, we started the day with a sanctions sideshow (see 0650 GMT), so I guess it is fitting to close with one. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking in Paris:

China will be under a lot of pressure to recognize the destabilizing impact that a nuclear-armed Iran would have in the [Persian] Gulf, from which they receive a significant percentage of their own supplies....We understand that right now it seems counterproductive to [China] to sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs....[But China] needs to think about the longer-term implications.

1. The White House is not even at the point of agreeing a sanctions package with the US Congress, let alone countries with far different agendas.
2. China is not going to agree tough sanctions in the UN Security Council. Really. Clinton is blowing smoke.
3. About the only outcome of this will be Press TV running a story on bad America threatening good Iran Government.


2250 GMT: Back after a break (Up In The Air is fantastic --- there, I've said it) to find that the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front has written an open letter to Iran's head of judiciary, Sadegh Larijani, putting a series of questions over the executions of Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Ramanipour.

1820 GMT: We've moved our item on the regime's apparent removal of Green from Iran's flag to a separate entry.

1755 GMT: Today's Pot-Kettle-Black Moment. Just came across a discussion on Press TV of a bill, passed in the US House of Representatives, threatening to block "anti-US" television channels.

Don't get me wrong: this is an incredibly stupid measure, although as Professor William Beeman, the most reflective of the three guests notes, it is a symbolic declaration unlikely to become law. However, I have to note that at no point do the words "Internet filtering", "expulsion/imprisonment of journalists", "jamming of satellite signals" (say, of Voice of America Persian or BBC Persian) come up in the conversation, which also includes a Dr Franklin Lamb and a Dr Seyed Mohammad Marandi.

1750 GMT: The Judiciary v. Ahmadinejad. At insideIRAN, Arash Aramesh has a useful summary of the suspension of the publication Hemmat by Iran's judiciary. The twist is that Hemmat, which ran into trouble for running an attack piece against Hashemi Rafsanjani, is a supporter of the Ahmadinejad Government. No surprise then that the President reportedly declared:

I am not very happy with some of the Judiciary’s actions. Someone published a paper and you shut it down. It is the job of a jury to order the closure of publications. We do not agree with such actions and believe that these actions show a spirit of dictatorship.

However, Aramesh does not connect the Hemmat story to the imprisonment of Mohammad Jafar Behdad (see 1230 GMT), an official in the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, for four months.

1725 GMT: The Latest from Gohardasht Prison. Peyke Iran reports that 300 Ashura detainees are under severe pressure by Ministry of Intelligence agents, demanding confessions of "mohareb" (war against God), in sections controlled by the Revolutionary Guard.

1700 GMT: The International Committee for Human Rights in Iran has started a new blog. Current posts consider the Zamani/Rahmanipour executions and "Members of Committee of Human Rights Reporters Under Pressure to Make Forced Confessions".

1600 GMT: The Strategy of Deaths. Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi has offered details on the regime's handling of executions: having put to death two pre-election detainees to death yesterday, the Government has handed down five more sentences on five people arrested on Ashura (27 December). The sentences are currently being appealed.

Doulatabadi's declaration complements a recent announcement that by Iran Prosecutor General Gholamhosein Mohseni Ejei that at least three Ashura Day detainees will be executed. Ejei also said four more pre-election prisoners had been sentenced to death. (Added to Thursday's executions, Doulatabadi and Ejei's numbers match up to the "eleven" death sentences announced by Iranian state media yesterday.)

1410 GMT: Man, 1) Ayatollah Jannati is in a really bad mood after being verbally slapped by Mehdi Karroubi; 2) the Government is scared of the forthcoming demonstrations on 22 Bahman (11 February); 3) both. The Los Angeles Times offers translated extracts from Jannati's Friday Prayers address (see 1155 GMT) in Tehran:

The prophet Muhammad signed non-aggression pacts with three Jewish tribes. The Jews failed to meet their commitments, and God ordered their massacre (by Imam Ali, the 3rd Imam Shia, despite his reputation for compassion)....When it comes to suppressing the enemy, divine compassion and leniency have no meaning.

The judiciary is tasked with dealing with the detained rioters. I know you well, judiciary officials! You came forward sincerely and accepted this responsibility. You are revolutionary and committed to the Supreme Leader. For God's sake, stand firm as you already did with your quick execution of these two convicts....

God ordered the prophet Muhammad to brutally slay hypocrites and ill-intentioned people who stuck to their convictions. Koran insistently orders such deaths. May God not forgive anyone showing leniency toward the corrupt on earth.

1230 GMT: An Ahmadinejad Official in Jail. Mohammad Jafar Behdad, head of internal media at the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, has been sentenced to 4 months in prison. Behdad, a former head of the Islamic Republic News Agency, was convicted of disregarding judiciary warnings against provocative publications. His newspaper Hemmat had been suspended for a feature on "Hashemi [Rafsanjani] and his band of brothers".

1220 GMT: Verbal Skirmishes. Retired Revolutionary Guard General Ali Asgari, a former minister in the Khatami Government, has declared that Hashemi Rafsanjani must remain by the side of the Supreme Leader and denounced Rafsanjani's verbal attacker, Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi, as a radical who defends a backward Islam.

On the regime side, Iran's police chief Esmail Ahmadi-Moghaddam has announced that "some of the elite are against the regime and with the enemy". At the same time, he appears to have held out a hand to Mir Hossein Mousavi, saying he "was deceived" by these wrong-doers.

1210 GMT: The "Real" Karroubi Interview. Fars News, whose distorted report on Mehdi Karroubi's views inadvertently moved Karroubi's challenge to the Ahmadinejad Government centre-stage, makes another clumsy intervention today.

Selecting extracts from Karroubi's interview with Britain's Financial Times and quoting them out of context, Fars declares that Karroubi has "100%" backed the Supreme Leader and denounced protesters.

Yeah, right.

1155 GMT: Your Tehran Friday Prayer Summary. Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the head of the Guardian Council, had the podium today. Given that Mehdi Karroubi knocked him about a bit yesterday, Jannati was probably not in the most conciliatory of moods as he said:

Weakness in the face of events such as the "irreverence" of demonstrations on Ashura will undermine the regime. Ayatollah [Sadegh] Larijani, be a man, get tough, bring in some protesters. (Hey, but it was pretty cool that you executed those two guys yesterday to please God.)

1140 GMT: A very slow day, both for sideshows and main events. During the lull, this comment from a reader to Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish, reacting to the Zamani/Rahmanipour executions, is striking:

You see the strategy is an obvious one: start with the people who are the weakest links, some obscure monarchist group and not directly related to the reformist/Mousavi's camp or the greens, that way it would make it harder politically for [Mir Hossein] Mousavi or [Mehdi] Karoubi to defend them. Then they will advance. This is, in their mind, also the best way to send a message about Feb 11th that if you are arrested on that day, you could be executed. The combination of desperation and cruelty.

0750 GMT: Remembering Montazeri. Video of the bazaar at Najafabad, the birthplace of Grand Ayatollah Montazeri, was empty on Thursday to mark the passing of the cleric in late December. Memorials for the "40th Day" of Montazeri's death were planned for both yesterday and today.)

0650 GMT: There are a number of obstacles to clear this morning before getting to the important developments. Foremost amongst these is last night's news that the US Senate, the upper house of the Congress, has approved tougher sanctions against Iran. The focus is on petroleum, denying loans and other assistance from American financial institutions to companies that export gasoline to Iran or help expand its oil-refining capacity. The penalties would extend to companies that build oil and gas pipelines in Iran and provide tankers to move Iran’s petroleum. The measure also prohibits the United States Government from buying goods from foreign companies that do business in Iran’s energy sector.

Even if sanctions are central to a resolution of Iran's political crisis, as opposed to their place in the manoeuvres over Iran's nuclear programme --- personally, I don't think they are --- there is a lot of bureaucratic road to cover before they are in place. The Senate has to agree its version of the bill with the House of Representatives. More importantly (and The New York Times story ignores this point), the Obama Administration so far has opposed the petroleum measures because they are unlikely to be effective. The White House and State Department prefer "targeted" sanctions, aimed especially at economic interests of bodies like the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.

Then there is the Washington sideshow of Very Important People battering each other in the guise of offering the Very Best US Policy on Iran. The Washington Post announces the boxing match between Richard Haass, formerly of the State Department and now head of the Council for Foreign Relations, and the Flynt/Hillary Leverett duo, formerly of State and the National Security Council. The punches are entirely predictable --- Haass, while proclaiming himself a "realist", has joined the chorus of US experts singing of "regime change", while the Leveretts are staunchly defending the legitimacy of the Iran Government --- and pretty much swatting air when it comes to the complexities of the Iranian situation. (But Haass was best man at the Leveretts' wedding, which turns a marginal story into a "quirky" one.)

So where are the significant stories? Well, there is yesterday's execution of two detainees, Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani and Arash Rahmanipour, who were jailed in April 2009 for endangering Iran's national security. In one sense, this is another sideshow. Obviously, neither Zamani and Rahmanipour were involved in post-election protest and the "monarchist" group to which they allegedly belonged is not significant in the Green movement.

However, the regime was far from subtle in linking the hangings of the two men to the demonstrations of Ashura (27 December), and that linkage --- inadvertently --- displays its fear of the forthcoming marches on 22 Bahman/11 February, the anniversary of the 1979 Revolution. What's more, by promising the executions of nine more detainees if everyone didn't just shut up and go away, the Government made a risky commitment. Either it goes ahead with the executions, making more martyrs for the protests, or it backs down.

And then there is The Week of Mehdi Karroubi, with the cleric launching another broadside against President Ahmadinejad and his allies yesterday. Some media continue to be led astray by confusion over Karroubi's loud and emerging strategy --- The New York Times, for example, mis-reads Karroubi's latest statement as "conciliatory remarks...shifting the blame for the violent postelection crackdown away from Ayatollah Khamenei".

They are not. Karroubi is both giving the Supreme Leader (or "Mr Khamenei", as he was labelled on Monday) a chance and setting him a test: do what you are supposed to do under our Constitution and Islamic Republic, Supreme Leader, and make your President accountable for injustices and abuses.

Enjoy all the sideshows, folks, but in this political circus, that's your centre-ring main event.

Iran Patriotism Special: Wiping the Green From The Flag

Yesterday we noted that the Iran flag had morphed from Red, White, and Green into Red, White, and Blue in a speech by President Ahmadinejad to officials:



I thought this might have been a production slip-up, with the Iranian flag melting away into the sky, but now a 2nd photo has emerged, from Ahmadinejad's introduction of the new head of the Islamic Republic News Agency:


Golnaz Esfandiari of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty has more on the story.

Iran Document: Karroubi Maintains the Pressure (28 January)

Yet another forthright declaration comes from Mehdi Karroubi in an interview with his website Saham News today, following his detailed statement to a British newspaper on Wednesday.

In case anyone is still unclear, Karroubi hammers home the message: Ahmadinejad is an illegitimate and irresponsible "President". And those who back him, not those who oppose him, have betrayed the Islamic Republic. (Supreme Leader, what say you?)

Translation from the Facebook page supporting Mir Hossein Mousavi, and passed on by The Flying Carpet Institute:

SAHAM: Mr. Karroubi, Recently there was news from you regarding the status of Ahmadinejad’s administration that was followed by different interpretations. The most important interpretation that bothered many people was the idea of your retreat from and overturning of your position after the election. Did your remark mean retreating and entering a new phase?

Iran Document/Analysis: Karroubi’s Statement on the Political Situation (27 January)
Latest Iran Video: When Karroubi Met Fars (25 January)
Iran & Karroubi: Why This is “Much Ado About Something”
The Latest from Iran (28 January): Trouble Brewing

KARROUBI: It is really strange for me that the experts misunderstood my clear and blunt remark. I ask the experts to pay attention to the introduction and conclusion of my remark.

I have emphasised my criticism over the problems with the election and its results which were the outcome of fraud and engineering OF the votes and continue to do so. However, Mr. Ahmadinejad is the head of the administration, whom despite all the protests has taken the power in the Executive Branch and thus must be accountable for his actions. Currently everyone, inside and outside [the country], in favour of him or in opposition, calls him the head of the establishment’s administration, meaning the one who controls the Executive Branch. Therefore, they demand [from him] that which s the responsibility of the head of the Executive Branch.


This is not something new and does not mean retreating from the previous position at all. This is just like other countries that, when someone takes the power, regardless of how, he/she is called with the relevant title. The protestors’ and my criticism about the legitimacy of this power is still intact, and I still believe that the people’s right to determine their fate was ignored in the 10th presidential election. If the election had been held correctly and the Guardian Council had really safeguarded the constitution, the outcome would have been different and the country and people would not have paid such cost. As I have said before, since this administration has not risen from the people’s vote, it cannot continue with its work.

SAHAM: You criticized the Guardian Council but Mr. Jannati [Ayatollah Jannati, head of the Guardian Council] in his latest remarks, has said that the Islamic Republic conducted one of the healthiest elections. He called the claim of fraud in election by people inside and outside the country ridiculous and stupid and said those people have sold themselves and have committed a betrayal that no one has done before. What is your opinion about these remarks that are a clear insult to this country’s nation and its senior figures?

KARROUBI: I read Mr. Jannati’s remarks too.

It is close to thirty years that Mr. Jannati [Editor: Note Karroubi, like the questioner, uses "Mr Jannati", diminishing Jannati's clerical status] has been in the Guardian Council and for many years he has been the General Secretary of this council and has had a decisive role there.

The talent of Mr. Jannati and his friends has been to turn the legal stature of this council to this pitiful situation. He considers the claims of fraud in election ridiculous and calls it betraying the country, but who is that does not know the one who betrayed this revolution, the martyr’s blood, Imam [Khomeini], and the dear people of Iran is he himself that has brought the country and the revolution to a point that even funerals are held with the presence of the riot police and plainclothes militia?

Pre-approving candidates in the elections and extensively disqualifying this country’s experts in various elections such as for the Assembly of Experts, the Parliament and the Presidential election, making up results as they please, and even changing results after the announcement of them are some of his talents. These betrayals are not only evident to him but also to the people.

Mr. Jannati, today the cry of Iranian people is the response to your betrayal of the people’s votes, the Constitution and Imam Khomeini’s and martyrs’ ideas by making the principle of the election meaningless and slaughtering the Republic.