UPDATED Death, Confusion, and Clerics in Iran: The Case of Mohammad Amin Valian

UPDATE 6 MARCH: Iranian Students News Agency has confirmed the "mohareb" death sentence handed down to Mohammad Amin Valian. Valian's attorney says the case has not yet gone to appeal.

The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran claims, from a source, that "[Valian's] family is under immense pressure to withhold interviews with the media and human rights organizations....Ministry of Information authorities have promised his family that if they don’t get the media involved, they would somehow secure a clemency for him from the Supreme Leader."

We still do not have confirmation of the "mohareb" (war against God) death sentence allegedly handed to Mohammad Amin Valian. What we do have, however, are some high-profile politics and religious moves which may point to deeper issues for the Islamic Republic. Mr Verde analyses:

Ayatollah Sane'i, in response to the question: “What are the criteria for identifying mohareb and what are the punishments for it?” has issued a fatwa (decree) on his site.

The Latest from Iran (4 March): A Death Penalty Mystery

The fatwa describes what is mohareb (which, from my reading, clearly does not include the actions of protesters, even on Ashura --- 27 December). More significantly, it says that in certain conditions when people are protesting for their rights, their defence of those rights is not only permitted, but is obligatory. [Sane'i uses the word “vajeb”, which is a strong word when it is used in fatwas --- for example, "vajeb" is used in relations to namaz (daily prayers), roozeh (fasting in Ramadan), and Hajj (the once in the lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca).]


In addition to Sane'i's fatwas, there are rumors that Ayatollah Mostafa Mohaghegh-Damad is lobbying the Qom Grand Ayatollahs to give fatwas to stop the execution of Valian. As EA has reported, Grand Ayatollah Makarem-Shirazi has denied that he ever issued a fatwa calling for the execution of protesters, even those who demonstrated on Ashura.

(A side note: both the Sane'i fatwa and Makarem-Shirazi denial were issued on the eve of the Prophet’s birthday. That may also be an indication of how important they think the issue is.)

We know that the Sane'i fatwa and Marakem-Shirazi's denial of fatwa are authentic: they are published on their own websites.  We are not sure of the authenticity of the Mohaghegh-Damad move. However, I am thinking that it might be true. The reason: his name has always been mentioned in an alleged protest to Sadegh Larijani, the head of Iran's judiciary, about the two executions in January.

Usually the clergy do not talk much about their behind-the-scene moves (they don’t like to publicize what they do). But if an untruth is told about what they are saying or doing, they usually issue a very strong denial. as Makarem-Shirazi has now done. Makarem has left no doubt that he not only does not want people executed, but he also wants them released).

If all of the above is true, we may be witnessing a new front (or better put, a new crack) appearing within the regime:

Sane'i supports the reformist camp. His fatwas are usually a slap down for Ayatollah Khamenei, who has --- far from incidentally --- lesser religious credentials.

Neither Mohaghegh-Damad or Makarem-Shirazi are reformists, however. They are conservative clerics who have good religious credentials. So we might be witnessing the conservative clerics trying to distance themselves from the actions of the regime and also from the Supreme Leader.

If this process continues, either the regime (and more significantly, Khamenei) will have to give in, or the regime will have to rely even more on the military and less on its religious legitimacy. (Its public legimimtacy no longer exists.)
These moves would be the first time that the reformists and conservative clerics have allied publicly.  It may also give more meaning and significance to Hashemi Rafsanjani’s speech on Wednesday.

This cannot be good for Khamenei.