The Latest from Iran (12 May): Defending the Indefencible?

2100 GMT: The Executions (Arresting the Students Special). RAHANA reports, "At least 15 female and male students have been arrested since Tuesday May 11, in Marivan [in Kurdistan], and taken to unknown locations. The arrests follow two days of rallies at Payam Nour University in Marivan as well as widespread calls for a province-wide strike on May 13 over the execution of 5 political prisoners."

2050 GMT: The Executions. The Iranian Independent Workers Union has issued a statement on the hanging of teacher Farzad Kamangar: "Execution of Farzad and other political prisoners will only add hatred and disgust of workers, teachers, and all Iranian’s towards the current situation more than ever. Freedom seeking shouts of Farzad will turn into screams of million teachers, workers and students to achieve a society free of death penalty."

And the Tehran Bus Workers Union declares, "We are mourning a teacher whose equipment was chalks and pens, one who taught kids, many of whom put their heads hungry on their pillows at night. His crime was standing for human rights."

NEW Iran Update: The Aftermath of the Executions
NEW Iran Document: Maziar Bahari’s Response to His 13-Year (and 74-Lash) Sentence
NEW Iran Special: A Renewal of Protest for 12 June?
The Latest from Iran (11 May): Opposition Surfaces

2040 GMT: Economy Watch. With the Ahmadinejad subsidy cuts imminent, a sign of things to come? Khabar Online reports:

During the last days, some gas stations in Tehran have installed notices saying they lack unsubsidized gasoline. The announcements have caused the bewilderment of customers who can not meet their demands by rationed gasoline.

As the gas stations avoid selling unsubsidized gasoline, the head of Iran's Association of Gas Station Owners declares that the problem is due to the shortage of "special unsubsidized gasoline cards".

Khabar adds the pointed fact, "Lacking sufficient oil refineries, Iran imports 40 percent of its gasoline for local consumption."



2030 GMT: More on the Karroubi Statement (1515 GMT). In his meeting with the family of the imprisoned journalist Ali Malihi, Mehdi Karroubi focused on the Government's loss of legitimacy because of transgressions and abuses: “They have not yet resolved the cases of Kahrizak Prison and the sexual abuses; the ambiguities surrounding that case still exist and they are increasing." Karroubi continued:

Lack of trust it at its lowest point ever, and the regime’s behaviour is such that an unprecedented crack has emerged between the people and the state. I swear to God we never thought country’s fate would turn out to be this way ... The people are moving in one direction and the state in another

1840 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Arsalan Abadi, an engineering student at Qazvin International University, has been sentenced to 9 1/2 years in prison.

1830 GMT: Mousavi's Latest. Mir Hossein Mousavi, speaking with Rah-e-Sabz, has emphasised that the Green Movement is a peace movement", supporting the Iranian people's demands for fulfillment of the Constitution.

Mousavi criticised the lack of independence in Iran's judiciary, said that reform depends on a free media, and noted the torture of and forced confessions from detainees.

1740 GMT: The Executions. A reader points us to Fars News' article with further details of the "case of the five terrorists", found guilty of bombing of centres of government and the people of Iranian cities.

1515 GMT: Is Human Life This Cheap? Mehdi Karroubi, visiting the family of a detained journalist, has asked, "Is human life so cheap that one can take it so easily, without the slightest legal consideration and hidden from the public?" He continued, ""When human life becomes so cheap that they [the authorities] open fire on people on the street only because of some civil protest, then such behaviour is not so much out of the norm."

Asked about a statement by Gholam-Hossein Elham, a member of the Guardian Council, that Mir Hossein Mousavi is pursuing "mohareb" (war against God), Karroubi replied: "We should cry for Islam that Elham and his disciples have become its spokesmen. "

1320 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Faezeh Hashemi, the daughter of former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, has declared that those who have to be purified are "those who stand against the law, people and religion, not me".

1315 GMT: Executions. Muhammad Sahimi has a long article in Tehran Bureau, "Capital Punishment, Capital Fear", pulling together the strands of information on Sunday's executions and their aftermath.

1300 GMT: Diversion. Amidst the internal tension and developments, today's Presidential distraction....

"You should know that your resolutions are not worth a penny," Ahmadinejad said in a message to the big powers.

"If you think that by making fuss and propaganda you can force us to withdraw, you are wrong. The Iranian nation will not withdraw even one inch from its stance," he said in a speech to a crowd in southwestern Iran.

1230 GMT: The Family of the Executed. Fereshteh Ghazi updates on alleged regime harassment of the family of Shirin Alamhouli, executed on Sunday (see 1130 GMT). Alamhouli's sister and mother are reportedly out on bail, but Ghazi says her grandfather, uncle, and cousin have now been arrested and are held in the Ministry of Intelligence. The family's phone has been disconnected since yesterday., the house is surrounded, and a curfew is in place.

1215 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Fereshteh Ghazi has a full account of Sunday's trial of Mohammad Davari, the imprisoned editor of Mehdi Karroubi's Saham News, with Davari's statement, “They want to sacrifice someone over the issue of raping detainees, and didn’t find anyone better than me.”

Davari was arrested on 26 September when the headquarters of Karroubi's Etemade Melli party were raided, less than two months after Karroubi publicly raised allegations of abuse and rape of post-election detainees. The Official charges against Davari include “disseminating propaganda against the regime" and "conspiracy to disrupt national security and public order".

Davari's lawyer, Mina Jafari said that her client, who is reportedly in poor health, is under pressure to confess against Mehdi Karroubi but has refused to do so.

According to Jafari, Davari said at his trial on Sunday, "In the past 8 months in prison, I judged my own actions more than you judged them, and I concluded that I didn’t do anything to discredit the regime. In fact, all of my actions added to the regime’s credibility.” The lawyer asked Karroubi to intervene to seek Davari's freedom.

1130 GMT: The Executions. Nazila Fathi of The New York Times follows up this morning on her reporting of Sunday's executions of five Iranians.

The centrepiece is an interview with Khalil Bahramian, lawyer for the three of the five slain prisoners. Bahramian said that authorities are refusing to release the bodies and asserted, in line with reports from the family, that the sister and mother of the executed Shirin Alamhouli, were arrested at their home in northwestern Iran. (They were later reportedly released on bail.) He also said the family was not aware of the execution until Monday afternoon.

Bahramian noted, “They [the authorities] even turned down my request to allow the families to be present while they are burying them [the executed].”

Fathi also draws from Rah-e-Sabz to report that Abdoljabar Karami, member of Parliament for Sanandaj, the capital of Iranian Kurdistan, was threatened by the provincial governor when he tried to stop the executions and was unable to secure the release of the bodies.

1025 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Peyke Iran claims that Hossein Rassayian, physics professor at Qazvin International University and a Mir Hossein Mousavi supporter, has been arrested.

1020 GMT: The Executions. Human Rights Activists News Agency claims that authorities are trying to arrest members of the family of Farzad Kamangar, one of the 5 Iranians put to death on Sunday.

1010 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz offers a round-up amidst summons of bailed protesters to return to the courts. Zahra Jabbari has been acquitted of "mohareb" (war against God), but human rights activist Abolfazl Abedini has been sentenced to 11 years in prison. Emaduddin Baghi, Badressadat Mofidi, and other journalists are seriously ill and need medication.

Baghi's lawyer, Hassan Ali Abutalebi has contrasted the treatment of his client with that of Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmardari, acquitted of all charges of libel earlier this week.

0945 GMT: President Be Gone? Ezzatollah Sahabi, former minister and member of Parliament, editor of the banned journal Iran-e Farda, and leader of Iran’s Nationalist-Religious political alliance, makes the declaration --- published in both Rah-e-Sabz and Khabar Online --- that the dismissal of President Ahmadinejad is necessary to preserve Iran and the Islamic Republic.

Reformist member of Parliament Darius Ghanbari has said that the prolongation of Ahmadinejad's presidency "is a joke" and the characteristic of his government is that "it doesn't tolerate critique".

0825 GMT: Dealing with Detainees. Writing in The National, Michael Theodoulou draws from our analysis to assess that the three detained US hikers, and the Iranian decision to allow their mothers to see them, are linked to Tehran's manoeuvres with the US over Iran's nuclear programme: "Hikers Seen as Bargaining Chips".

0815 GMT: On the International Front. Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani has returned from Turkey and the meeting of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference with the declaration that a Qods Committee on Palestine will be established and assertion of agood relationship with Turkey, but with not a word on uranium enrichment.

Following a pattern, President Ahmadinejad has used a speech to look away from internal matters, asking, "Who is Israel to stand against us?" and declaring, "No one will attack us, there is nobody."

0530 GMT: Responding to the Defence of the Indefencible. I had not posted my response to the latest column of Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett, using an attack on Nazila Fathi of The New York Times to maintain "official justifications" of Sunday's executions, as I did not wish to offer any oxygen for their views. Instead I had commented in a personal capacity on other websites and in discussion with members of Gulf 2000.

I have asked by readers, however, to post my response:

In the spirit of the intellectual honesty that the Leveretts claim, I note that they --- in the guise of an attack on Nazila Fathi's journalistic honesty --- have defended the "official justifications" of Iranian state media over Sunday's execution of 5 Iranians, denying any substantiated claims of the deprivation of human rights.

I therefore offer extracts of and links to only a few of many pieces of evidence for consideration:

"Khalil Bahramian, Kamangar’s lawyer, said: 'Nothing in Kamangar’s judicial files and records demonstrates any links to the charges brought against him.'

Bahramian, who was present during the closed-door court hearing, described it as 'lasting no more than five minutes, with the Judge issuing his sentence without any explanation and then promptly leaving the room'. He added, I have seen absolutely zero evidence presented against Kamangar. In my forty years of legal profession, I have never witnessed such a prosecution.'"

2. "Khalil Bahramian, Kamangar’s attorney, in an interview before knowing about the execution said: 'Mr. Kamangar and his interrogator told me that there are changes in the case and under review by the prosecutor and execution is out of the question. I inquired more than ten times and they told me the case is under review. But the intelligence officer had told Farzad that execution had been revoked.' Later being notified of the execution after the fact, Bahramian said in an interview: 'The rules call for notification of the lawyers on carrying out the death penalty. In case of two of my clients, Farzad Kamangar and Mehdi Eslamian, I was not notified at all.'"

3. "Mehdi Islamian's brother was executed last year, convicted of cooperation with the Monarchist Group. Mehdi was convicted of giving financial aid to his brother before his arrest."

4. The last letter of Farzad Kamangar before his execution

5. The last letter of Shirin Alamhouli before her execution

In the spirit of intellectual honesty, and more importantly in the spirit of respect for human rights, I ask the Leveretts to set aside their diversionary attack on Nazila Fathi and to provide evidence, beyond the official account of Fars News and the Islamic Republic News Agency, that due process was followed from arrest to execution in the case of these five Iranians.

(The Leveretts have subsequently replied on Gulf 2000 --- the first time they have ever engaged with my comments --- without providing any evidence on the case, and I have responded.)

0425 GMT: Culture Corner. Golnaz Esfandiari of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports on "Banned Music Banned":

Rasul Abbasi, the director-general for transportation and traffic coordination of Iran's municipalities, has told the Borna news agency that taxi drivers are not allowed to play banned music in their taxis.

Abbasi said that if they did so, they would be dealt with according to the law, which could lead to the cancellation of their taxi permit and confiscation of their cars.

The Iranian official added that the law in this regard has not been implemented for the past few years. He called on the managers of organizations supervising taxis in Iran to oversee the performance of their drivers.

Moshtaq, a taxi driver in Tehran, commented on the announcement:

It is one of the most important human rights for one to be able to choose what he listens to and no one has the authority to determine that. What would one want to listen to in his free time, for instance, whether banned or not. Who is the one to actually decide what should be banned and what should not? On what basis is this determined?

0420 GMT: While looking for further signs of the political fallout from Sunday's executions of five Iranians, we post an update on the latest developments.

Afghanistan: Revealing the US "Black Site" Prison at Bagram (Fisher)

Max Fisher writes for The Atlantic:

In November, The New York Times and The Washington Post reported the existence of a secret "black site" prison at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan. The site, unconfirmed by the military and separate from the main prison at Bagram, was reported based on interviews with human-rights workers and people who claimed to be former detainees.

Afghanistan Analysis: Is the “Kandahar Offensive” Crumbling? (Porter)

Now the BBC reports that the International Committee of the Red Cross has confirmed the site's existence with the military. The US official in charge of Afghanistan detention, Vice Admiral Robert Harward has denied that the prison, reportedly called the Tor Jail after the Urdu word for "black," exists. What do we know?

• Tor Jail Conditions BBC's Hilary Andersson reports, "In recent weeks the BBC has logged the testimonies of nine prisoners who say they had been held in the so-called 'Tor Jail'. They told consistent stories of being held in isolation in cold cells where a light is on all day and night. The men said they had been deprived of sleep by US military personnel there." The cells are filled with a constant noise and guards regularly wake prisoners to prevent them from sleeping.

• Tor Jail Detainee Speaks: Andersson records an account from one detainee. "Mirwais was watering his plants one night when American soldiers came to get him. He is still missing half a row of teeth from the beating he says he got that night and he says he cannot hear properly in one ear. US troops accused him of making bombs and giving the Taliban money."

• The Sketchy Timeline: The Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman explores, "Months ago, I asked Vice Adm. Robert Harward, the chief U.S. military officer responsible for detentions operations in Afghanistan if all detainees had access to the Red Cross, and he answered, 'All detainees under my command have access to the International [Committee of the] Red Cross.' According to the ICRC, that's been the case since August 2009 (which precedes Harward’s November arrival in Afghanistan). But how long was Tor open before detainees had ICRC access?"

• Karzai Already Emphasizing Bagram: Foreign Policy's Josh Rogin notes the timing: Afghan President Hamid Karzai is in Washington to meet with Obama. "One request that Karzai and friends brought to town is that the Obama team confirm and then speed up their promise to hand over control of the Bagram prison to the Afghan government. Bagram, sometimes called 'Obama's Guantanamo' because of the secretive procedures use to detain and interrogate prisoners there, held 645 prisoners captured on the battlefield as of September 2009."

• Obama Has 'Institutionalized' Worst Bush Practices: FireDogLake's Jeff Kaye explains:

The President began his administration with a big series of presidential orders that supposedly ended the Bush administration’s policy of torturing prisoners, and shut down the CIA’s black site prisons. But as we know now, not all the black site prisons were shut down. Nor was the torture ended. Whether it’s beatings and forced-feedings at Guantanamo, or the kinds of torture described at Bagram, it’s obvious that torture has not been rooted out of U.S. military-intelligence operations. In fact, by way of the Obama administration’s recent approval of the Bush-era Army Field Manual on interrogations, with its infamous Appendix M, which allows for much of the kind of torture practiced at Bagram, the White House has institutionalized a level of torture that was introduced by the previous administration.

Matlin's America: Is the US Constitution Fit for Purpose?

In a 40-year professional lifetime of reading countless statutes, regulations, and legal documents, there were only two occasions when I realised instantly that I had read something exceptional.

One of these occurred over The Partnership Act of 1890, a 12-page document I was required to understand to pass one of my many lawyers’ exams, a document written in language as succinct as humanly possible. The other document was the American Constitution, which I read when I was at school. I was instantly impressed by its clarity of language, a reaction I remember all these years later. I recall its approach to the structure of government, the certainty of separation of powers, and the potential tensions between the three branches of federal government, although I didn’t think in exactly those terms. For me, the document was a work of art.

I am envious of Americans with their Constitution. We Brits, too, have a written constitution but it is not codified into one document. We have common law, statute, and legal precedent. We also have a Bill of Rights, passed in 1688 following the bloodless Glorious Revolution, when “the Crown in Parliament” became the supreme power. Our Bill of Rights, however is not a document anywhere near as influential as the American version.


Until 2009, we Brits did not have branches of government whose powers were clearly separate and enforceable as such. Our executive branch, namely the Prime Minister and his or her Cabinet, were also legislators, so no separation of powers there. The Law Lords, our equivalent of the Supreme Court, were not excluded from the House of Lords, acting as a legislative body, until last year. The strong government whipping powers in the House of Commons makes certain that the demands of the executive will always be met by legislators.

In contrast, Americans do not have to put up with attempts by the executive to circumnavigate separation of powers or force through legislation. I know of only one exception to US separation powers, namely when the Vice-President, sitting as chairman of the US Senate, casts a deciding vote in the event of a tie.

However, as an interested observer, I cannot regard the Constitution as perfect. It has surprising omissions. For example, there is no declaration of “one person, one vote”, which is one of the bedrocks of democracy. Perhaps this is an indication that the framers were not too impressed by the educational standards of the poorer of their fellow citizens.

Also, the Constitution makes no provision whatsoever for the regulation of city or town government. True, the largest American city in the 1780s was Boston, with a population of some 8,000 persons, thus there was no apparent urgency to legislate for smaller communities. However, the framers were aware that by 1789, Europe boasted large city populations, like Paris (750,000) and London (700,000), and it was easily foreseeable that the American urban population would rapidly increase. Indeed, Jefferson warned it would happen.

Apparently, the founders had more than enough to cope with between 1789 and 1792, deciding upon the rules for a federal government and getting the Constitution ratified by the states. City government would be a matter for local citizens and the states.

I like the immediacy of conflict, built into the Constitution, between the executive and legislature. A President’s legislative programme has to be championed into Congress. Positions on the legislation are taken rapidly, and a President can quickly gauge the difficulties he may have to face to get passage of his programme. Each body alson has advantages and disadvantages, not specified in the Constitution. For example, the Senate’s power of filibuster, which is a Congressional rule and not a constitutional power, can be removed or altered, as it was during Truman’s presidency, if Congress so decides. Within the executive, a President has what Teddy Roosevelt called “the bully pulpit”, namely the power to persuade through all kinds of media outlets who need to report daily on Presidential activities.

To counter the speed of conflict between the executive and legislative branches, the Supreme Court’s role is often decidedly slow. It took two years before Roosevelt’s New Deal programme was torn apart by the Court.

Still, the Supreme Court is an extraordinary device and is rightly held in high esteem. Undoubtedly, it is a political body but most of the time, it seeks to transcend partisan politics. On occasion it fails, for example when the 2000 Presidential election was handed to George W. Bush by the Court. However, even in this case, the Court was careful to state that its judgement was “not to be taken as a precedent”.

Where I struggle with the American Constitution is on interpretations made by the Court. Let us consider the First Amendment and the ruling of the Supreme Court that “speech” and “money” cannot be separated in the political sphere. It seems that the law permits a citizen to say anything he likes and to spend his money wherever and on whatsoever he chooses.

Recently, the Supremes extended the First Amendment ruling to corporate bodies. The court failed to impose a conservative or strict construction test upon what is constitutional. Furthermore, this ruling is difficult to reconcile with the ideals of Founding Fathers who sought to escape the privilege and abuse of wealth of their British masters. In 1792, would the framers have approved of a rival Presidential candidate, who could spend his way to power, to George Washington?

Not long ago, John McCain, together with Russ Feingold, sponsored a fair and reasonable statute on campaign finance. That statute is now in tatters, mainly as a result of Supreme Court rulings. Is this what Congress intended to happen? There seems to be something corrosive and corruptive in a political system that allows money, not ideas, to be the dominant factor in an election.

I am also deeply troubled by the interpretations of the Second Amendment over the "right to bear arms". I know I am treading on hallowed ground and expect many brickbats. Did the framers really intend citizens to have the right to own semi-automatic weapons? By extension, what is there to prevent a citizen from parking a Centurion Tank in his front yard?

My argument is based on legal reason. The Second Amendment provides as follows: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

The opening clause of the Amendment is what we lawyers call a condition precedent, in other words something which must occur or be in existence before the rest of a provision can apply. The words are plain. “Militia” in late eighteenth century-speak meant a legally constituted armed force. If a person was a member of such a force, he might keep and use a weapon as part of his duties. How can this Amendment be interpreted to allow Americans in many states to go to a gun show and buy and lawfully keep a weapon?

Now, I am happy to go toe to toe with any National Rifle Association member and argue principles such as “guns don’t kill, people do”. But this is not my point. I am looking at the amendment purely on legal interpretation. I do not believe that the framers had any intention whatsoever of permitting the entire American adult population to have the right to own guns. Had there been such an intention, the opening words of the Amendment would have been omitted because they would have been superfluous.

For certain, there is nothing in the Federalist Papers, the extensive discussion between James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay on the formation of the American Republic, which shows an intention to arm citizens as a matter of course or right. “Why would it?” I hear people ask. “Those discussions did not cover individual rights.” True but they covered every aspect of federal government for those times.

There are numerous examples of other decisions which cause concern, for example the Plessy v Ferguson decision enshrining "separate but equal", which contradicted not only the 14th Amendment but also the Civil Rights Act of 1875. There are the recent rulings on the Eighth Amendment over "cruel and unusual punishment". However, I know there have been innumerable brilliant decisions by the Court, dating back to Madison v Marbury in 1803.

Let me make it as clear as I can. I have no issues with a nation whose laws stem from a document that is almost 225 years old and has, by and large, stood the test of time. It is common ground that if the executive and legislative branches of the federal government cannot get the job done, it is almost always because of ideology, partisan politics, and personal problems between individuals, not the framework provided by the Constitution.

In 1937, Congress held the composition of The Supreme Court sacrosanct, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted his Court Packing Plan. However, is the Court still held in high esteem today for the right reasons? I am bound to question a judiciary which seems to flout the wishes of the majority of both those elected and those who elected them, for the same ideological and partisan political reasons as members of Congress. If my argument has merit, perhaps it is the workings and processes of the Court that need to be re-examined, not the document which is supposed to be both its justification and its cause of concern.

Iran Update: The Aftermath of the Executions

0345 GMT: Three days after their executions, the names of Farzad Kamangar, Ali Heydarian, Farhad Vakili, Shirin Alamhouli, and Mehdi Eslamian continue to resonate in discussion of Iran. As of last night, the families were still waiting for the release of the bodies, with claims that they were being pressured to sign an oath that there would be no protests accompanying the funerals. There was also a report that the sister and mother of Shirin Alamhouli were arrested and later released on bail.

Iran Labor Report carried a statement from the lawyer for Kamangar, Alamhouli, and Eslamian:

Khalil Bahramian, in an interview before knowing about the execution said: "Mr. Kamangar and his interrogator told me that there are changes in the case and under review by the prosecutor and execution is out of the question. I inquired more than ten times and they told me the case is under review. But the intelligence officer had told Farzad that execution had been revoked."

Notified of the execution after the fact, Bahramian said in an interview: "The rules call for notification of the lawyers on carrying out the death penalty. In the cases of two of my clients, Farzad Kamangar and Mehdi Eslamian, I was not notified at all."

Bahramian also spoke with a TV interviewer about the events.

The political fallout continues. Amnesty International issued a statement on Tuesday:

We condemn these executions which were carried out without any prior warning. Despite the serious accusations against them, the five were denied fair trials. Three of the defendants were tortured and two forced to 'confess' under duress. They were then executed in violation of Iranian law, which requires the authorities to notify prisoners' lawyers.in advance before carrying out executions.

Human Rights Watch summarises developments and comments:

These hangings of four Kurdish prisoners are the latest example of the government’s unfair use of the death penalty against ethnic minority dissidents. The judiciary routinely accuses Kurdish dissidents, including civil society activists, of belonging to armed separatist groups and sentences them to death in an effort to crush dissent.

Meanwhile, defenders of the Iranian Government outside the country, in the guise of an attack on the coverage of The New York Times, have tried to sustain Iranian state media's account that those executed were guilty of bombings and membership of terrorist organisations.

The Latest from Iran (11 May): Opposition Surfaces

2220 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. A Tehran appeals court has upheld the guilty verdict against Hamzeh Karami, manager of the Jomhouriyat website. Karami will serve one year in prison for propaganda against the system and 10 years in prison and permanent dismissal from government services for embezzlement.

Karami was acquitted of collaboration and collusion with to disrupt national security, which would have added five years to his jail term.

NEW Iran Document: Maziar Bahari’s Response to His 13-Year (and 74-Lash) Sentence
NEW Iran Special: A Renewal of Protest for 12 June?
UPDATED Iran Video: Protest Against Ahmadinejad at Shahid Beheshti University (10 May)
Iran Background Video: Protest in Kurdistan Over Political Prisoners
Latest from Iran (10 May): Will the Executions Matter?

1905 GMT: Behave Yourselves! Minister of Interior Mostafa Mohammad Najjar has said police will deal firmly with those who violate socially accepted standards, including disregard for the Islamic dress code: “As the president has ordered and the people have demanded, police will take firm action against those who break the norms."


1555 GMT: Getting over the MediaFails. I was considering an entry about a series of media trainwrecks in Iran coverage --- Bronze Medal to CNN's Rick Sanchez, as the broadcaster decided to notice opposition because of yesterday's 8-minute video from the Shahid Beheshti University protest, for his statement that "five demonstrators died" on Sunday; Silver Medal to Reuters for simply dressing up the Islamic Republic News Agency press release on Sunday's executions; Gold Medal to The Huffington Post for skipping Iran coverage in favour of a food-fight between Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett and their critics.

But why spend the time and energy on failures? Instead, we have posted the response of journalist Maziar Bahari to his 13-year, 74-lash sentence by an Iranian court.

1515 GMT: The Executions. Zahra Rahnavard has issued a statement denouncing Sunday's hangings as a demonstration of the "extreme provocative and violent rule of the regime".

1345 GMT: Promise of the Day. First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi, accused of corruption by leading members of Parliament, has reportedly said in a government meeting: "If one of these frauds is confirmed, I'll cut off my hand."

1335 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Is former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, in the run-up to 12 June, coming off the political fence? Speaking to reformist youth, Rafsanjani reporting said that the imprisonment of “concerned critics” of the government will enhance people’s awareness of the situation and stressed that “silence” in the face of political issues is unacceptable.

Rafsanjani, according to Mir Hossein Mousavi's website Kalemeh, said that arrests have made a significant number of people “more persistent” and added, “Do not lose heart!.....When you enter political activism, you should not think that the equations are simple and the matters will be resolved with a few demonstrations.”

1332 GMT: The Executions. Human Rights Activists News Agency has posted a report with pictures and video of a demonstration in Washington DC against the hanging of 5 Iranians on Sunday. The National Iranian American Council has issued a statement condemning the executions.

Pictures have also emerged of a protest in Iraq's Sulaimaniya.


1330 GMT: Sniping at Ahmadinejad. In another show of defiance, the Iranian Parliament has pronounced that 11 rules of implementation of the Ahmadinejad Government, covering areas such as money laundering and budget reform, are illegal.

1320 GMT: Khamenei's Man Attacks. The Supreme Leader's vice-deputy to the Revolutionary Guard, Hojetoleslam Muhammad Bagher-Zolghadr, has declared that Grand Ayatollah Sane'i, a hate figure for many in the regime, wanted to become Ayatollah Khomeini's successor and that former President Hashemi Rafsanjani is seeking "to be a pillar of Revolution".

1315 GMT: Video Game Corner. Rah-e-Sabz, citing the Islamic Republic News Agency, claims that a new computer game, "Fighting Sedition", has been released. It is supposedly based on a fighter aircraft attacking targets that look like opposition figures Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mohammad Khatami.

1154 GMT: Economy Watch. The government has announced that implementation of the Ahmadinejad subsidy cuts will begin on 21 May.

1150 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Medical student Maryam Abbasinejad, arrested on 2 May, has been released. It is unknown whether the decision by the authorities is linked to a letter from 60 professors from the Tehran University of Medical Sciences to the university’s president, calling for the freeing of Abbasinejad.

1040 GMT: An EA correspondent, drawing on information from inside Iran, reports that it was not only Shahid Beheshti University students who came out to demonstrate against President Ahmadinejad. The university's lecturers were also present in significant numbers.

0855 GMT: The US Hikers. International media are buzzing about the announcement by Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki that Iran will give visas to the mothers of three US citizens arrested along the Iraqi border last July to visit their children in a Tehran prison.

It is just our speculation, but there may be a connection to Iran's apparent efforts to get a deal, possibly brokered by Turkey and Brazil, on uranium enrichment. There is likely to be more on this later today or tomorrow....

0825 GMT: Panic Stations. Here's the first paragraph ofthis morning's story from The Times of London: "Iran is focused on improving a growing arsenal of ballistic missiles but needs at least four more years to be able to target London and more than a decade to threaten the East Coast of the United States, a leading think-tank [the International Institute for Strategic Studies] said yesterday."

However, that measured conclusion is not nearly dramatic enough for The Times' editors. Their headline? "UK could be target for Tehran missiles ‘in four years’".

0800 GMT: The Oil Squeeze. Reuters reports, from the Iranian newspaper Siyaset-e-Rouz, the statement of Minister of Oil Masoud Mirzakemi that Iran needs $25 billion of investment to develop its oil and gas industry.

0715 GMT: Government Gets Tough on Itself! Khabar Online reports that the Government is to fine officials 1000 Toman (just over $1) for each minute they are late to meetings.

0710 GMT: The Economic Battle. After his venture to New York, President Ahmadinejad finally returned to domestic contests yesterday, declaring over his subsidy cut plan, "I stand to the end for justice and will not be fooled by anyone."
<
0700 GMT: The Executions. Political prisoners in the Gohardasht facility have published a letter of solidarity with those executed on Sunday.

0635  GMT: More Hangings? In the aftermath of Sunday's hanging, The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran warns that at least sixteen Kurdish detainees and eleven post-election protestors are in danger of unannounced, sudden executions.

0625 GMT: Considering the context of the executions and yesterday's response, an EA reader sends us a discussion in Sweden including Hassan Shariatmadari and Farrokh Negahdar on "Perspectives of the Green Movement".

0620 GMT: Silencing the Families of the Executed. Fereshteh Ghazi reports that the Iranian authorities are refusing to release the bodies of the five Iranians put to death on Sunday to their families, who are waiting in front of Evin Prison. Ghazi claims that the families are being told they must sign an oath that there will be no protests in their towns.

0615 GMT: Ghazi on Ahmadinejad and Journalists. We notice video of a speech by Fereshteh Ghazi, one of the foremost chroniclers and analysts of Iran, at George Washington University. In the extract, she considers the Government's attempt to "frame" political discussion with its repression of journalists.


Fereshteh Ghazi (@iranbaan) from Mehran Divanbaigyzand on Vimeo.

0610 GMT: We begin this morning with a special analysis, "The Renewal of Protest Before 12 June?", considering the catalyst of Sunday's executions of five Iranians, the anti-Ahmadinejad demonstration at Shahid Beheshti University, and the wider political context.