Head of Judiciary: Media Pressure Regarding Political Prisoners' Hunger Strike is a Crime

The head of Iran's judiciary described the dissemination of information regarding issues such as the hunger strike of political prisoners as 'media manipulation' and 'a crime,' urging officials of the judiciary to pay 'no attention' to it. According to the IRIB news agency, Sadegh Larijani stated on Tuesday, January 16, that the 'media manipulations' regarding the judiciary, including the 'highlighting' of the hunger strikes, have a criminal description and do not affect the judiciary's fair handling of cases. Larijani claimed that 'powerful individuals and foreign countries are trying to create obstacles in the path of judicial proceedings or the execution of rulings through media, organizations, and institutions.' He labeled what he called 'improper media interference' in judicial cases, including 'the negative roles of some media,' and added that 'if this media manipulation disrupts judicial proceedings, it is a crime.' The head of the judiciary urged his staff to 'pay no attention to media manipulations.' He emphasized that 'widespread and extensive pressure' regarding the hunger strike of prisoners or 'similar cases' would have an impact on the handling of these cases. On January 5, the hashtag calling for the release of Ali Shariati (#sosAli) trended globally on Twitter. Prior to that, a hashtag related to the hunger strike of Arash Sadeghi had also trended globally, and eventually, Mr. Sadeghi's wife was granted leave, leading him to end his hunger strike. Several members of parliament expressed concern over the situation of these political prisoners on Twitter, with Elias Hazrati, a representative from Tehran, writing to the head of the judiciary to request that if any rights of these prisoners had been 'violated,' they should be 'restored.' In contrast, Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi, the Tehran prosecutor, criticized the representatives' 'support' for these prisoners on January 4, accusing them of 'weakening' the judiciary. Saeed Shirzad and Ali Shariati have ended their hunger strikes, but there have been no reports regarding the continuation or end of the hunger strikes of Nizar Zaka, a Lebanese citizen imprisoned in Iran, Mohammad Reza Nokonam, and Mehdi Kouhian. In his remarks on Tuesday, the head of the judiciary thanked the Supreme Leader's statement that 'everyone should appreciate a decisive and brave judiciary,' calling it 'encouraging.' He assured that the judiciary 'will act in this same direction' and that the officials of this branch and judges 'are in no way inclined to compromise or act passively.' Following the conflict between government and judiciary officials, the Supreme Leader stated on January 9 that he would not comment on the dispute between the heads of the executive and judiciary branches, while also saying that 'the existence of an independent and courageous judiciary should be appreciated by all.' Previously, officials from both the judiciary and government had made accusations against each other. On January 3, the head of the judiciary accused the Foreign Ministry, Central Bank, and Ministry of Oil of failing to take necessary actions to recover Babak Zanjani's assets abroad, while mentioning allegations of Zanjani's assistance to Hassan Rouhani's campaign in the 2013 elections. These remarks by Sadegh Larijani were a response to comments made by Hassan Rouhani on January 1, where he stated that he had requested the judiciary to hand over Zanjani's case to the Ministry of Intelligence, but this request was not fulfilled. He also noted that people's questions regarding this case remain unanswered. Following Sadegh Larijani's statements, Hassan Rouhani's Twitter account called for transparency regarding the judiciary's accounts, while Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei, the spokesperson and first deputy of the judiciary, called for the disclosure of the expenses of Rouhani's campaign in 2013. The Foreign, Intelligence, and Oil Ministries, as well as the Central Bank, issued statements denying the accusations made by the head of the judiciary, asserting that they had properly carried out the actions requested of them in this case and that the judiciary had previously commended them.