Also available in Persian — نسخه فارسی EN فا
❓ Unknown

Motahari: Not Every Protest Against the Judiciary Constitutes a Crime

Feb 1, 2026 February 1, 2026 3 min read 📰 Radio Farda
📋 Key Takeaway

Ali Motahari has criticized judicial officials for labeling protests against court rulings as crimes, emphasizing the normalcy of expressing dissatisfaction with judicial decisions. This matter involves the Rafsanjani family and Mehdi Hashemi, highlighting ongoing tensions between political figures and the judiciary in Iran.

🔍 Quick Context Guide
💡 Bottom Line: The dispute highlights ongoing challenges in Iran's judicial transparency and political dissent.

👥 Key Players

Ali Motahari MENTIONED
Tehran representative in parliament
"Motahari is known for his outspoken views and criticism of the judiciary, representing a moderate political stance within Iran."
Sadeq Amoli Larijani MENTIONED
Head of the Judiciary
"As the head of the judiciary, Larijani plays a crucial role in shaping Iran's legal and judicial policies."
Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei MENTIONED
First Deputy of the Judiciary
"Ejei is a key figure in the judiciary, involved in high-profile legal decisions and enforcement."
Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani MENTIONED
Son of former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani
"His legal case is significant due to his family's political influence and the implications for political dissent in Iran."

📰 What Happened

Ali Motahari criticized judiciary officials for labeling protests against court rulings as crimes, particularly in the case of Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani. The Rafsanjani family protested the verdict against Mehdi, calling for transparency in the legal process.

  • Motahari argued that expressing dissatisfaction with judicial decisions should not be criminalized.
  • The Rafsanjani family requested the broadcast of Mehdi Hashemi's trial sessions for transparency.

💡 Why It Matters

🇮🇷 For Iran: The case underscores tensions between political families and the judiciary, reflecting broader issues of political dissent and judicial transparency.
🌍 Regional: The situation may influence regional perceptions of Iran's internal stability and governance.
🌐 International: International observers may view this as indicative of Iran's human rights and judicial processes, impacting diplomatic relations.

📚 Background

Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani's case is part of a broader pattern of political and judicial tensions in Iran, involving influential families and the judiciary's role in governance.

Judicial transparency in Iran Political dissent in Iran
📡 Source: NEUTRAL
📊 Confidence: 70%
ISNA is a semi-official news agency in Iran, often reflecting government perspectives but also providing factual reporting.

Ali Motahari criticized the statements made by Sadeq Amoli Larijani, the head of the judiciary, and Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, the first deputy of the judiciary, regarding the Rafsanjani family's protest against the verdict on Mehdi Hashemi. He wrote: "We should not consider every protest as a crime or as undermining the judiciary." According to a report on Saturday, August 23, from the ISNA news agency, this Tehran representative in parliament stated in a letter to Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei that the Rafsanjani family's remarks about the 'unfairness' of Mehdi Hashemi's verdict were 'normal' and emphasized that their request for the court sessions to be broadcast could even be accepted. Motahari argued that the 'logical result' of a judicial authority filing a complaint against individuals merely for expressing their opinions about their case or their client's case is that we must consider the judiciary as infallible, which 'no sound mind' would accept. The first deputy of the judiciary had previously described Mehdi Hashemi's claims of 'being wronged' as 'a crime and defamation.' In his letter, Motahari stated that 'this statement is not correct. What prevents the accused or their lawyer from believing that an unfair verdict has been issued against them? At most, the judiciary can respond that no, this verdict is in accordance with the law and fair.' On August 19, Sadeq Amoli Larijani reacted to the release of a farewell video of Mehdi Hashemi Rafsanjani with Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the head of the Expediency Discernment Council, stating that 'we should not create an atmosphere where anyone who has been in a position can make farewell videos to undermine the judiciary.' In response to this criticism from the head of the judiciary, the Rafsanjani family issued a statement on August 21, protesting the 'banning' of Mehdi Hashemi's defense while claiming that 'lies and slanders' about this case were being broadcast by state media and military institutions. Meanwhile, Motahari also emphasized in response to the head of the judiciary's criticism that 'the farewell of a family member and accompanying them to prison while complying with the law and simultaneously stating that their verdict was not fair' is a 'normal practice for all families.' Mehdi Hashemi had requested the complete broadcast of his trial sessions from state television before turning himself in to Evin prison on August 18, but Davood Nematian Anaraki, the director of public relations at the state television organization, stated that broadcasting this trial 'requires obtaining the necessary permits from the judiciary.'

🌐

Translated from the original and edited for English readers. View original source →

Translation confidence: 85%

📰 Related Coverage

⚖️ Independent Platform — Artesh.com is not affiliated with any government, military, or political organization. Editorial Policy →