"Sacrificing" Iranian Athletes "Does Not Help Palestine at All"

Review of newspapers on Tuesday, November 28, 2017, by Shahram Rafiee Zadeh. The newspaper Shargh dedicated its front page to Saeed Mortazavi, the former prosecutor of Tehran, and published the news of his definitive conviction for complicity in the murder of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini, describing this verdict as "the price of Kahrizak." Shargh noted that "Saeed Mortazavi has been in court for years; until 2009 as a judge and prosecutor, and after 2009 as a defendant. The defendant of Kahrizak and social security." In reviewing the Kahrizak detention center case, it recalled that "Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini," "Mohammad Kamrani," and "Amir Javadi-Far," three detainees from July 18, 2009, were killed after being transferred from the Kahrizak detention center. The newspaper wrote that the officials of the Kahrizak detention center at that time stated in a letter to the then prosecutor of Tehran that the cause of their deaths was "meningitis," but later, with the revelation of details of the beatings of detainees in Kahrizak and the trial of several of its agents, the defendants in the disciplinary court stated that "the text of this false report was given to them by the Tehran prosecutor, Saeed Mortazavi, who asked them to present such a report to the Tehran public prosecutor for expediency." Shargh also noted in a commentary that "the direct perpetrator" is someone who participates in the execution of a crime, and the accomplice is someone who, without personally executing the crime attributed to the direct perpetrator, facilitates the occurrence of the crime or encourages the perpetrator to commit it through their intentional behavior. It wrote: "In Islamic penal law, the punishment for intentional murder is retribution, but regarding the accomplice in intentional murder, if the main perpetrator or the murderer is sentenced to retribution, the punishment for the accomplice is imprisonment of degree two (15 to 25 years) or degree three (10 to 15 years), depending on the judge's discretion," and only "if the murderer has no complainant, or the complainant has forgiven the retribution, they will be sentenced to imprisonment from one to five years." The newspaper wrote: "It seems that in Saeed Mortazavi's case, the judges of Branch 22 of the Tehran Court of Appeals considered the actions of the Kahrizak perpetrators as intentional murder and assumed that the Tehran prosecutor, who ordered the transfer of the victims to the Kahrizak detention center, was aware of the killers' intent; otherwise, the realization of complicity in intentional murder is questionable." The newspaper Etemad also dedicated its front page to Saeed Mortazavi and with the headline "Only Two Years" wrote: "The first news is that Saeed Mortazavi was sentenced to two years in prison in the Kahrizak case. This means that Branch 22 of the Court of Appeals reduced his sentence by three years because the initial sentence was five years." This newspaper quoted Mirmajid Taheri, the lawyer for the heirs of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini, who was informed electronically of the ruling of Branch 22 of the Court of Appeals, stating: "Saeed Mortazavi has been sentenced to two years of penal imprisonment for complicity in murder in the Kahrizak case." Etemad also wrote: "The second news is that Mortazavi was acquitted in part of the social security case. Judge Kashkooli in Branch 9 of the court had sentenced him to six months of penal imprisonment, six months of suspended imprisonment, and restitution for acquiring illegal property and unlawfully holding the position of head of social security with that astronomical salary (46 million tomans), but now according to the ruling of Branch 22 of the court, Saeed Mortazavi has been acquitted of this charge." Etemad simultaneously reported the conviction of one of the plaintiffs' lawyers against Saeed Mortazavi, writing: "The third news is that Mostafa Torkhamdani, the lawyer for the plaintiffs against Mortazavi in the social security case, was sentenced to ten months of penal imprisonment and 40 lashes for defamation due to publishing the contents of Mortazavi's non-definitive conviction ruling." According to this newspaper, in the end, "the Court of Appeals reduced Saeed Mortazavi's crime somewhat and acquitted him of preparing false reports and complicity in the past. The families of Javadi-Far and Kamrani stepped back, but the Rouh-al-Amini family, who had not previously filed a complaint against Saeed Mortazavi, demanded a retrial and did not back down from pursuing the matter at all," although there are "rumors about the families of Javadi-Far and Kamrani giving their consent." The newspaper Khorasan also reported under the headline "Determining the Fate of Two Controversial Cases of Saeed Mortazavi" that "the eight-year marathon of Saeed Mortazavi's case regarding Kahrizak ended with his definitive conviction to two years in prison after several back-and-forths between the primary courts, appeals, and the Supreme Court. A case that was initiated immediately after the events at Kahrizak detention center and despite once acquitting the then Tehran prosecutor, the case was reviewed again and ultimately led to his conviction to imprisonment, while Mortazavi was acquitted in the social security case." This newspaper noted the criticisms regarding the "prolongation of the Kahrizak case" and considered it natural, writing that on one hand, the accusation in this case, namely "complicity in murder," is associated with many complexities in all legal systems worldwide, and on the other hand, the legal structures of our country create many powers and capacities for both parties to the case to strive for their rights. In Mortazavi's case, both parties tried to defend themselves until the last moment, and this issue led to the prolongation of this case." Khorasan, however, advised the judiciary to pay attention to the "specific demands of public opinion regarding some political cases" and to "design a special structure for the prompt handling of some cases in collaboration with the parliament." Several newspapers on Tuesday also focused on the defeat of Iranian wrestler Alireza Karimi in the World Junior Wrestling Championships, which sparked widespread criticism on social media. The newspaper Jam-e-Farda dedicated its front page to a scene from Alireza Karimi's match against a Russian opponent and with the headline "Lose Alireza... Lose," wrote: "In this match, while he was winning until a few minutes before the end, he shouts 'Alireza, lose' and releases himself to lose. With a bewildered look, astonished and tearful, he holds back his hand so it doesn't go up, so the referee doesn't say he is the real winner who now has to lose. Alireza Karimi, the representative of Iran in the 86 kg weight class at the World Junior Wrestling Championships, lost to the Russian representative, and it seems this loss was intentional to avoid facing the Israeli representative in the next round. Saran Ghazanfari in the Jam-e-Farda report referred to the history of Iranian players withdrawing from international competitions against Israeli opponents, mentioning "Arash Mir Asmaeili, the flag bearer of Iran's delegation at the 2004 Athens Olympics, as a 'great chance to win a gold medal in judo' who in the very first round refused to compete against Ehud Wax, an Israeli judoka, under the pretext of being overweight, just as in the 2008 Olympics, Mohammad Alirezaei, Iran's record-holder in breaststroke swimming, announced that due to being grouped with a swimmer from Israel, he would not participate in the competition due to a cold and appendicitis. The newspaper Jam-e-Farda emphasized that 'if we believe in an issue, we should legislate for it and stand by the consequences,' writing: 'The Wrestling Federation only issued a statement and did not mention a boycott.' The newspaper Bahar also dedicated its front page to Alireza Karimi, posing the question 'Is surrender better than fighting?' and wrote: 'Why do the country's officials, by creating obstacles for our athletes, open the way for Israeli athletes and deprive society of a collective joy resulting from a sports victory?' This newspaper emphasized that 'the avoidance of facing Israeli athletes has so far brought no relief to the Palestinians,' writing: 'What stands before us as a bitter reality is that Alireza Karimi and Alireza Karimis are athletes who are sacrificed by policies that, contrary to what is stated in official propaganda, do not help Palestine at all.' The newspaper Javan, close to the Revolutionary Guards, however, considered Alireza Karimi as 'the first man of Iranian sports in the fight' against Israel, writing: 'The good boy of Iranian wrestling missed out on a medal for the second time, and that is because he should not have faced the Israeli wrestler.' This newspaper noted that some 'say Palestinian athletes compete against representatives of this regime (Israel),' writing: 'Well, let them compete; this does not justify withdrawing from the fundamental struggle,' as 'we have a problem with the very existence of Israel.' The newspaper Sobhe No reported the possibility of Telegram being filtered, writing: 'Comments from some governmental and state officials in recent days and weeks have strengthened the likelihood of Telegram being blocked.' This newspaper noted that 'rumors of blocking Telegram have been heard for a year,' writing that 'it seems these rumors have become closer to reality these days,' although Abolhasan Firouzabadi, the secretary of the Supreme Council of Cyberspace, reacted to these speculations by stating that 'blocking foreign messaging apps is not currently on the agenda,' but 'he also attached these warning phrases to his remarks that all channels and networks that are unofficially active in the country using foreign software should certainly also use domestic social networks and messaging apps.' Sobhe No also reported that according to 'the hearsay of the newspaper's reporter,' 'Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi called on several domestic messaging apps to speak of comprehensive support for any messaging app that takes significant steps to attract domestic users and can add a considerable number of Telegram users to its own users,' but this is not the whole story, as Amir Khourakian, the deputy of the National Cyberspace Center, mentioned the 'possibility of blocking some messaging apps.' This newspaper wrote: 'The importance of this issue has become more pronounced, especially now that this messaging app has entered negotiations with Russian officials and has even faced requests from Americans for cooperation.' Sobhe No named the 'Vipsi messaging app,' registered in Hong Kong, and two Iranian messaging apps, Soroush and Gap, as potential alternatives to Telegram. In this context, 'officially legitimizing Iran's advisory presence in Yemen for the first time,' the 2300% increase in the parliament's budget between 2004 and 2017, the introduction of 'the owners of the top 100 companies in Iran's economy,' changing the battlefield of 'proxies'; war against the people in the streets of Iran, the first paragraph; the responsibility of the opposition and the possibility of radicalizing Iranian society, the death of the last Mossad representative in Tehran amid the Iran crisis, the large and horrific massacre during the protests in Iran, the death of the last Mossad representative in Tehran amid the Iran crisis, the account of three witnesses from the situation in Isfahan province; 'like war-torn areas,' Trump's emphasis on 'stopping executions in Iran': we do not know what will happen in the future, Trump says if the Islamic Republic attempts to assassinate him, 'it will be wiped off the face of the earth.'