The Khahrizak Confession

The newspaper Etemad described the letter of apology from the former Tehran prosecutor regarding the 'crimes of Khahrizak detention center' as a 'Khahrizak confession' and wrote: 'After seven years, Saeed Mortazavi expressed regret for his responsibility in Khahrizak in a letter.' Rezvaneh Rezai-Pour wrote in Etemad's report: 'Seven years had to pass for him to refer to that incident as a “crime.” Seven years had to pass for him to utter the word “martyr” alongside the names of the Khahrizak victims.' Finally, 'just on the day that it seemed to be the last session of the Khahrizak case in Branch 22 of the Provincial Court of Appeals, Saeed Mortazavi seized the opportunity to raise issues in his final defense that many did not expect.' According to Etemad, Saeed Mortazavi, who was the Tehran prosecutor in 2009, wrote in his letter: 'Regarding the bloody events of July 2009, which occurred following the great sedition and conspiracy after the presidential election, the Supreme Leader referred to it as a crime due to the depth of the tragedy. As the prosecutor at the time, I deeply express regret and apologize and ask for forgiveness from the martyrs of this incident (Amir) Javadi-Far, (Mohsen) Rouh-al-Amini, and (Mohammad) Kamrani, and I pray for their elevated ranks from God.' Concurrently with the publication of the former Tehran prosecutor's apology letter, Nahid Mowlavi, a journalist for Etemad, contacted several families of the Khahrizak detainees to ask for their reactions to this letter. The family of Mohammad Kamrani stated that they 'do not accept' Saeed Mortazavi's apology, the family of Amir Javadi-Far said they have 'not read the letter yet,' and the family of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini emphasized that 'we will speak in court.' Abbas Abdi, in Etemad's editorial titled 'The End of Power Display without Responsibility,' evaluated the former Tehran prosecutor's apology letter, writing: 'This letter is a kind of acceptance of responsibility and confession of guilt, and thus leaves the court free to issue a ruling based on confession rather than testimony and evidence. An important ambiguity that this letter can resolve is the issue of negligence and fault.' Because 'if Mr. Mortazavi's actions in the Khahrizak case were due to negligence, there is no need for an apology, as judicial negligence occurs in many cases, and the government accepts responsibility for it. But the Khahrizak case was clearly due to fault, although Saeed Mortazavi tries to equate fault with intent in his letter and absolve himself of responsibility.' The editorial writer of Etemad emphasized that many consider Saeed Mortazavi's letter as 'a kind of attempt to close the case, an effort that has already garnered the relative satisfaction of the plaintiffs or at least the court.' He wrote: 'Given Saeed Mortazavi's temperament and the length of time that has passed since the incident, and the crossed-out text, one can be assured that this letter is more a product of a deal for a light and suspended sentence than a result of any remorse from Mr. Mortazavi.' However, 'the main problem is that the claimants in this matter are not just the families of the three lost youths, but a large number of wounded youths and, more importantly, society as a whole.' The newspaper Shargh also highlighted in its front page titled 'Forgive Us' the 'late apology for the Khahrizak incident after 7 years,' stating: 'On Sunday, coinciding with the third and final session of the lawsuit by the family of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini, one of the victims of the Khahrizak detention center, a text of a letter from Saeed Mortazavi, the former Tehran prosecutor, was published in the media, which implicitly apologized to the families of the victims of the Khahrizak atrocities.' Sara Najimi, a lawyer, emphasized in a note in this newspaper that 'nowhere in the law does an apology halt proceedings. Therefore, this issue, regardless of media coverage, will have no impact on the legal proceedings of the case except for the satisfaction of the heirs of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini.' Saleh Nikbakht, a lawyer and legal expert, emphasized that with the publication of Saeed Mortazavi's letter, 'complicity in murder was established,' stating: 'As long as the family of Mohsen Rouh-al-Amini does not give consent, the court proceedings will not change.' He added, 'Considering the ambiguity of Mortazavi's letter and that public opinion did not accept it, whatever his motivation was, it was not realized.' However, 'on the other hand, if the complaint of the family of the late Rouh-al-Amini is successful and the former prosecutor is convicted, this will also be a reason for the reinstatement of the case by the heirs of Mohammad Kamrani,' and 'the concern over this matter may be one of the reasons for writing this letter.' Mehdi Hajati, a legal expert, also wrote in the newspaper Shargh about 'the legal consequences of the former Tehran prosecutor's apology,' stating: 'Legally, the submission of such a letter to the Court of Appeals indicates that the reviewing court, regardless of other evidence and documents in the file, which are hidden from others, can become aware of the commission of the behavior attributed to the former Tehran prosecutor.' Even if 'there is no other evidence in the file, it can investigate the defendant's claim regarding the lack of malice in the commission of the attributed crimes.' The columnist of the newspaper Shargh emphasized that 'it does not seem that given the lengthy proceedings of the case and the evidence collected in preliminary investigations, and considering the report of the parliamentary investigative committee that identified the former Tehran prosecutor as directly responsible for the Khahrizak atrocities, determining the occurrence or non-occurrence of a crime by the main defendant in this case will be difficult for the judges of the Court of Appeals. The contents of this letter, which includes Saeed Mortazavi's apology and implicit acceptance of his accusations regarding the atrocities of 2009, can also serve as evidence that satisfies the conscience of the judges in charge.' The newspaper Noavaran reported with the headline 'In Praise of Forgiveness and the Elimination of Violence or the Execution of Punishment,' stating that Saeed Mortazavi 'the most controversial judicial figure in Iran, apologized for his actions in the painful Khahrizak case, who previously took a position to absolve himself and tried to exonerate himself through legal and political correspondence. Now he seeks forgiveness from the heirs of the victims in exchange for the painful violence that tormented the soul of society.' Nasser Imani, a principlist political activist, also expressed his regret to Noavaran regarding the late apology letter by Saeed Mortazavi, emphasizing that 'this apology, after seven years of the court proceedings, and considering that court pressure led to the writing of this letter, may be devoid of value.' The newspaper Javan, close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, wrote with the headline 'Saeed Mortazavi Finally Apologized, the Leaders of the Sedition Remain Silent,' stating: 'The faithful forces to the Islamic Revolution are not pleased with Saeed Mortazavi for his negligence or fault in the Khahrizak incident, which the Leader referred to as a “crime,” and the controversies surrounding his presence in the Social Security Organization and his role in confronting the leaders of the two branches have worsened perceptions. However, his apology to the heirs of the Khahrizak victims and acceptance of mistakes, regardless of the intention behind it, is noteworthy.' This newspaper described Saeed Mortazavi's role in the deaths of the detainees from the protests of July 18, 2009, in the Khahrizak detention center as 'indirect' and wrote: 'He recorded the title of the first apologizer regarding the events after the 2009 sedition.' The newspaper close to the Revolutionary Guards also emphasized that 'how appropriate it would be for the designers, commanders, and leaders of the sedition to also use this method,' writing: 'How appropriate it would be for that leader of the sedition' to also 'apologize to the families of the other victims and martyrs of the sedition and the accusation of fraud against the system so that perhaps God, the nation, and the Leader may forgive them. It truly takes courage to do this, which is unlikely to be witnessed.' The newspaper Khorasan also evaluated Saeed Mortazavi's apology as 'late,' stating: 'Regardless of what decisions the grieving families standing by the ideals of the revolution make regarding Mortazavi's apology letter, the people of Iran demand a decisive ruling from the judiciary in this case so that no one dares to play with the dignity of the system and the people of Iran again.' The newspaper Arman focused on 'Ghasem Ghalibaf's gas attack on critics,' reporting that the mayor of Tehran, in response to the exposure of the transfer of astronomical properties to certain individuals and organizations, said: 'We will never be disappointed to find individuals who have their hearts set on foreigners and who, in unison with the enemies of the system and the voices of foreign radios, spread lies about the municipality.' According to this newspaper, Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf told his critics: 'You whose hopes and aspirations are the same as those of the West and England; Jack Straw, who was the British Foreign Secretary, came to Tehran before and when he returned from Tehran after the sanctions and after his term, he said the transformation I saw in Tehran was unbelievable. At least your fairness should be as much as Jack Straw, whom you love.' Some newspapers close to the principlists dedicated their front page headlines and photos to the controversies surrounding Hillary Clinton's presence at the fifteenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. The newspaper Vatan-e-Emrooz wrote with the headline 'September 11, Hillary,' stating: 'With Clinton fainting at the anniversary of the collapse of the twin towers, doubts about her health have intensified.' The newspaper Kayhan, which is published under the supervision of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, referred to the Democratic Party candidate in the U.S. presidential election as 'the mother of ISIS' and listed various illnesses attributed to her. Kayhan wrote, among other things: 'Inability to understand and articulate words, heart disease, multiple sclerosis, obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, and Parkinson's disease are among the illnesses attributed to Hillary Clinton in various media.' The newspapers Farhikhtegan and Etemad reported on 'Hassan Rouhani's trip to New York and Latin America.' The newspaper Etemad wrote: 'Meeting with several world leaders, meetings with leaders of divine religions, and discussions with political and economic elites are part of the President's program in New York.' The newspaper Farhikhtegan also quoted First Vice President Eshaq Jahangiri as saying that 'Hassan Rouhani will go to the United Nations General Assembly for the fourth time and will speak in front of the leaders and high-ranking officials of the world,' adding that 'this time, in the last year of his presidency, he must pursue the JCPOA and bring it to fruition.' The newspaper Abarar reported that the International Hamoun Wetland Research Institute announced the results of its study on the latest status of the Hamoun Wetland, stating, 'This wetland has completely dried up,' and 'more than two million fish and fry have perished, resulting in an environmental disaster in the southeast of the country.' According to this newspaper, Saeed Mohammadi, the director of the environmental department of Sistan and Baluchestan, however, declared 'the fish deaths in the Hamoun to be sensationalism' and said: 'No environmental disaster has occurred in Hamoun, and the Hamoun wetland is in very good condition.'