You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran's parliament refuses to define political crimes
2004-08-19
Iran's conservative-controlled parliament yesterday blocked a plan to define political crimes which would have clarified the status of political prisoners, said the student news agency ISNA. The parliament, or Majlis, blocked a proposal that asked the government to give a legal definition of political crimes.
"They're what we say they are, that's what they are!"
The proposal had been put forward by the reformist government before most reformists were barred from contesting elections last February and they subsequently lost their majority. Human rights activists say a legal definition of political crimes is required so that those who are convicted because of their political beliefs are not punished under common law. "If political crime was defined, many of those who are imprisoned today for undermining state security would be free today," legal expert Ali Najafi Tavana told ISNA.
Posted by:Fred

#6  It is a pity a culture which produced the likes of Omar Khayyam, to whom we all owe a debt in re Mathematics, Music, Poetry!

Come on, BigEd, that's a fragment. Please complete the thought. "It's a pity" how, in what way, for what reason?
Posted by: Zenster   2004-08-19 8:53:34 PM  

#5  Symmetry has a beauty all its own

It is a pity a culture which produced the likes of Omar Khayyam, to whom we all owe a debt in re Mathematics, Music, Poetry!
Posted by: BigEd   2004-08-19 4:54:27 PM  

#4  This reminds me very little of the old Soviet Union's rule of law. Essentially, what you do is make so many different types of behavior illegal that everybody is guilty of something. All that remains is for them to come and arrest you at the time of their choosing.

So it is in Iran. Without any clear delineation of what constitutes political crime, the definition of it remains completely arbitrary and is subject to the arbiter's whim. Another good analogy would be the Middle Ages. Since the Bible was printed only in Latin, the commoner usually could not read it and was subject to whatever interpretation was decided upon by whichever authority. The potential for abuse of power was effectively unlimited.

Iran is clearly a proponent of stone age mentality. I say let's bomb them back to the stone age so that their environment and thinking will match. Symmetry has a beauty all its own.
Posted by: Zenster   2004-08-19 4:45:02 PM  

#3  â€œIf political crime was defined, many of those who are imprisoned today for undermining state security would be free today,” legal expert Ali Najafi Tavana told ISNA.

Personally, I don't think it really matters much; when the highest authority in the land is a cleric the likes of Khamenei, any written law isn't going to be worth the paper it's printed on.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2004-08-19 3:46:30 PM  

#2  â€œIf political crime was defined, many of those who are imprisoned today for undermining state security would be free today,”

I'm sorry you got that wrong. With the correct definition ALL mullahs would be in jail.
Posted by: True German Ally   2004-08-19 3:04:03 PM  

#1  Statute 156 E-T-507. TURBAN PRESENTATION
When a citizen wraps his turban improperly, praise Allah, he shall receive 40 lashes, praise Allah, and because this is considered subversive, praise Allah, he shall then be buried up to his neck and stoned. It is written.
Posted by: BigEd   2004-08-19 12:30:07 PM  

00:00