Tehran Efforts to Defend Navid Afkari’s Execution in a Ridiculous Manner

By Jubin Katiraie

Many facts about the execution of Iranian wrestling champion Navid Afkari indicate the authorities’ decision to execute him was due to the government’s need to frighten the people and prevent any further protests.

To see a few of the contradictions in the case of Navid and his brothers, one should read the latest revelation of VOA, which according to one of Navid’s relatives, exposed that Navid and his other two brothers which are now in custody are innocent. And the government has convicted him by trumped-up charges.

But this is not the case of this article. This article by collecting some of the reactions of the Iranian media outlets will show that this ridiculous reaction by the government is evidence enough and there is no need to prove that these three brothers are innocent.

Just concentrate on Tehran’s contradictions and officials’ desperate effort to defend themselves.

The state-run FARS news agency on 14 September: “Jafar Ghaderi, a representative of the people of Shiraz in the Islamic Parliament, in an interview with a parliamentary reporter of Fars News Agency, referring to the execution of the sentence of Navid Afkari, a young man who was retaliated to a premeditated murder: “This case went through its normal course and eventually led to the execution of the killer.”

“He then added: When a person allows himself to kill another person for no reason, the victim’s family and society expect the judiciary to administer justice and not be influenced by blackmail and pressure from the domestic and foreign media. If these blackmails and pressures of the media are to be decisive, nothing will be left.

“In the end, Ghaderi said: ‘The work of the judiciary in retaliation promised a logical and reasonable work and there is no objection to it.” (FARS 14 September)

And Aftab news wrote: “Ruhollah Nejabat said in his speech in the open session of the parliament yesterday: If justice is not subject to historical social justice, it is blind. What does the weakening of religious sovereignty have to do with investigative justice? Everyone’s words and deeds should be in order to strengthen the Islamic system. If the Islamic system is weakened, an unforgivable sin has occurred. The kind of justice that is based on the values ​​of Islam and the opinion of the Imams and the Supreme Leader will be desirable. Whatever the other behaviors, are not investigative justice and are not desirable. Why is it that, due to the complex propaganda of the enemy, all the actions of the Islamic Republic are considered null and void?”

And Sepehr daily on 14 September wrote: “In the meantime, of course, the strength of the judiciary also encouraged the oppressed and the lovers of the revolution. The toughness that showed he did not get caught up in the clichés and trends of Twitter and did justice at all costs. And justice, which, of course, must be continued, because the enemies of the system and their internal followers will never stop supporting their mercenaries and other criminals (such as the perpetrators of the November 2019 edition) who are in the custody of the judiciary, and this case requires the permanent strength of the judiciary.” (Sepehr daily, 14 September)

And at least one of the government-link main media Mashregh news referring to a video, with the title, ‘A number of Navid Afkaris going at it!’ wrote: “If the murderers and rioters were not going to be executed at any media pressure, now they were all walking around the city with impunity and freedom in any case, and this scene was the least we saw. (Referring to the included video.) (Mashregh news 14 September)

At a meeting of the Supreme Judicial Council, Ibrahim Raisi, the head of the judiciary, expressed his fear at the wave of disgust with the execution of Navid, calling it exaggerations.

“Referring to the legal process in handling cases and complaints and legal guarantees for the administration of justice for litigants, the head of the judiciary said that committed judges handle cases based on these judicial procedures and exaggerations should not and cannot affect the judge’s opinion.

“The head of the judiciary also thanked the prosecutor for distinguishing between political crimes and security crimes, and he called on the courts and tribunals to take action to enforce the law and the ordered circulars on political crime. At this hearing, the Tehran prosecutor said that five defendants had been indicted as political offenses and sent to the criminal court. (State-TV channel one, 14 September)