Three-minute read
In a recurrent display of judicial theatrics held every Tuesday, Iran’s regime convened a session to prosecute 104 officials and members of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). This session, held on July 9, highlighted the Iranian regime’s anger towards the Free Iran 2024 Summit and the mass protests by thousands of Iranians in Berlin on June 29. The proceedings also showcased absurdities and glaring violations of basic fair trial standards.
The presiding judge, introduced by state media only as “Judge Dehghani,” criticized foreign countries for not extraditing members of the MEK even before issuing any rulings. He also issued warnings to thousands of MEK supporters who participated in the Berlin demonstrations and included a so-called religious expert who argued for the execution of MEK members under charges of “rebellion” under Sharia law. The plaintiffs’ attorney went further, insisting that MEK members should be executed irrespective of their religious status.
Judge Dehghani lamented at the start of the session, “Not a single defense attorney or brief has been submitted by any of the defendants.” Acknowledging the international disregard for the regime’s farcical display, he added, “Anti-terrorism conventions mandate that states prosecute or extradite accused terrorists. Thus, governments must either try these individuals or hand them over to requesting states.”
Justice in Absurdity: #Iran’s Lawless Dictator Holds Trial of Sworn Enemieshttps://t.co/gMVIRpmuT0
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) December 25, 2023
He warned host countries of the MEK, stating, “If any country refuses to extradite accused terrorists, a red notice will be issued. This court warns that no member state of anti-terrorism conventions can host these individuals; they must prosecute or extradite them to Iran.”
Dehghani continued, “As the presiding judge, I declare that the defendants should return and defend themselves. Extradition is a recognized international norm, and Iran will enforce it.”
Calling on the regime’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to take action against those participating in the MEK demonstrations, Dehghani boasted, “Political asylum should not be granted to perpetrators of terrorist acts; this request is in accordance with the principles of conventions. This court declares that if henceforth, Iranians abroad attend any meetings organized by the defendants of this case anywhere in the world (consulates, cultural centers, and any center outside the country), a red notice will be issued for them in accordance with international conventions. Therefore, the presiding judge of this court asks the Attorney General and the Minister of Foreign Affairs to ensure that if Iranians abroad attend any meeting at the invitation of the defendants in this case, it will be considered support for the Mojahedin Organization and will be subject to criminal prosecution in court. These individuals will certainly be extradited to the country.”
Desperately attempting to spin new narratives about the @Mojahedineng during its staged trial, the clerical regime is essentially undermining its own decades-long #propaganda against the movement. This not only weakens Khomeini's defamation tactics but also inadvertently… pic.twitter.com/WkAzHs3ZGC
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) May 12, 2024
In this session, an individual introduced only as “Moradi,” acting as the attorney for the plaintiffs, claimed that “Maryam Rajavi stated in a video that the MEK and ISIS are two sides of the same coin.” While taking his brazen lie seriously, he added, “I ask the leaders of countries whether they would allow members of the ISIS group to hold a meeting in their country.”
Adding to the absurdity, the judge concurred, “The plaintiffs’ attorney insists on preventing rallies in front of Iranian embassies.”
A so-called religious expert, identified only as “Sedaqat,” cited Islamic texts to argue that MEK members, identifying as Muslims, should face execution for “rebellion.” A regime-appointed defense attorney, concerned about the political and social implications of formally recognizing MEK as Muslims, queried whether the MEK was officially considered a Muslim organization.
Sedaqat responded, “Regardless of religious status, rebellion charges apply to the defendants, as the criminal procedure law makes no mention of religious affiliation. The MEK’s leadership identifies as Muslim.”
The theatrical proceedings on July 9th revealed a clear reality: in the Iranian regime, law and justice have never been genuine standards. Those acting as judges, lawyers, prosecutors, and even experts are merely putting on a performance, utterly disconnected from the people’s rights. However, once again, this session has unequivocally shown the extent of the regime’s fear of the MEK and their supporters. Although the purpose of this court is to intimidate the Iranian people and the countries hosting the MEK, the developments of the last few weeks have proven it to be ineffective so far.