One Year Prison Sentence for Manager of Iran University of Science and Technology Telegram Channel
Amirreza Mojrad, manager of the student Telegram channel “Iran University of Science and Technology News,” was sentenced to one year of retribution imprisonment by Tehran Criminal Court for resharing a critical image with an Ashura theme in 2018.
Amirreza Mojrad, manager of the student Telegram channel “Iran University of Science and Technology News,” was sentenced to one year of retribution imprisonment by Tehran Criminal Court for resharing a critical image with an Ashura theme. His lawyer confirmed this news on Sunday, December 26 (January 26) on the Twitter network.
Mohammadali Kamfirouzi, Amirreza Mojrad’s lawyer, wrote about this verdict that in September 2018, due to posting an image with the theme of “the possible behavior of some mourners today of Imam Hussein during the time of the Ashura uprising in Kufa” on the Iran University of Science and Technology Telegram channel, Amirreza Mojrad was summoned to Evin Prosecutor’s Office.
After appearing at the prosecutor’s office, he was arrested and a case was filed against him with charges of “propaganda activity against the Islamic Republic system” and “insult to sacred values.” According to him: “Resharing this image has no legal basis for any crime.”
Kamfirouzi said that initially his client was sentenced to 8 months imprisonment for “propaganda activity against the system,” which was pardoned. However, he was again tried by Tehran Criminal Court for the same reason and this time on charges of “insulting sacred values” and without allowing for defense arguments, he was sentenced to one year imprisonment.
According to this judicial lawyer, the Tehran Criminal Court’s ruling contains “defects and errors.”
Kamfirouzi wrote on his personal Twitter page about the issued verdict: “Everything irrelevant was discussed except the case subject; from ‘the country’s currency independence’ to ‘freeing humans from animalistic and wild ideologies’ and ‘insulting human sciences,’ but alas, there was not even two lines of legal reasoning.”
Source: DW
