Iran’s Parliament Criminalizes Interviews with “Hostile” Media
The Iranian Parliament continues its review of a bill titled “Countering Foreign Intelligence Services and Foreign Governments or Entities,” expanding restrictions on freedom of expression and Iranians’ contact with media outlets. On Tuesday, October 5, representatives passed Article 22, which prohibits Iranian citizens from interviewing or communicating with media outlets that the Ministry of Intelligence designates as “hostile,” imposing criminal penalties on violators including imprisonment and flogging. Simultaneously, transferring unpublished official information and statistics to “foreign agents” can result in imprisonment of more than five to ten years and permanent dismissal from office.
Under Article 22, Iranian citizens cannot interview or communicate with media outlets or “media persons” that the Ministry of Intelligence designates as “hostile” and publicly announces. Media outlets owned, managed, or funded by foreign government-related agents are also subject to this restriction. Violating this prohibition, according to the text of the resolution, will result in one or more class six punishments under Article 19 of the Islamic Penal Code.
These punishments are extensive and can include imprisonment of more than six months to two years, monetary fines, flogging of 31 to 74 lashes, and deprivation of social rights. A notable aspect is that Islamic Republic authorities are exempted from this restriction in the article’s text; that is, the limitation imposed on “Iranian citizens” does not apply to officials in government positions.
As a result, a media interview, which in many legal systems is defined within the framework of freedom of expression and access to information, can become the subject of a criminal case if it involves contact with a media outlet that the Ministry of Intelligence designates as “hostile.” This is one of the main concerns about the bill, because determining whether a media outlet is considered “hostile” is left to the Ministry of Intelligence according to the article’s text, and the term itself lacks a precise and clear definition in the resolution. Critics have warned that such a definition could expand the scope of the prohibition considerably.
Alongside Article 22, Parliament also passed Article 20 of the bill. Under this article, individuals who have access to information, reports, data, or unpublished official statistics through their employment, position, or legal assignment, or through professional relations with individuals in related positions, and provide them to a “foreign agent” without authorization, will face class four imprisonment and permanent dismissal from the related position. Class four imprisonment under Islamic Penal Code is more than five to ten years.
Stricter punishments are provided for classified information. According to a provision of Article 20, disclosure, publication, or transfer of confidential or secret information to a foreign agent or foreign national, if it causes damage or harm to national security or interests, can result in class three punishments.
The bill faced opposition from within the Islamic Republic since its general approval. Masoud Pezeshkian’s government formally opposed it in September and stated that the bill’s text and review procedure had serious flaws. The President’s legal advisor had said there is no legal vacuum to counter foreign influence, and if a new law is needed, it should be prepared with the participation of the government and judiciary after examining its various dimensions. The government also warned about creating restrictions on scientific activities, accelerating the migration of elites, and the negative repercussions of this bill.
Critics are concerned that the concept of “countering foreign influence” has extended beyond espionage and intelligence activity to include media, academic, professional, and civic communications of citizens.
In such circumstances, Article 22 is of special significance because it exposes Iranian citizens to criminal punishment not for transferring classified information or conducting intelligence operations, but merely for communicating with a media outlet that the government designates as “hostile.” This issue could further restrict Iran’s media landscape and make citizens, journalists, civil activists, researchers, and even families of victims and protesters more cautious or fearful of speaking with media outlets outside the country.
In practice, such an approach could blur the line between “countering espionage” and “restricting information flow.” If a citizen discusses the country’s economic, social, human rights, or political situation with foreign media, determining whether this contact was merely media activity or constitutes an instance of “foreign influence” will depend on how these regulations are interpreted and implemented.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that Parliament’s recent resolutions are not yet the end of the legislative process and must go through subsequent legal stages to become enforceable law. Therefore, what has been approved now is a parliamentary resolution, not a law that necessarily has immediate criminal enforceability.
A bill that was supposed to counter “foreign interference” according to its authors has now reached a point where even a conversation between an Iranian citizen and a foreign media outlet could be subject to criminalization. While the Islamic Republic has long restricted or labeled independent and critical foreign media as “hostile,” entrusting the Ministry of Intelligence with determining this designation and then linking it to imprisonment and flogging punishments has increased concerns about the future of freedom of expression and Iranian citizens’ free access to information.
These resolutions ultimately send a clear message about the bill’s direction: countering what the government calls “foreign influence” no longer remains limited to intelligence activities and encompasses the realm of media communications and information flow. The more this sphere is restricted, the more limited will be the opportunity for critics, protesters, families of victims, and Iran’s civil society to have their voices heard.
