More Arrests in Kurdistan, Ejlal Ghavami Arrested

Ejlal Ghavami, a human rights activist and a prominent personality involved in cultural issues in Kurdistan was arrested two days ago on his way to work. His defense attorney Nemat Ahmadi told ISNA student news agency, “My client had been sentenced to three years imprisonment by the first Revolutionary Court on charges of activities against state security by participating in illegal gatherings, propaganda against the state and in support of opposition groups and for insulting official authorities. We later learned that the second branch of the appellate court had upheld this judgment.” Ahmadi also said, “While the arrest warrant and non service of the appellate court’s decision were not unlawful acts, they were not in line with current practices. Defendants are summoned by courts to be informed of the court ruling against them. If they do not show up, the judgment is announced to the defense attorney.”

Last week, another Kurdish human rights activist Mahmud Kaboodvand was arrested by authorities, making Ghavami’s arrest the second in a week. Ghavami had openly said that he believes that civil society is “not only a shield to protect the government, but is even more of a protection for individuals. A system of fundamental rights guarantees the provision of this domain. Such a public domain is the place where rational dialogues takes place and is the best indicator of the existence of a civil society.” It is because of this that he believes that the media such as radio and television must come out of the monopoly of the state and operate outside the ideological constrains so that parties, non-government groups and the private sector can provide to the public and authorities solutions, ideas and policies to improve various issues through their programs and plans. “Today because Iranian society needs that a free media and press operate so that the views of the various sections of the nation can be exchanged and communicated to the government, these outlets should not be limited or banned,” he has said. “Transforming the media into a moderate critical voice of the people would lead to constructive criticism providing transparency to the behavior of the state, while also presenting the wishes of the public in a mild manner. But by limiting cultural expression and the work of the media not only will the exchange of information be constrained but the participation of the public and the elite in the decision making process will be disrupted as well. One of the consequences of limiting cultural activities or shutting the flow of information will be apathy and distrust against the state in society, making it less legitimate and productive.”