This is the New Tweet from Mr. Raeisian, Attorney at Law, as You Can See

Mortezaei, Deputy for Supervision and Inspection of the Supreme Court

Jafari, Deputy for Supervision and Evaluation of the Disciplinary Prosecutor’s Office for Judges

Mansouri, Deputy for Supervision of Prosecutor’s Offices and Judicial Officers of the Attorney General's Office

Sarvi, Deputy for Supervision and Inspection of the Judiciary of Tehran Province

I would like to emphasize that my criticisms and questions directed at Mr. Amir Raeisian in no way confirm the details of the judicial process or the substantive content of the allegations or trials concerning the late Mohammad Qobadlou.

This is the new tweet from Mr. Raeisian, Attorney at Law, as you can see.

The Execution Unit of the Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor's Office of Robat Karim County has sent a notification in response to the lawyer’s request to halt the execution; however, the office manager or the electronic system user did not notice or pay attention to complete and edit the default fields before sending the notification, resulting in part of the definitive ruling from Branch 39 of the Supreme Court being sent.

The ruling states that for a complete study of the 44-page judgment, one should refer to the execution unit of the prosecutor’s office after the execution of the death penalty!

Please pay attention to the time and date of the notification's sending; is the prosecutor's office or the electronic judicial postal unit present and active during office hours at this time?

In this apparent notification, there is no mention of Mohseni Ejei's authorization on behalf of Ayatollah Khamenei for the execution of the death sentence.

In the previous notification, the execution judge also failed to inform the lawyer on the night of the execution of Mohammad Qobadlou, despite the explicit wording of Article 543 of the Criminal Procedure Code, about the location and time of the execution, and whether the lawyer could be present for a last visit with the client to hear his statements and last wishes at the execution site.

Do you have a convincing response for this method of notification?

Although the office of Branch 39 of the Supreme Court referred the matter to the head of the judiciary, would it not have been better to officially send a copy of the judgment through the electronic notification system to the esteemed lawyer? However, this does not absolve their responsibility for proper follow-up and physical attendance at the mentioned branch and the execution of judgments, especially for this sensitive case.