Do you remember my notes and objections regarding the statements of Mr. Amir Raisian, the attorney of justice, regarding his negligence regarding the proper follow-up of the case of the late Mohammad Qabadlou, and then the statements of his other lawyer,

Now, Ms. Sarkar, the honorable attorney of justice, has given an interview to Iran Watch.  I carefully watched the full interview for 50 minutes so that I could at least get the answers to my questions, but I hesitated and alas!  Now I have to put more emphasis on my questions.

First of all, I must say that:

1- My complaint to the lawyers was only about the type of follow-up of the application stage of Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Law, leading to deprivation of life.  I didn't go into the details of the accusation case and trials, which was not and is not my specialty, but now with this interview, I saw that the negligence of lawyers is older.

2- In no way, my criticism of the way both respected attorneys of justice were followed up is a defense of the judiciary or the process that took place in the case of the late Qabadlou and led to the loss of life.

  Regardless of the emotional nature of Ms. Vakil's interview, to the extent that they repeatedly mispronounce the branches of the court and the branches of the court together, or they have a gross mistake in the definition of the application of Article 477, and they only consider the application of Article 477 to be related to final decisions and to  Note 2 of this article and its executive instructions and the limits of powers of the adjudicating branch are not taken into account, it is interesting that in many cases the statements of Ms. Vakil are in conflict with the statements and claims of Mr. Raisian's other lawyer.

And of course, with these gross mistakes, at least in the form of expression and information, they wanted to defend the life of a human being and his defense rights!

I recommend that respected lawyers and legal professionals and social activists should consider this so-called disclosure and think about it.

My questions are very clear.

  1- Each of the respected lawyers should confirm that in the pursuit of the application of Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Law, which was found to be contrary to Mr. Raisian's claim, they were aware of it before, to the area of ​​the head of the judiciary, the area of ​​the first deputy and the judicial deputy of the head of the judiciary and the deputy of supervision and  Follow-up or the Department of Justice of Tehran Province referred or even sent a correspondence or even mailed.

Pay attention, no matter what decision the judiciary will make, it is not a negation of the legal duty of the defense lawyer, and it is the right and fair defense of the obvious rights of every defendant.

  2- Respected lawyers should confirm that they had recourse to the judge of execution of criminal sentences or the general and revolutionary prosecutor of Rabat Karim city from the first branch of the Supreme Court of the country and the appeal stage.

  3- In the same interview, it was revealed to the lawyer, and contrary to the claim of Mr. Amir Raisian and the confirmation of Abdi Media's accurate information, the lawyers were aware of the re-referral of the case for the application of Article 477 to the 39th branch of the Supreme Court.

  Now let them confirm that they went to Sheikh Ali Razini or Sheikh Gholamreza Mazari, the members of the 39th branch of the Supreme Court, for additional explanations, or even went and they did not allow them!!!  And let them send even one bill (at this stage) to this branch physically or systemically.

4- To confirm that they requested in writing from the head of the 39th branch of the Supreme Court a copy of the recent judgment of Al-Sadour and the branch refused, or they requested a copy of the judgment from the judge of the execution of criminal sentences of the Rabat Karim Court by visiting in person (before the execution of the sentence) and  They did not give.

5- The most important of all these questions is the great negligence of lawyers. 
With the announcement of the execution of the sentence by the execution judge of the Prosecutor's Office, regardless of the end of the administrative time, why did they not officially ask the place of the execution of the sentence and request a meeting with the client?

6- And above, on the same night of the execution of the sentence, why wasn't the judge on duty of the General and Revolutionary Prosecutor's Office of Rabat Karim approached to meet the client sentenced to death, and this mistake of the judge of the execution of the sentence was announced and requested to comply with the law?

Shouldn't there be a difference between a human rights lawyer and a person without legal knowledge?