Will the Family of the Late Mohammad Qobadlou File a Complaint with the Disciplinary Prosecutor's Office of the Bar Association Regarding His Lawyers' Pursuits?

In my numerous notes addressed to your colleague Mr. Amir Raeisian, both of you representing the late Mr. Mohammad Qobadlou, I have currently used the term "negligence" to address my critiques towards you.

I have considerations and will heed the advice of one of the respected individuals, refraining from more daring and explicit critiques of you esteemed lawyers.

Please note that this should not be construed as an endorsement of the judicial process or a defense of the actions of the judiciary regarding the specifics of this case and the execution of this young man.

On the contrary, I suspect that the lack of a straightforward response from the spokesperson or the media center of the judiciary, or the CEO of the young and "truthful" Mizan News Agency, is questionable. However, I do not wish to think, whether intentionally or unintentionally, that there has been collusion.

This is because the judiciary and its media branches can easily and transparently state whether both lawyers have made physical or systematic referrals or correspondences to the presidency, the office of the first deputy, the office of the judicial deputy, Branch 39 of the Supreme Court, or the office responsible for granting permission for executions or the execution of sentences at the Robat Karim Prosecutor's Office.

Furthermore, it can be easily verified through the cookies of the Adl Iran systems and the content monitoring of your user account at the Information Technology Center of the judiciary which IP address and when you checked which pages of the late client's case, and what actions you took afterward.

Exactly while it is possible to send motions to the judicial authorities around the clock, regardless of office hours and the outcome; why didn't you submit a systematic motion to the execution judge regarding the location of the execution after the notice of execution? Did you request a meeting with the client and indicate your presence at the execution site? Or did you inform the duty prosecutor of the Robat Karim Prosecutor's Office either by phone or in writing during a personal visit?

Was the journey long, or was it difficult to go?

Dear Esteemed Lawyer,

Either both lawyers were aware of the proceedings of the case and the implementation of Article 477 and deny it, which is a betrayal of the client and public trust, or you were unaware, and this significant negligence reflects poorly on both of you for failing to communicate.

I emphasize that for now, I want to believe that both of you merely acted negligently.

I believe that the deceased cannot be revived, but if you have any documented explanations regarding proper follow-ups, please publish them publicly.

If you have the courage, assert that my questions are false so I can respond with substantiated answers.

I even believe that if the family of the late Mohammad Qobadlou cares, they should file complaints against both of you with the disciplinary prosecutor of the relevant Bar Association, and you should provide the very important documents you claim to possess to the relevant prosecutor and prosecutor's office so that an order for non-prosecution can be issued against you.

Please note that as an independent journalist, I fear neither the cyber army nor the misunderstandings that led to insults directed at me. I stand by every part of my writings and await substantive critiques instead of insults and superficial criticisms from you, your esteemed colleague, or any other informed party.

Human rights advocacy is not a claim. The life of the client is sacred, no matter who they are. Legal representation requires diligence and precise follow-ups, not Twitter games and seeking fame.

#AbdiMedia