Spotlight on

November 2012—Aban 1391 Week of November 6‐13, 2012 Editor: Dr. Raz Zimmt

Highlights of the week

 Iranian reactions to Obama win reflect different voices on United States

 Restrictions imposed on import of “luxury” products after last week’s export

restrictions

 Flying isn’t cheap anymore: domestic flight costs have gone up by 65%

 Who is in charge of funds at the Supreme Leader’s office?

 Iranian blogger’s death in prison sparks controversy

Iranian reactions to Obama win represent different voices on United States

The Iranian reactions to Barack Obama’s re-election for president of the United States represented the different voices in the Iranian discourse on the United States and the possibility of launching negotiations with it.

An official reaction released by Ramin Mehmanparast, the spokesman for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said that Obama’s re-election is a message from the American people against a radical policy and a manifestation of their demand that Obama fulfill his promises of a fundamental change in American policy and pay more attention to the domestic affairs of the United States and the welfare of its citizens. Public opinion in the Middle East and the Muslim world is still waiting for the U.S. president’s promises to be fulfilled, and believes that it is only by adopting a policy based on non-intervention in the affairs of the region’s countries that the United States can regain some of the prestige it once had among Middle Eastern nations. In the past 33 years Iran has had experience with different presidents from both parties, who have

229-12 2 taken a hostile approach towards the interests of the Iranian people, and it believes that the Iranian people’s distrust of the United States administration can only be lessened if their wishes and rights are respected and if the United States implements a fundamental, practical change in its policy towards Iran, said the announcement released by the speaker of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Fars, November 7).

The conservative press, which stressed even before the elections that there is no actual difference between the two presidential candidates, continued to play down the significance of the elections after their results were published. In an editorial published on the eve of the elections, the daily Kayhan said that, whichever way the elections go, it won’t matter much for Iran, and that no change is forthcoming in the overall hostile stance taken by the United States towards Iran. The TV debate between Obama and Romney has proven that both parties in the United States are united in their opinion on the anti-Iranian sanctions, the nuclear program, and Israel’s crimes, and that there is no difference whatsoever between them.

Similarly, the election results make no difference for the possibility of a military option against Iran, and in any case such an option is impractical because of the economic crisis and the budget deficit of the United States. Talking about war given the current economic, social, and political situation of the United States is a lie, and both presidents will likely proceed with the anti-Iranian sanctions project. Those who say that Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities in case the candidate it supports wins the elections are also mistaken, and Israel’s choice for the next president of the United States is not at all clear. The struggle between Islamic Iran and the Great Satan is not a tactical issue that can be easily changed, the newspaper concluded, but rather a fundamental struggle that cannot be hidden away (Kayhan, November 6).

An article published by the daily after the election results were published said that the elections are not particularly significant because of the persistent weakness of the United States. For American voters, it was a choice between bad and worse, the article said. Kayhan noted the weakness of the United States in contrast to the growing strength of the Muslim world, with Iran at its center, the weakening of the Zionist lobby in the United States, and the increasing differences of opinion between Israel and the United States. Even though Prime Minister Netanyahu congratulated Obama on his victory, the relations between the two countries have reached an unprecedented level of tension this past year.

229-12 3

The daily estimated that, given Obama’s weakness, he will be unable to solve the significant foreign policy challenges, mainly the Palestinian problem, the Islamic awakening, and the Iranian challenge. Obama is currently as weak as former President George Bush, and the United States of 2012 is the same United States of 2001. The crimes committed by the United States during the Obama administration are no less grave than those of the Bush administration, and the United States continues to be involved in crimes perpetrated as part of the regional conflicts in Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia (Kayhan, November 8).

The daily Jomhuri-ye Eslami also argued that the election results will have no effect on the policy pursued by the United States towards Iran. In its summary of weekly events, the daily said that, contrary to the considerable interest aroused by the presidential elections inside the United States, the world does not consider them particularly significant and believes the two candidates to be two sides of the same coin. It doesn’t matter who wins the elections, because every president is bound by a predetermined policy and works in accordance with the dictates of “world Zionism” and the imperialist objectives of the United States (Jomhuri-ye Eslami, November 8). Another article published by the daily earlier this week said that the only difference between Romney and Obama is their chosen style of foreign policy. This exterior difference has led some non-U.S. commentators to speculate that Obama’s re-election will bring about a change in the American policy, but the fact is that as long as the American policy is influenced by “Zionist networks” and the rich, it will remain unchanged (Jomhuri-ye Eslami, November 11).

229-12 4

Media affiliated with the pragmatic conservative bloc and with the reformists manifested a more optimistic and positive approach towards Obama’s victory, and noted that several opportunities have been opened up for Iran thanks to his re-election. In an article published by the daily Tehran Emrooz, international affairs commentator Hassan Hanizadeh estimated that, in light of the broad support given by the “Zionist lobby” to Mitt Romney, Obama will likely distance himself from Israel in the next four years and take a more independent approach compared to the past. His drifting away from the “Zionist lobby” gives Iran an opportunity to examine Obama’s foreign policy to have the economic sanctions lifted. Considering the positive signals Obama has sent to Iran these past several years, it is not out of the question that the sanctions will be lifted, even though the international atmosphere in the shadow of the continuing pressure exerted by the West on Iran is not conducive to promoting negotiations with the new American administration (Tehran Emrooz, November 8).

Mehdi Mohtashemi, former director of the United States desk in Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, also estimated in an interview given to the Asr-e Iran website that the United States’ policy towards Israel may undergo certain changes in the coming several years because Obama is no longer concerned with being re-elected and may put more pressure on Israel to come back to the negotiating table. The Iranian diplomat estimated, however, that the Obama administration is likely to persist with its current policy towards Iran, particularly the escalation of economic sanctions and providing a possibility for progress in the negotiations between the G5+1 countries and Iran. With Obama, at least Iran knows what it can expect. If Mitt Romney had been elected, however, it would have been difficult to predict his actions (Asr-e Iran, November 7).

In an article published by the reformist daily Arman, political commentator Sadegh Zibakalam argued that Romney’s victory would definitely have been worse for Iran than Obama’s victory, considering the former’s statements about Iran during the election campaign. Zibakalam estimated that Obama would continue his current policy towards Iran, adding, however, that this depends to a great deal on how Iran will conduct itself with the American administration. He discussed the gradual change among Iran’s conservatives with regard to possible negotiations with Iran, and expressed his hope that this change will continue and eventually pave the way for negotiations between the two countries that will serve Iran’s national interests (Arman, November 8).

Hamid Reza Asefi, who served as spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during President Khatami’s administration, also argued that the future of Iran-United States

229-12 5 relations depends to a greater extent on the internal developments in Iran than the election results in the United States. Asefi said that there are no significant differences between the two major political parties in the United States as far as foreign policy is concerned, and that the American policy towards Iran reflects a doctrine that does not change between presidents. According to Asefi, the Iranian presidential elections will have a greater impact on the relations between the two countries, which are influenced by Iran’s foreign policy more than they do by the American foreign policy (Arman, November 8).

The different approaches prevalent in Iran towards the United States could also be seen on the official website of the Ministry of Intelligence. A commentary article released by the website on the eve of the presidential elections said that the Democratic Party’s stance towards Iran is more convenient for it than that of the Republican Party. Even though in both parties there are top officials who are hostile towards Iran, there are significant differences between them. The Republican Party is in favor of stepping up the struggle against Iran and advocates the use of force to ensure American interests and objectives. Romney and his party believe that Iran’s nuclear activity is the greatest threat to the United States in the world, and that the Obama administration failed in dealing with the Iranian problem since it was his preference to use the diplomatic approach, which yielded no results. The republican stance is closer to Israel’s policy on the use of military force against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The Democratic Party is just as hostile to Iran as the Republican Party, but its stance towards Iran is completely different. Even though the Democrats say that all the options are on the table, the fact is that they pin their hopes on diplomacy and the policy of economic sanctions. Obama’s policy is different than Israel’s, which could be seen in his refusal to agree to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s demand to establish “red lines” for the Iranian nuclear program, leading to an open conflict between the two countries (www.vaja.ir, November 6).

Meanwhile, more and more voices in Iran say that the prospect of direct negotiations with the United States should not be ruled out. Speaking at a conference held in the north Iranian Gorgan University this week, Manouchehr Mottaki, former minister of foreign affairs, announced that the issue of relations between Iran and the United States is not a “partisan subject but a national project”, and that the ground in both countries has to be prepared for the reestablishment of these relations. He noted that

229-12 6 the Supreme Leader had formerly said that the lack of relations between Iran and the United States was not forever. According to Mottaki, it is possible to restore the ties between the two countries if there is political willingness in both of them to do so. He noted, however, that such political willingness does not exist in Washington yet, and that the United States still believes that it can exert pressure on Iran (www.snn.ir, November 10).

Hossein Sheikholeslam, the international affairs advisor of the Majles speaker, also addressed the possibility of negotiations with the United States, saying that Iran will agree to such negotiations if they serve the interests of the regime. Speaking at a conference held in Gilan University, Sheikholeslam said that both countries are currently locked in a fierce struggle, and that the nuclear program is just an excuse which the United States uses to fight against Iran (www.snn.ir, November 10).

Restrictions imposed on import of “luxury” products after last week’s export restrictions

Just one week after the government imposed restrictions on exporting products and goods from Iran, Deputy Industry and Commerce Minister Hamid Safdel announced this week that the government has decided to ban the import of what it referred to as 77 “luxury and non-vital products” to Iran. According to Iranian customs data, 12 million dollars’ worth of such products were imported to Iran last year. In an interview to , the deputy minister said that his ministry is looking into the list of low- priority imports to make a final decision on the policy for importing them to Iran.

The decision to ban the import of non-vital products is intended to help deal with the foreign currency crisis. The list of products released by the government includes clothing, personal care items, cars, chandeliers, couches, home appliances (such as refrigerators and television sets), light bulbs, fish, flowers, juices, dressings, cocoa, coffee, chocolate, jam, cosmetics, candles and matches, pesticides, bathtubs, toilet seats, plastic items, suitcases, wood products, blankets and bedspreads, toilet paper, rugs, shoes, umbrellas, various kinds of construction materials, sculptures, diamonds, carpentry tools, copper items, stoves, telephones, cars, motorcycles, bicycles, boats, hand watches, musical instruments, lamps, toys, paintings, aluminum products, calculators, batteries, car batteries, microphones and speakers, CDs and disks, and cellular telephones (Mehr, November 7).

229-12 7

The Tabnak website strongly criticized the government’s decision, which initially included limitations on the import of computers and IT equipment, and warned that it will lead to an increase in the smuggling of laptop computers and cellular telephones. A commentary article published in Tabnak’s economic supplement said that some of the products included on the list of banned imports, such as laptops, desktop computers, cellular telephones, and home appliances, cannot be considered luxury products, since they are in high demand in Iran. Banning their import to Iran will trigger a sharp increase in the prices of such products and make smuggling them into the country much more prevalent.

The website said that the purpose of the restrictions on importing these products is unclear, since, at any rate, they are defined as low-priority products which cannot be imported at the official low exchange rate. Tabnak warned that the decision made by the government will have negative economic consequences, just like its decision to stop selling foreign currency at the official exchange rate to those traveling abroad and to students who study in foreign countries, which worked people into an unprecedented frenzy to buy foreign currency and led to a sharp increase in free-market foreign currency exchange rates. The website accused the government of making economic decisions without giving any thought to their consequences (Tabnak, November 7).

The head of Tehran’s Union of Computer Technology also criticized the decision to include computer equipment in the list of banned imports. He warned that the decision will lead to a sharp 300 to 500 percent increase in the prices of computer equipment and an increase in the smuggling of such equipment. In an interview to Mehr News Agency, Seyyed Mehdi-Mir Mehdi said that the decision will have a severe impact on

229-12 8 the maintenance of Iran’s national computer infrastructure and on the daily lives of the citizens, since most computer equipment is imported from other countries, the exceptions being mice, keyboards, and monitors, which are manufactured in Iran. He noted that the government has done nothing to encourage the production of computer equipment in Iran, and that manufacturers of such equipment are required to wait at least four years for their production permits. As long as the government has not taken measures to have computer equipment manufactured in Iran, its import from foreign countries cannot be prevented (Mehr, November 11). In the wake of the strong criticism of the inclusion of computer equipment in the list of banned imports, a top official in the Commerce Development Organization announced on Monday that no restrictions will be imposed on the import of computers and IT equipment (Mehr, November 12).

Meanwhile, the Khabar Online website reported that, shortly prior to the new restrictions on importing products to Iran, there was a significant increase in the import of luxury cars to the country. According to customs data, 3900 cars, including 38 worth more than 100,000 dollars each, were imported to Iran last month, mostly from the UAE. Two hundred ninety luxury cars at a total worth of over 40 million dollars were imported to Iran in the first seven months of the current Iranian year (March-September 2012). Of the 38 luxury cars imported last month, there were 31 Porsche cars, 6 Mercedes Benz, and one Maserati. A total of 277 Porsche cars have been imported to Iran since the beginning of the year, 144 of which cost more than 100,000 dollars each. The most expensive car, a Porsche Panamera Turbo, was imported from Germany and sold for 210,000 dollars (Khabar On-line, November 8).

Flying isn’t cheap anymore: domestic flight costs have gone up by 65%

Iran’s Aviation Organization announced an average increase of 65 percent in domestic airline ticket costs. Hamid-Reza Pahlavani, chairman of the Aviation Organization, reported that the price increase had come into effect last week. He noted that the airlines had asked the Supreme Aviation Council for a more significant increase in ticket prices given the sharp increase in the foreign currency exchange rate in recent months, but that the council had decided to approve an increase of 65 percent out of consideration for public interests. The prices will increase by 60 to 70 percent depending on the distance of the flight and the number of passengers.

229-12 9

Comparison of domestic flight prices for some itineraries

Departure Destination Old price (in New price rials) (in rials) Abadan Ardabil 949,000 1,565,815

Abadan Kish 802,000 1,323,300

Abadan Yazd 748,000 1,234,200

Arak Bandar Abbas 1,056,000 1,742,400

Esfahan Abadan 558,000 920,700

Esfahan Ahvaz 558,000 920,700

Esfahan Bandar Abbas 809,000 1,334,850

Esfahan Zahedan 906,000 1,494,900

Esfahan Kermanshah 644,000 1,062,600

Ahvaz Bandar Abbas 877,000 1,447,050

Ahvaz Zahedan 1,457,000 2,404,050

Ahvaz Kish 819,000 1,351,350

Bandar Abbas Abadan 862,000 1,422,300

Bandar Abbas Rasht 1,184,000 1,953,600

Bandar Abbas Kermanshah 1,251,000 2,064,150

Bandar Abbas Yazd 628,000 1,036,200

Tabriz Esfahan 775,000 1,278,750

Tabriz Ahvaz 905,000 1,493,250

Tabriz Bandar Abbas 1,400,000 2,310,000

Tabriz Kish 1,337,000 2,105,050

Tehran Abadan 697,000 1,150,050

Tehran Ardabil 558,000 920,700

Tehran Esfahan 558,000 920,700

229-12 10

Tehran Ahvaz 610,000 1,006,500

Tehran Bandar Abbas 1,086,000 1,791,900

Tehran Bushehr 807,000 1,331,550

Tehran Tabriz 594,000 980,100

Seyyed Mehdi Sadeqi, a board member of the Aviation Organization, said in an interview to that raising airline ticket prices by 65 percent will not compensate the airlines for the significant losses that they have suffered in recent months, and may in fact even increase them. He noted that the airlines have been severely hit this past year by the significant 250-percent increase in fuel prices and the sharp appreciation of the dollar against the rial. Sadeqi said that 70 percent of airlines’ expenses are in foreign currency, which is why the steep rise of the dollar has caused considerable losses for the companies. He said that, over the past year, the routine expenses of Iran’s airliners have gone up by 100 percent as a result of the increase in gas prices and in employees’ salaries, as well as the growing routine operating expenses, including water and electricity tariffs, catering service costs, and airport service costs.

According to Sadeqi, the only way that the recently authorized increase in air ticket prices might help improve the situation of the airliners is for the government to provide them with foreign currency at the official low exchange rate (1,226 tomans per dollar) and with gas at discount prices. He added that increasing airline ticket prices may cause more losses for the airlines, as it will bring about a decrease in the number of passengers who use domestic flights for tourism and recreation. Iran’s airlines, he said, are already facing a decrease in the number of people who use the domestic flight services (Fars, November 9).

229-12 11

The daily Tehran Emrooz expressed its support for the decision to raise airline ticket prices, saying that there is no way around it. An editorial by Ali-Reza Boheyra’i, an expert on the aviation industry, said that some experts have argued that a 65-percent increase in airline ticket prices is unrealistic and unreasonable since it is considerably higher than the increase in Iran’s inflation rate. This argument is incorrect since the aviation industry cannot be treated the same way as the other industries in Iran. It is true that the prices of many products and services in the country are determined according to the inflation rate, but they cannot be compared with aviation services. Iran does not manufacture the spare parts needed for airplanes but rather imports them from other countries. In addition, the airlines do most of their business in dollars, not in rials like other services in Iran. This makes it impossible to apply the rules and regulations that govern other services and goods to the aviation industry.

The dollar’s sharp 240-percent increase has had a particularly significant effect on the aviation industry, which depends on the dollar-rial exchange rate, and the airlines therefore cannot be expected not to raise their fares. If there is criticism of the price increase, it should be addressed to the government, which won’t sell foreign currency at the official low exchange rate to the airlines. The government argues that it can’t sell foreign currency at the official exchange rate to the airlines and is considering selling them dollars for at least 2,500 tomans each. The airlines have no choice but to adapt their revenues to their expenses at this exchange rate and reach a budget balance— otherwise they will be forced to go out of business.

229-12 12

It also needs to be considered, the author of the article argues, that most passengers who use domestic flight services have relatively high salaries and can afford spending higher sums on flights. Those who can’t afford flying at the higher prices can use alternative and less costly means of transportation like trains and buses, which is exactly the way things are in European countries. In Germany, for example, only the wealthy use domestic flights, while other people take trains or buses (Tehran Emrooz, November 7).

Who is in charge of funds at the Supreme Leader’s office?

In its most recent issue, Pasdar-e Eslam (“Guardian of Islam”), a monthly issued on behalf of the Islamic Publicity Organization, published a lengthy interview with Ayatollah Seyyed Hashem Rasouli Mahallati, who was referred to as being in charge of financial affairs at the Supreme Leader’s office.

The interview, which was republished on other websites affiliated with the right wing of the conservative camp, was mostly dedicated to the top cleric’s retrospective of his time with Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic revolution, and their relationship, which lasted more than 50 years. In the interview, Mahallati was described as one of Khomeini’s closest friends, and a person who fulfilled various religious, social, and cultural roles at the Supreme Leader’s office. Mahallati is the father-in-law of Ali-Akbar Nateq Nouri, former speaker of the Majles and one of the Supreme Leader’s senior advisors.

In the last part of the interview, Mahallati spoke about his work in the service of Ali Khamenei, the current Supreme Leader, which began shortly after Khomeini’s death in 1989. Mahallati said that his acquaintance with Khamenei goes back to the 1950s and the 1960s, when he met Khamenei in the city of Qom and even gave him religion classes for a period of time. He said that, after Khomeini’s death, he was approached by Khamenei’s then office chief Mir-Mohammadi, who said that Khamenei would like to meet him. Mahallati realized that the Supreme Leader wanted to offer him a job at his office, and performed a ritual consultation of the Quran (estekhareh) whose results were positive. He met with Khamenei, who asked him to take charge of handling Friday prayer leaders in mosques as well as financial and religious law affairs. Khamenei informed Mahallati that he was interested in making him responsible for all financial

229-12 13 affairs, so that even if the Supreme Leader himself needed funds, he would go to Mahallati.

For years, Mahallati was the head of the Friday prayer leaders’ council. Several years later, at his request, he was relieved of responsibility for the prayer leaders due to his workload and advancing age. However, he continues to handle financial affairs at the Supreme Leader’s office. From time to time, Khamenei has people go to Mahallati to receive money. At other times, Mahallati visits Supreme Leader Khamenei’s office to give him advice on money that he receives.

Ayatollah Hashem Rasouli Mahallati (www.mashreghnews.ir)

Following up on numerous reports published in recent years that have quoted people close to Supreme Leader Khamenei on his supposed modesty, Mahallati, too, discussed the Supreme Leader’s simple lifestyle, his integrity in financial affairs, and his (“admirably”) careful conduct with regard to his expenses, particularly those pertaining to his office. Mahallati said that Khamenei refuses to use the office funds to finance his own or his family’s expenses. According to Mahallati, one time Khamenei even refused to let his children use the copying machine in his office for their studies.

When asked about the Supreme Leader’s income sources, Mahallati said that his income comes from an old apartment that he rents out and donations. He noted that Khamenei often lends money to different people, including his personal guards. According to Mahallati, Khamenei’s modesty is also evident in his personal room, whose design is very plain (, November 8).

229-12 14

Iranian blogger’s death in prison sparks controversy

The death of an Iranian blogger during his prison sentence sparked a public controversy this week and was even brought up at a Majles session. Sattar Beheshti, 35, was arrested on October 30 at his residence in Robat Karim, Tehran Province, for publishing anti-regime materials on his personal blog and the Facebook social network.

He was accused of compromising state security and handed over to the cyber police for interrogation. On October 31 Beheshti was moved to Ward 350 at Tehran’s Evin prison, where political prisoners are incarcerated. He spent about 24 hours in the ward and was subsequently brought back for more questioning at the cyber police headquarters. On November 6 his family was informed of his death and asked to pick up his body at the Kahrizak detention facility in Tehran. The authorities, which provided the family members with no explanations on the circumstances surrounding his death, warned them not to talk to the media about the incident and even confiscated their cellular telephones and imposed severe restrictions on their movement. Last Thursday, November 8, Beheshti was buried in Tehran. The ceremony was closely supervised by the internal security forces, who even imposed restrictions on the number of participants.

229-12 15

This weekend the reformist website Kalemeh presented testimonies from Ward 350 according to which Beheshti had been severely tortured during his questioning at the cyber police headquarters. Forty-one political prisoners held in the ward released a memorandum of opinion where they testified about his physical and mental condition after being moved to the ward. According to the testimonies, when Beheshti arrived in the ward on October 31, he told his fellow prisoners that he had been severely beaten while in the custody of the cyber police, and that the interrogators had even threatened to kill him. The prisoners said that there were signs of brutal violence on all parts of his body, and that he was in a bad physical and mental condition. Despite being in a poor state, Beheshti managed to write a brief complaint to the Evin prison authorities describing his condition and the way he had been tortured by the cyber police interrogators.

The letter of complaint sent by Beheshti to the prison authorities (Kalemeh)

Beheshti was taken to the prison infirmary on two occasions, the political prisoners said. On November 1 Beheshti was once again moved from Ward 350 to the cyber police headquarters. Before being moved, he expressed his concern that the interrogators intended to kill him (Kalemeh, November 10).

Beheshti’s death drew strong reactions from the reformist media and human rights organizations in Iran and the West. Iranian social network users accused the Iranian authorities of responsibility for his death, protested the authorities’ silence over the incident, and called for Beheshti’s death to be used for raising public awareness of the problem of political prisoners detained in Iran.

229-12 16

Baztab, a website affiliated with Mohsen Reza’i, chairman of the Expediency Discernment Council and former chief of the Revolutionary Guards, argued that Beheshti’s death is reminiscent of the incident at the Kahrizak detention facility, and demanded that the authorities take strong measures against those responsible for his death to make sure such cases do not happen again (, November 7). The Kahrizak affair first made headlines in July 2009, when the south Tehran detention facility was closed down on orders from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the wake of reports that at least three detainees had died there after being abused by wardens and other inmates. One of the detainees who died in the detention facility was Abdol Hossein Ruhollamini, the son of one of Mohsen Reza’i’s top advisors.

In the wake of the strong reactions provoked by Beheshti’s death, the affair became a subject of discussion in the Majles. Majles member Ahmad Tavakoli strongly criticized the silence of the authorities over the blogger’s death, saying that it is necessary to shed light on the circumstances surrounding his death. He noted that governments and media in the West are taking advantage of the affair to attack Iran, and that the judiciary and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs need to provide explanations on it. He called on the judiciary to take strong action against those responsible for the blogger’s death and suggested that the authorities should deal with top officials involved in corruption instead of going after bloggers (Alef, November 11). Mohammad-Hassan Abu-Torabi, deputy speaker of the Majles, also commented on the affair, and announced that the Majles National Security and Foreign Policy Committee established a special committee to look into the circumstances of Beheshti’s death (ISNA, November 11).

A reaction issued by the judiciary’s Human Rights Headquarters following Beheshti’s death said that Ayatollah Sadeq Larijani, chief of the judiciary, ordered an investigation into the affair and said that its results should be published as soon as possible. The announcement of the judiciary said that the Islamic republic respects the rights of all citizens, including suspects and detainees, and that the judiciary intends to take action against all those who are found to be involved in the affair (Asr-e Iran, November 11). On Monday, November 12, the Iranian media reported that three of Beheshti’s interrogators had been detained.

229-12 17

Pictures of the week: floods in northern Iran

229-12 18

229-12