X
GO
Publish date: Wednesday 09 December 2020
view count : 122
create date : Wednesday, December 9, 2020 | 11:21 AM
publish date : Wednesday, December 9, 2020 | 11:17 AM
update date : Wednesday, December 9, 2020 | 11:37 AM

Why has Rouhollah Zam been sentenced to death?

  • Why has Rouhollah Zam been sentenced to death?

Iran’s Supreme Court has upheld the death sentence against the administrator of an anti-Iran Telegram channel Amad News who had been convicted of “corruption on earth” in a lower court.

Iranian Judiciary Spokesman Gholam-Hossein Esmaili said Rouhollah Zam had received the death penalty from the Public and Revolution Court.

 

He was arrested in October 2019 by the Intelligence Organization of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corp (IRGC). Iranian intelligence forces had been keeping a watchful eye on Rouhollah Zam’s movements for a long time and he stepped into the intelligence trap set by IRGC some two years ago.

 

The meticulous intelligence operation involved outmaneuvering the intelligence services of certain Western countries, especially France, which offered Zam guidance and protection for his operation.

 

Amad News was notorious for disseminating incriminating content against the Islamic establishment, insulting the sanctity of Iranian Muslims and publishing fake news in order to drive a wedge between the Iranian people and government. Zam’s Telegram channel encouraged social unrest and spread the timings for that in Iran in 2017. This channel also published fake information about IRI officials.

 

Zam faced charges of having “committed offenses against the country’s internal and external security” and “espionage for the French intelligence service,” alongside “corruption on earth” as well as insult to “the sanctity of Islam” according to an indictment released in February.

 

He has confessed to having committed the mentioned crimes and he also has said in the second session of his trial that he had the highest security protection after the French President Emmanuel Macron.

 

Certain western countries including France have considered Zam’s conviction “unfair” and a “measure taken against the freedom of press” but the question raised here is why western countries’ officials protest a legal verdict issued by a legitimate court but remain silent when the rights of the Iranian nation is at stake? The answer to this question is easy since western countries claim to be human rights advocates and ask for justice to be done only when their interests require them to do so and they could also ignore a whole nation’s rights completely when there is no interest for them.

tags: