It’s been over a month since the last briefing by the spokesperson of the jury of political and press courts regarding the cases handled by these courts. Akbar Nasrollahi, who started informing about press cases regularly after being elected as the spokesperson of the jury in November 2023 (Aban 1402), saw this trend decrease sharply from early February 2024, eventually stopping in March.
When asked by a researcher from DeFFI about the reasons for the halt in information dissemination about the rulings of press courts, Nasrollahi responded, “No court has been held.” He also denied any structural changes or changes in the spokesperson of the political and press courts, confirming that he is still the spokesperson.
Nasrollahi last reported on February 19, 2024 (30 Bahman 1402), about the issuance of a conviction against the newspaper Shargh by the jury of the political and press courts. Prior to that, on February 6, 2024 (17 Bahman 1402), he had informed about the court of Farhikhtegan and a journalist of this newspaper. In January 2024, Nasrollahi had reported on the rulings issued by the jury against 10 media outlets.
Despite the noticeable reduction in the dissemination of information about the press courts in February and the halt in holding these courts in March, DeFFI cannot independently refute Nasrollahi’s statement about the non-holding of courts. Follow-ups with several journalists and media managers regarding the holding or non-holding of political and press courts in the past month did not yield any data contradicting Nasrollahi’s claims.
What Does the Non-Holding of Political and Press Courts Mean?
Based on documented cases by DeFFI, since February 19, 2024 (30 Bahman 1402) and the halt in holding political and press courts, at least 23 journalists and Iranian media outlets have been prosecuted, judicial cases have been filed against 10 journalists and media managers, and 13 journalists have been sentenced in separate cases — applying Article 134 of the Islamic Penal Code and the last ruling issued in each case — to a total of 109 months in prison, 72 million tomans in fines, four years of deprivation from journalism, and two years of prohibition from activity in cyberspace.
These statistics indicate that the non-holding of press courts does not necessarily mean a reduction or cessation of media repression. Over the past month and since the last press court session, criminal courts and revolutionary courts in Iran have issued rulings against Iranian journalists in at least 14 separate cases.
DeFFI’s findings show that political and press courts, contrary to the Press Law, deliberately refuse to handle some media cases, sending these cases mostly to criminal and revolutionary courts for adjudication.
An examination of one of the cases documented by DeFFI in March 2024 clearly shows this extralegal pattern. On March 4, 2024 (14 Esfand 1402), Branch 1058 of Tehran’s Criminal Court 2 sentenced Maryam Shekarani, a journalist and head of the economy section of Shargh newspaper, to a six million toman fine.
This case was reviewed in a criminal court despite the Press Court’s declared “lack of jurisdiction,” leading to the case being returned to Criminal Court 2 for a ruling. Branch 1058 of Tehran’s Criminal Court 2 had previously faced a “lack of jurisdiction” order and referred the case to Branch 9 of Tehran’s Criminal Court 1, which operates with the presence of the press courts’ jury.
The deliberate pattern of avoiding media cases in political and press courts is a clear violation of established laws in Iran. According to Article 302 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the jurisdiction of political and press cases lies with Criminal Courts 1, which, per Article 34 of the Press Law, must be held publicly with the presence of a jury.
The reason for not adjudicating media activists’ cases in press courts should be sought in the mechanisms of media repression in Iran. The number of press cases is one of the most important indicators of civil liberties, development, and citizens’ right to free information flow.
The Islamic Republic, aware of international sensitivity to media repression, tries to use an extralegal pattern to mostly hold media activists’ trials in criminal and revolutionary courts, reduce the official statistics of press cases, and with vague and seemingly unrelated charges to journalistic activities against journalists, disrupt both the documentation of repression patterns and the independent flow of information in Iran.