Dearest friends,
The last night was extreme. The “ground invasion” of Gaza resulted in scores and carloads with maimed, torn apart, bleeding, shivering, dying – all sorts of injured Palestinians, all ages, all civilians, all innocent.
The heroes in the ambulances and in all of Gaza’s hospitals are working 12-24 hour shifts, grey from fatigue and inhuman workloads (without payment all in Shifa for the last 4 months), they care, triage, try to understand the incomprehensible chaos of bodies, sizes, limbs, walking, not walking, breathing, not breathing, bleeding, not bleeding humans. HUMANS!
Now, once more treated like animals by “the most moral army in the world” (sic!).
My respect for the wounded is endless, in their contained determination in the midst of pain, agony and shock; my admiration for the staff and volunteers is endless, my closeness to the Palestinian “sumud” gives me strength, although in glimpses I just want to scream, hold someone tight, cry, smell the and hair of the warm child, covered in blood, protect ourselves in an endless embrace – but we cannot afford that, nor can they.
Ashy grey faces – Oh NO! Not one more load of tens of maimed and bleeding, we still have lakes of blood on the floor in the ER, piles of dripping, blood-soaked bandages to clear out – oh – the cleaners, everywhere, swiftly shovelling the blood and discarded tissues, hair, clothes,cannulas – the leftovers from death – all taken away … to be prepared again, to be repeated all over. More then 100 cases came to Shifa in the last 24 hrs. Enough for a large well trained hospital with anxiety-tab.com, but here – almost nothing: no electricity, water, disposables, drugs, OR-tables, instruments, monitors – all rusted and as if taken from museums of yesterday’s hospitals. But they do not complain, these heroes. They get on with it, like warriors, head on, enormously resolute.
And as I write these words to you, alone, on a bed, my tears flow, the warm but useless tears of pain and grief, of anger and fear. This is not happening!
An then, just now, the orchestra of the Israeli war-machine starts its gruesome symphony again, just now: salvos of artillery from the navy boats just down on the shores, the roaring F16, the sickening drones (Arabic ‘Zennanis’, the hummers), and the cluttering Apaches. So much made in and paid by the US.
Mr. Obama – do you have a heart?
I invite you – spend one night – just one night – with us in Shifa. Disguised as a cleaner, maybe.
I am convinced, 100%, it would change history.
Nobody with a heart AND power could ever walk away from a night in Shifa without being determined to end the slaughter of the Palestinian people.
But the heartless and merciless have done their calculations and planned another “dahyia” onslaught on Gaza.
The rivers of blood will keep the coming night. I can hear they have tuned their instruments of death.
Please. Do what you can. This, THIS cannot continue.
Mads Gilbert MD PhD Professor and Clinical Head Clinic of Emergency Medicine University Hospital of North Norway Source: World Bulletin
Six flechette shells were fired towards the village of Khuzaa, east of Khan Younis, on 17 July, according to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Nahla Khalil Najjar, 37, suffered injuries to her chest, it said. PCHR provided a picture of flechettes taken by a fieldworker last week.
The Zionist military did not deny using the shells in the conflict. “As a rule, the IDF only employs weapons that have been determined lawful under international law, and in a manner which fully conforms with the laws of armed conflict,” a spokesperson said in response to a request for specific comment on the deployment of flechettes.
B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights organization, describes a flechette shell as “an anti-personnel weapon that is generally fired from a tank. The shell explodes in the air and releases thousands of metal darts 37.5mm in length, which disperse in a conical arch 300 meters long and about 90 meters wide”.
The munitions are not prohibited under international humanitarian law, but according to B’Tselem, “other rules of humanitarian law render their use in the Gaza Strip illegal. One of the most fundamental principles is the obligation to distinguish between those who are involved and those who are not involved in the fighting, and to avoid to the extent possible injury to those who are not involved. Deriving from this principle is the prohibition of the use of an imprecise weapon which is likely to result in civilian injuries”.
The Zionist regime has deployed flechette shells in Gaza and Lebanon before. B’Tselem has documented the deaths of nine Palestinians in Gaza from flechettes in 2001 and 2002. Flechettes have also killed and wounded dozens of civilians, including women and children, in conflicts between the occupying regime of Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
The Zionist military deployed artillery shells containing white phosphorous in densely populated areas of Gaza during Operation Cast Lead in 2008 and 2009, causing scores of deaths and extensive burns. It initially issued a categorical denial of reports of the use of white phosphorous, but later admitted it, saying the weapon was only used to create smokescreens.
Human Rights Watch said its use of the munitions in Operation Cast Lead was indiscriminate and evidence of war crimes.
In response to a legal challenge, the Zionist regime said last year it would “avoid the use in built-up areas of artillery shells containing white phosphorus, with two narrow exceptions”. The exceptions were not disclosed.
But on Monday, Zionist aerial and ground forces were using white phosphorus bombs to pound several residential areas across the besieged Gaza Strip, several reporters on the ground said.
Just recently, a Norwegian doctor in the besieged coastal enclave criticized the occupying regime for using cancer-inducing bombs against Palestinian civilians.
Medics says some Palestinians in the besieged enclave have been wounded by a new type of weapon that even doctors with previous experience in war zones do not recognize.
Israel also used depleted-uranium in the besieged region during previous assaults.
Zionist PM Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday defended the growing civilian toll in his invasion of the Gaza Strip, particularly the deaths in attacks on the Gaza City’s Shejaiya neighborhood, while touting the ongoing war as a “historic battle” for the occupying regime’s survival.
The indiscriminate shelling and bombing of the district left more than 100 people dead, with mutilated bodies of women and children lying in the streets as they frantically tried to flee the attack.
Netanyahu insisted that “we asked in every way for the civilian population to leave” and that Hamas was to blame for every civilian who wasn’t able to flee the onslaught.
Some 50,000 Gazans have already fled their homes, but given the strip’s tiny size and that neither the occupying regime of Israel nor Egypt is letting in civilian refugees, there aren’t really places for them to go.
Netanyahu claimed that the “international legitimacy” of the invasion was not in question and that Israel enjoys “very strong support” worldwide for continuing the attacks.
By the international legitimacy, he apparently meant the U.S. and its allies as Secretary of State John Kerry travelled to Cairo to negotiate a ceasefire.
A lot of U.S. officials don’t seem ready for the war to end either, and Kerry had reportedly been “warned” against going to Cairo. The U.S. Senate is also unanimously pushing a non-binding resolution endorsing the Israeli invasion.
The U.S. resolution not only backs the continued Israeli invasion, but also demands Hamas end all resistance to the attacks, and demands the Palestinian Authority sever all ties with Hamas.
Kerry’s own position is somewhat muddled, as publicly he is towing the line on the Zionist regime’s “right to defend itself” by attacking the Gaza Strip, while being caught by a live mic privately expressing frustration about the civilian toll, particularly the large number of children the occupying regime of Israel has killed. When confronted about the contrast, Kerry defaulted back to the pro-Israel position.
It is almost a year since the use of the terms moderation and restraint has picked up in our daily conversations. When Dr. Hassan Rouhani used the same words to paint a picture appealing enough to the Iranian people to hand him an emphatic victory in elections, the question was whether moderation could turn into common discourse in Iranian culture. Anthropologist Nasser Fakouhi answers that question and talks about the application of moderation in formulation of cultural strategy. The university professor believes moderation is tantamount to rationalism and wisdom and says: “In order to institutionalize the culture of moderation and develop a cultural strategy on its foundation, the first step should be to erase the myth-ridden mentality that has ensnared us in the radical and conservative ideologies of the 20th century. Today the nationalist ideology is not touted anywhere in the world; and in case there is any such promotion, it comes from the least developed sections of society.” The following is an excerpt of an interview a 44th issue of Jostoju, the monthly appendix of Etemad newspaper, conducted with Dr. Fakouhi, an assistant professor at Tehran University’s Faculty of Social Sciences:
Last year saw the victory in presidential elections of a candidate who ran on a platform of moderation in politics. The question is how moderation caught the eye of the Iranian people. Was it already an attribute of the Iranians? Basically, are the Iranian people known for having such a characteristic?
The change in question should come slowly and steadily to minimize risks and repercussions in the short- and medium-run.
The approach we have Iranized and renamed is well-known in our own culture and in cultures elsewhere in the world. It’s not anything new, neither in politics, nor in social behavior. As far as social behavior is concerned, moderation is a rather vague concept with more or less clear characteristics. It prompts us to distance ourselves, on the one hand, from radicalism (recourse to disproportionately extreme views to change the status quo) and, on the other, from conservatism (tendency to maintain the status quo) and accept the fact that thanks to clearly explainable reasons the status quo should change for the better (to secure public satisfaction and improve the quality of their lives). However, the change in question should come slowly and steadily to minimize risks and repercussions in the short- and medium-run.
Are you suggesting that during last year’s presidential elections we understood that the change in question should be introduced with moderation?
In addition to plots by foreigners, we fell prey to radical and conservative discourses and missed out on a great opportunity.
As I said this approach is deep-rooted in our traditional culture and in cultures elsewhere in the world. Its root should be looked for in an experience which has led to the emergence of a practical philosophy. I don’t want to get involved in lengthy political and theoretical issues here, but it’s worth mentioning that rightist revolutionary approaches of the 20th century (Fascism, and most recently Thatcherism, and Reaganism which outlived President Reagan and stretched into the Bush presidency) and leftist approaches (Leninist and Maoist Communism and Castroism) were jarring examples of dangerous radicalism and conservatism that led to dire consequences for societies, and the world at large. Other ideologies on the left side of the spectrum such as Social Democracy and on the right including Christian Socialism are clear examples of leaning toward moderation. In other words, we have both historical and theoretical examples to deal with. In response to your question as to whether Iranians have been familiar with such approaches, I would have to say: without a doubt. But just like people elsewhere in the world they are as exposed as ever to the other two tendencies. And the reason for that is clear: radical and conservative discourses are abbreviated worldviews that simplify everything and thus catch the eye of more individuals. In fact, they show the audience a green-light that is non-existent. Whereas the discourse of moderation always has to display intricacies and difficulties as an inseparable part of the package it offers. A perfect example of this happened during Iran’s Constitutional Revolution and later during the nationalization of the oil industry. In addition to plots by foreigners, we fell prey to radical and conservative discourses and missed out on a great opportunity. […]
Can we make a nation buy into moderation as a cultural strategy or a cultural characteristic? And what should be done to pave the way for such acceptance?
It is not a national characteristic. I have said this in the past, let me repeat myself, recourse to national sentiments and nationality, to which we are accustomed, is something political. This theory which was championed by Anthony Smith and Benedict Anderson, who lived around the time of the French Revolution, is less than 200 years old. In Iran, the most optimistic historical perspective would suggest that it dates back to the time when the Constitutional Movement was in the making. What we pay attention to is the Iranian civilization and culture that goes back thousands of years and manifests itself in the language, lifestyle, wisdom and thoughts, philosophy, technological skills, intelligence and survival strategies of the people. It has nothing to do with governance in general and vulnerable national governments whose reigns had barely hit the 100-year mark in particular.
We need to focus on these cultural elements in building our future and not on a nationalistic mythology that is a product of the racist policies of the 20th century which have done nothing of significance for humanity except overseeing the killings of hundreds of millions of people and commission of unspeakable atrocities.
The vulnerability you just mentioned is of great importance. What can be done to get rid of the mentality of which myths are a central part?
I believe the first step down that path should be toward elimination of the myth-ridden thoughts that hold us hostage to radical or conservative ideologies of the 20th century. Today nationalist ideology is not touted anywhere in the world; in case there is any such promotion, it comes from the least developed sections of society. For example, recent European electionswhich saw the resurgence of nationalism in countries such as France were widely dubbed as a grave threat. In our country a bunch of individuals who view themselves as masters proudly lay claim to Fascist and other racist ideologies without drawing any criticism. These individuals hijack our history and nurture the idea of setting up imaginary governments which would inflame ethnic and racial hatred and shed blood across the land if and when they rise to power. That is why I think the first step is to rid ourselves of such problems that first found their way into our society more than 100 years ago. We need to develop an understanding of the world the way it is, rather than the way we want it to be. Such understanding is key to securing our rightful place in the community of nations. Narcissism and self-doubt are the biggest threats against nations and the Iranians are under threat from both.
Is there any link between culture and the birth of moderates in a society?
No one is born a moderate, or a radical for that matter. Biologically humans might have features that render them predisposed to a certain line of thinking, but culture is there to help bring up social creatures poised to accommodate others and accept that human beings cannot exist in vacuum.
I didn’t mean biological birth. Can culture be used to raise moderate individuals?
Culture is the best means to change individuals’ predispositions to violence and non-accommodation of others. In social systems, selfishness is bound to bring about destruction, whereas selflessness guarantees sustainability.
In light of Iran’s political developments over the past two decades, can the victory of a candidate that ran on a platform of moderation institutionalize restraint in society? The election in June 1997 of Seyyed Mohammad Khatami was an idealistic choice of the public which was followed eight years later by a vote that placed Ahmadinejad at the helm of the executive branch. Are the results of last year’s elections an indication that moderation is gaining momentum in our society?
I believe those two developments you just mentioned, particularly the 9th and 10th governments [led by Ahmadinejad] which openly supported radicalism and populism and dealt an unspeakable blow to the country, have been instrumental in this [promotion of moderation]. People witnessed that one can easily make promises and shatter livelihoods. They found out that it was easy to make a mockery of the world and force an entire nation to live with the colonial, domineering policies of big powers who used the same empty promises to justify their actions. The tough stance taken in the face of big powers produced nothing but sanctions and back-to-back resolutions against the Iranian government. That was a reality major powers had failed to swallow ever since the victory of the Iranian revolution. Until the rise to power of the 9th government, they had not found the opportunity to bring so much pressure to bear against Iran through sanctions and resolutions. How did they do it? How was it possible for a widely-loathed racist government like that of Israel and a warlike administration like that of President Bush to easily talk about military option against Iran? The reason is obvious. They were dealing with a radical who used very harsh words they blew up to justify their actions. I believe today Israeli and American hawks frown upon the discourse of moderation. Why is a group, willingly or unwillingly, inflaming tensions in the country to set the stage for them [hawkish Israeli and US politicians] to redirect their warlike slogans at Iran? That is when their economic interests come into play. A raging crisis is ideal for those who think about nothing but plundering the country’s resources. […] Everyone who inflames tensions is willingly or unwillingly serving the interests of major powers in this restive corner of the world. We are among a handful of countries which have remained immune from the cycle of violence. Moderation is not a political or ideological choice – rather it is a wise, strategic necessity.
A look at Iran’s history suggests that sometimes Iranians do not put up much resistance in the face of heavy attacks and later come to terms with the aggressors. What is your take on such an attitude? Is it in any way related to institutionalization of a characteristic in society?
That is another rather vague idea one cannot rule out. A glance at the history of Iran shows that it is true, to a large extent, but it cannot be used as a basis for drawing practical or short- and medium-term conclusions in modern and post-modern circumstances. What Iranians did 500 or 1,000 years ago does not have anything to do with what they should do today, unless we develop an insight into their strategic thinking and build on their thoughts to formulate a modern-day strategy. Such an approach requires high levels of intelligence, top management skills and a deep understanding of the world. Although history helps, it does not provide us with any example to imitate, neither in Iran, nor anywhere else in the world. In a very complex way, cultural strategies can either propel a civilization in the course of history or lead it to the brink of annihilation. The point we need to pay attention to is that there is no autopilot. The future lies in our own hands. Depending on the amount of effort and energy we put in, Iran can turn intoone of the most developed countries of the globe, or come down in the world. In contemporary history we have seen both cases unfold in civilizations with a long history just like Iran’s. We need to act vigilantly and build on wisdom in choosing our future path. We need to make sure we are not tempted to disregard other countries and cultures or the variety that exists within Iran, a variety that manifests itself in the lifestyle, education and identities of individuals. Such variety could be our biggest asset if we develop the capability to tap into it. On the other hand, it could turn into a grave threat if we assumed that all people should be like each other and their lifestyle, ideas and behavior should be in keeping with a strict unified model.
We need to respect the rights of minorities and avoid fabrication, hypocrisy, corruption, acquisitiveness, extravagance and of course indifference toward the plight of others. That holds the key to our success and that of moderation.
No doubt, what we call social cohesion, coexistence, and possession of national and cultural identity entails certain requirements such as compliance by all members of society with a set of ethical, legal, and traditional standards. But how we interpret these rules and put them into practice can dramatically change our destiny. I believe the kind of management that draws on a social system, rather than take it on or put pressure on it, can create a good atmosphere for all citizens or at least for a majority of them in which freedom, equality, and justice – which have always been stressed by our traditions and religion – are the key principles. In other words, we need to respect the rights of minorities and avoid fabrication, hypocrisy, corruption, acquisitiveness, extravagance and of course indifference toward the plight of others. That holds the key to our success and that of moderation.
Abbas Norouzi added the archeologists have so far conducted 16 seasons of excavations.
He explained that in recent years, the department has seriously pursued studies on the hinterlands of the Persian Gulf and the three islands of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs.
The official disclosed that the new round of archeological research undertaken in the Persian Gulf to gather new documents on Iran’s political, cultural and social impacts on the northern and southern coasts of the Persian Gulf and its islands.
A book on the research findings will shortly be published in three languages of Persian, English and Arabic, he said. It will include the latest historical and cultural information about the Persian Gulf, he added.
Also, the department has restored the monuments along the Persian Gulf coastline and conducted feasibility studies on Laft Ecomuseum on Qeshm Island, he concluded.
Diana Magnay is an international correspondent for CNN based in Berlin.
A live Magnay report from a hill overlooking the Gaza Strip on Thursday showed Zionists who could be heard cheering as missiles were fired at innocent Palestinians in Gaza. Following the report, Magnay tweeted that the Israelis who were cheering the bombing threatened her.
“Israelis on hill above Sderot cheer as bombs land on #gaza; threaten to ‘destroy our car if I say a word wrong’. Scum,” she tweeted.
While the tweet was quickly removed, CNN pulled Magnay out of her post covering Israel’s offensive against Palestinians and assigned her to Moscow.
Magnay’s removal from her post comes one day after another American news network, NBC News, pulled out its correspondent Ayman Mohyeddin from the Gaza Strip without any explanation, a move which sparked widespread criticism of the news outlet for censoring the atrocities committed by the Zionist regime against Palestinians.
The NBC News correspondent, who personally witnessed the Zionist military’s brutal murdering of four Palestinian boys who were playing on a beach in Gaza on Wednesday, was ordered by the network’s executives to leave the Palestinian territory immediately.
Mohyeddin’s witness account of the killing of the four young boys by Israeli gunboat fire has gone viral online. On the air, Mohyeldin recounted how, moments before their death, he was kicking a soccer ball with the four boys, who were between the ages of 9 and 11 and all from the same family.
The Zionist regime’s offensive against the Gaza Strip is in its eleventh day. At least 292 Palestinians have been killed in the occupying regime’s aerial and ground assaults on the besieged enclave.
Since the Tel Aviv regime’s ground incursion into Gaza on Thursday night, 50 Gazans, including children, infants, women, and elderly people, have been killed.
On Friday, US President Barack Obama told reporters at the White House that he has assured Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Washington’s support for Tel Aviv’s assault on the Gaza Strip.
“The Muslim countries should have closer consultations and cooperation to prevent the (ongoing) attacks on the Palestinians,” Larijani said during the phone conversation.
The Iranian parliament speaker condemned the Zionist regime’s attacks on the defenseless people of Gaza, and said, “The Iranian parliament as the current head of the Inter-Parliamentary Union of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation is hosting the inter-parliamentary union’s troika meeting to study ways for providing political support for the Palestinian nation.”
Sheikh Al-Maoni, for his part, pointed to the Israeli attacks on the people of Gaza, and said, “The Zionist regime’s attacks on Gaza is regrettable and bring a feeling of responsibility to every Muslim.”
In relevant remarks on Thursday, Larijani in separate messages to Chairman of the Parliamentary Union of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Abdolvahed Razzi and its Secretary-General Martin Chungung called for an immediate end to the brutal Israeli attacks on the people in Gaza.
In his messages, Larijani warned that continuation of the brutal siege of Gaza would lead to human catastrophe in that region and threatens the regional peace and security.
He called on the OIC Parliamentary Union, the international community and other global organizations to take immediate actions to halt Tel Aviv brutal attacks on Gaza.
Israel has been pounding the blockaded Gaza for 13 consecutive days, killing at least 355 people and injuring more than 2,600 others.
According to the UN, 77% of the victims in Gaza are civilians and defenseless people.
“With the efforts of the domestic experts in this field, IAC, for the first time, has held international training courses on working with radars for 30 Syrian air traffic controllers. The courses fully comply with the standards of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),” Shoushtari stated.
He also said that the mentioned courses are being held in four groups, and each course will last for a week.
By holding the courses since 10 years ago , IAC has saved a large sum of money and even earn some money by training air traffic controllers from other countries.
Despite three decades of western sections against Iran, the Islamic Republic has made great achievements in the area of aviation and has attained self-sufficiency in producing essential military equipment and systems.
Marziyeh Afkham condemned what she called crimes against humanity and the war crimes committed by the Zionist regime of Israel, especially the brutal onslaught against women, children and the elderly in the Shejaiya neighborhood of the Gaza Strip.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran’s government and nation will, like the past, stand with the victorious Palestinian nation and its brave resistance, and will not remain silent on the brutal crimes by the Zionists,” she said.
Israel has launched a ground military operation in the Gaza Strip since Thursday after 10 days of bombardment of the enclave from the air and sea.
More than 400 Palestinians have been killed and nearly 2,700 have been wounded in the 13-day Israeli assault on the densely-populated enclave of 1.8 million Palestinians.
Palestinian medics and witnesses said heavy Israeli shelling in Shejaiya district has killed dozens of people, including children.
Elsewhere in her comments, Afkham reminded the concerned international and regional organizations to condemn Israel’s offensive against Palestinians and to take action for an immediate end to the attacks.
The spokeswoman further predicted that “the world’s Muslim and freedom-seeking nations” will demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian people by staging mass rallies on this year’s International Quds Day.
The International Quds Day is an annual event during which demonstrators express their solidarity with the Palestinian people and opposition to the occupation of the Palestinian territories by the Zionist regime of Israel.
The day is also seen as the legacy of the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini, who officially declared the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan as International Quds Day back in 1979.
Reflecting the campaign for forgiveness, a 27th issue of Ayeh magazine ran an article on “Qisas and Pardon” which includes a few interviews. The first interview was with Ali Jamshidi, a former Criminal Court judge. The dialogue centered on ways of securing consent from the victim’s family and on efforts to talk them out of seeking Qisas. The second interview was with Nima Nakisa, a former goalkeeper of the national football team and a social activist. In the space of three months, his efforts to seek pardon from victims’ families for those convicted of murder have seen 27 death-row inmates walk away from the gallows. The third and last interview was with another Hujjat al-Islam Qazanfari, a former Criminal Court judge, now a member of parliament’s Judicial Committee. The following is an excerpt of the article:
Civil activists join forces with courts to seek pardon from victims’ families for those convicted of murder, hoping to hand them a second chance to live.
Over the last few months, Islamic compassion has given life back to a number of death-row inmates across the country. If attempts to win pardon for Balal, a convicted killer in Mazandaran – a province in northern Iran – had not received the media coverage it did, there would have been no manifestation of Islamic compassion in the provinces. However, what happened indicated that forgiveness is an option. It all started when the host of a popular TV sports show called on the family of a young man who was killed in a street fight by Balal to pardon him and waive their right to Qisas [an-eye-for-an-eye Islamic retribution law]. Those appeals persisted until the execution day. Balal stood on a chair on the gallows with the noose around his neck. When the mother of the victim walked to him, everyone thought she was about to pull the chair from under his feet, but much to everyone’s surprise, she slapped him in the face, took the noose off from his neck and forgave him. Her motherly forgiveness was followed by a wave of unexpected pardons. In short, Balal’s pardon was the beginning of serial forgiveness across the country.
Qisas is the religious and legal right of a person who has lost his/her beloved one, and no one can or should deny the bereaved such a right. However, religious experts say, “Qisas is not a hard-and-fast rule which leaves the family of the murder victim with only one option. In fact, they have three choices: they can ask for Qisas, opt for blood money, or forgo both and pardon the murderer. Still, Qisas is a social right that cannot be denied.”
Time and again, I have heard that the pleasure associated with forgiveness can never be found in payback. Qisas is not exclusive to Islam. In fact, it did exist in non-divine schools preceding other religions, but Islam turned it into law for Muslims.
It’s true that Qisas is a right, still God speaks nicely about how sweet forgiveness is. “Time and again, We have heard that the pleasure associated with forgiveness can never be found in payback. Qisas is not exclusive to Islam. In fact, it did exist in non-divine schools preceding other religions, but Islam turned it into law for Muslims,” said Hujjat al-Islam Mohammad Mortazavi. Verse 178 of Koran’s Al-Baqarah Surah reads: “You who believe, the law of retribution is prescribed for you in cases of murder, but if the heirs of the killed person forgive the killer, then they should demand blood money within reason, and the killer must pay with handsome gratitude; this is mercy from your Creator and nurturer; so after this, whoever transgresses the limits, he shall have a painful torment.” The void emanating from the loss of a loved one in the hearts of bereaved mothers, fathers and children can never be filled. It will be nagging for the mother of Abdullah, as well as for the mothers of two other murder victims, one in Takestan – a city in Qazvin province – and the other in East Azerbaijan province. Yet, as experts say, it would be much better to opt for the sweetness of forgiveness rather than the bitterness of revenge.
That set the stage for a first “National Celebration of Forgiveness” event in June 2014. The gathering was intended to praise the efforts of those who were actively involved in seeking pardon for young people who were convicted of murder. In attendance were Hujjat al-Islam Sayyed Hassan Khomeini, a host of state officials, artists, sportsmen, social activists, and a number of judges who had introduced innovative ways to secure pardon for young people.
Hassan Khomeini led off his speech with a poetic line by Hamid Mosadegh. The line cursed “anyone who is opposed to us becoming one.”[The grandson of the founder of the Islamic Republic] said, “If we want forgiveness to become common practice, we should promote the culture of forgiveness, and the journey down that path starts from ourselves. Those in authority should do the same thing and try to forgive those whom they might hold grudges against.
“Those who pardon have a right as far as the murderer is concerned. By waiving this right, they give the death-row prisoners a second chance at life. In addition, they have a right as far as society and every single of us who lives in it are concerned. Through forgiveness, they show us that the community should be purged of spite. One who forgives does not just pardon the killer, he also gives us dignity,” he added.
Pointing out the impact of such gatherings in promoting forgiveness in society, he said, “One of the results of meetings as such is that a seed is planted with the hope of growing. A seed planted in soil first sprouts, then turns into a sapling which later grows into a productive tree that contributes to the future of society.A spite-free community lives with no issues. Every journey to progress starts with baby steps. We should start being good on the inside. When we expect the victim’s family to waive their right to Qisas, are we ready ourselves to let go of our small demands? For example, when it comes to driving or, more generally, inourinteractions with family and relatives, to what extent do we exercise patience? Kindness should be injected to society somehow.”
Ali Jamshidi, a former Criminal Court judge
What is the difference between Qisas and the death penalty?
Qisas is the punishment for murder, more specifically for killing a Muslim. In other words, if a non-Muslim kills another non-Muslim, he won’t be sentenced to Qisas. However, if either a Muslim or a non-Muslim murders a Muslim, he will face Qisas. The charges a person who has killed a Muslim faces cover both the private and public aspects of the crime s/he has committed. The punishment meted out for the private aspect of a crime is Qisas, while the public retribution is three to 10 years in prison. However, if a defendant is charged with crimes which endanger public security such as rape, waging war against God, or drug trafficking, based on the type of crime and its severity the court hands down the death penalty. […]
Judges of criminal courts and prison officials try until the very end to secure pardon. Of course, such efforts are made for cases involving Qisas.
How far do judges and prison officials go to seek pardon for a death-row inmate?
When a case is sent to the courthouse to have the verdict enforced, a few sessions are held and the victim’s family is advised to practice what is recommended by Islam and pardon the murderer. These sessions carry on even after the verdict is upheld and the victim’s family comes to the prison to witness the execution. Judges of criminal courts and prison officials try until the very end to secure pardon. Of course, such efforts are made for cases involving Qisas. […]
Do those efforts continue even as the inmate is already on the gallows?
Seeking pardon does not know any bounds as far as time and place are concerned. We intend to save a person from death, that’s why until the very last moment even when the noose is put around the neck of the convict, we try to talk the victim’s family out of Qisas. Mind you, we do our best not to leave it to the last moment. To that end, we organize some sessions to secure clemency for a remorseful convict. Even when the convict is on the gallows and there is a sense that the victim’s family is slightly willing to forgive him, we try to prolong the process with the hope of having the convict pardoned. […]
Nima Nakisa, whose efforts have saved the lives of 27 people sentenced to Qisas
Nima Nakisa
It was in February 2014 when Nima Nakisa, the former goalkeeper of the national football team and Tehran’s Persepolis club, made the acquaintance of Judge Amirabadi, the head of Tehran Criminal Court. Later that acquaintance saved 27 convicted murderers from the gallows. Judge Amirabadi, who was then the acting head of Tehran Criminal Court, asked Nakisa, the vice-president of the Dispute Settlement Council, to start seeking pardons from victims’ families. He was never given a letter of appointment, but before long he established a record for himself in terms of winning pardons from victims’ families and saving convicted murderers from the gallows. In just three months, he managed to save 27 people from death. Now, Nima Nakisa is sitting down with us for an interview on murder, murderer and Qisas.
No one has the right to question Qisas. It is a religious and legal right of the victims’ families. That right is explicitly underscored in verse 45 of Maidah Surah in the Koran which cites the fact that God has put life in Qisas for people. At the same time, it’s said that if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it will be for him an expiation of his sins.
Mr. Nakisa, have you spent all your days in Tehran courts over the past 3 months?
Yes, about four or five hours a day.
You mean you went to the courthouse every day to be introduced to a victim’s family to secure their pardon?
No, I usually read the cases myself and picked one to pursue.
Did you give priority to cases which deeply moved you?
Not really, I only got myself involved in certain cases. I keep away from the cases involving premeditated murder or rape. My efforts are aimed at saving those convicted murderers who have killed without malice aforethought.
So you have your boundaries as far as seeking pardon from the victims’ families is concerned.
I don’t wish to judge people, but I am not interested in cases involving abduction, premeditated murders, rape or horrific killings. Yet, I believe some killers lose their control in a fit of temper, and should be given a second chance to live. […]
Unfortunately, some who wish to encourage people to pardon, question their fundamental right to Qisas, either intentionally or unintentionally. What are your thoughts on it?
No one has the right to question Qisas. It is a religious and legal right of the victims’ families. That right is explicitly underscored in verse 45 of Maidah Surah in theKoran which cites the fact that God has put life in Qisas for people. At the same time, it’s said that if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it will be for him an expiation of his sins. […]
Have you ever thought about social implications of such pardons? How does a murderer behave when s/he returns to society?
One does undergo change when a death verdict is issued in their case. If pardoned, they could be the source of good. Once I came across a murderer who memorized the Koran in prison and turned into a totally different person, but he was sent to the gallows. Had he been pardoned and returned to society, many could have learned from him and moved in the right direction. Let me stress the point that as a matter of fact, in this day and age, lots of values have lost their luster. We have a rich and effective religion and culture. However, in the face of the cultural onslaught, lots of our values have been pushed to the sidelines. I believe we should revive our humanity, our principles and our culture. We have great role models like [war] martyrs who came from all walks of life and became national heroes as a result of their actions.
In conclusion, I want to briefly address the families who ask for Qisas. I want to tell them that Qisas is the right which is given to them by God, and nobody can doubt it. But nonetheless, I do want them to put the execution on hold, consult with experts, and avoid making a decision they will regret for the rest of their lives.
Some people abroad are critical of the lawful, legitimate and Islamic right to Qisas, whereas those who are unmindful of the emphasis Islam places on forgiveness argue that such pardons have harmful effects which can later pose a threat to society. Such opposite views made us conduct an interview with Hujjat al-Islam Musa Qazanfari about the position of Qisas in Islamic retribution laws and also about efforts to consolidate the recent campaign for forgiveness. The MP representing Kerman province in the Islamic Consultative Assembly described the present Qisas law as “complete”, and said that pardoning a convicted murderer plays a major role in easing violence and stigmatizing criminal activity, even though there are some who believe otherwise.
Hujjat al-Islam Qazanfari, a member of parliament’s Judicial Committee
Since the start of a forgiveness campaign which got underway when Balal, a killer from Mazandaran province, was given clemency, different people have taken different positions and some foreign media have criticized the concept of Qisas. First, tell us briefly about the position of Qisas in the Islamic retribution law.
Under Islam, Qisas is a legitimate verdict and a legal right for the victim’s family. As a matter of fact, it’s an obvious and explicit law which cannot be questioned or doubted. It’s explicitly stated in the Islamic retribution law that Qisas is the right of the victim’s family, not that of the government. Yet, the law also grants the family the option to waive their right to Qisas and instead reach a compromise with the murderer to either pardon him in return for blood money or an amount bigger than the official figure, or simply forgive him in exchange for nothing. All that should be decided by the victim’s family. As for the public aspect of the crime, the government can only subject the pardoned murderer to punitive measures and Ta’zir [punishment administered at the discretion of the judge] which can range from a few months to a year or even more in prison based on the decision of the judge. However, the judge cannot and will not have the authority to overturn the verdict of Qisas and grant the convict clemency. […]
Under Islam, Qisas is a legitimate verdict and a legal right for the victim’s family. As a matter of fact, it’s an obvious and explicit law which cannot be questioned or doubted. It’s explicitly stated in the Islamic retribution law that Qisas is the right of the victim’s family, not that of the government.
From your perspective, how permanent the ongoing campaign for forgiveness will be?
When I was a judge hearing homicide cases, I would always build on the Koran and Hadith [the record of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad] to urge the victims’ families to forgive. Islam lays great emphasis on forgiveness. The recently-launched campaign to seek clemency is truly praiseworthy, whether the media contributed to it or other factors were at play. Anyway, I do hope it will persist. I am not sure media publicity can have a long-lasting and sustainable effect on the campaign. Its impact will be short-lived, because the loss of a child for the parents is so tremendous that the media could not keep playing an effective role in seeking pardon in the long run. However, if we intend to have those sentenced to Qisas pardoned, we should draw the attention of victims’ families to Hadith, Islamic compassion and the beauty of forgiveness. On the execution day and even prior to that, prison officials, the elderly, and in cases similar to that of Balal even artists should take action. […]
There are some who argue that if every murderer is pardoned, then the crime will lose its stigma. Do you agree with such an argument?
I strongly disagree with such contention. In fact, I have a compelling reason for my opposition. I was a judge. I have often seen the conditions of those sentenced to Qisas in prison and in courts. Thugs who draw machetes and kill are usually transformed after a verdict of Qisas is handed down and they are sent to prison. They are usually in a state of extreme ignominy and misery. […]
On the eve of execution, the prisoner on death row is isolated from his fellow inmates and is told to ask God for forgiveness, and make a will. He spends a night or two in solitary confinement, waiting for death. It is impossible not to undergo change. In some cases, because of those changes in the behavior of convicts and their humiliation and remorse, the victim’s family eventually voices consent to spare them. So I believe that forgiveness will never destigmatize crime.
To what extent do you think such pardons can reduce the number of murders in society?
Forgiveness will have its own impact on society. We witnessed such an effect after Balal – who killed Abdullah Hosseinzadeh in a street fight – was pardoned and saved from the gallows. On the execution day, after he was pardoned in Noor – a city in northern Iran – in a symbolic act lots of young people who had knives on their person took them out of their pockets and threw them to the ground. That is nothing but the positive role of forgiveness in cutting the murder rate.
It should be mentioned that the foreword to the report is written and edited by this website and is not the same as the introduction Ayeh magazine has published.
