June 2nd, 2008

Source: RadioFarda.com

The report compiled by the International Labor Organization (ILO) panel dispatched to Iran, was printed last week at the commencement of the annual ILO conference in Geneva.

In a section of this report which was a transcription of Mansour Osanloo’s court of appeals hearing, it is stated that one of the charges brought against him is vandalism of public property. Mansour Osanloo is the imprisoned secretary general of the Syndicate of Workers of Tehran and Suburbs (Vahed) Bus Company.

This labor activist was arrested in the month of Tir (June/July) of last year by intelligence agents and was then sentenced to five (5) years in prison. His arrest met with widespread protests by workers groups and human rights organization both in Iran and throughout the world.

The report prepared by the International Labor Organization (ILO) panel also quoted the judge presiding over Mansour Osanloo’s appeals court hearing as saying: “this labor activist was treated justly.”

One of Osanloo’s defense attorneys, Parveez Khorsheed spoke to the Radio Farda reporter regarding this matter.

Radio Farda: The presiding judge has told the International Labor Organization (ILO) panel that one of Mr. Osanloo’s offenses is vandalism of public property; is this accurate?

Parveez Khorsheed: There has been no such offense of vandalism of public property recorded in the case that has been built against Mr. Osanloo. This is the presiding judge’s personal opinion and thus contrary to facts.

Radio Farda: Mr. Osanloo has been arrested and accused of taking action against national security. Why was this charge not mentioned and another plea was listed?

Parveez Khorsheed: I am not in charge of the personal will of those who express their opinions, therefore you need to be asking the “why” from the judge. It was the judge who read the file of the accused and it is he who is conscious of the charges.

Radio Farda: So why has he then discussed such a charge with a panel of foreigners?

Parveez Khorsheed: Mr. Osanloo simply is not charged with an offense such as vandalism of public property, however he has been active in (labor) union and syndicate issues; our country’s judges have therefore suggested that his activities and trips abroad are tantamount to taking action against national security.

Radio Farda: The presiding judge has told the dispatched ILO panel that Mr. Osanloo has been treated justly and that he is represented by two (2) attorneys who defend his rights. Do you believe that Mr. Osanloo’s case is being examined justly?

Parveez Khorsheed: No, it is actually not. In the petitions that we have presented the judges, we have written and documented these breaches; they have also not observed several rules intrinsic to the Islamic regime itself which in the case of Mr. Osanloo have been disregarded.

Radio Farda: Could you mention some of these breaches?

Parveez Khorsheed: The first point is that myself and Dr. Mowlaei are both Mr. Osanloo’s defense attorneys however the issued verdict and the appeal verdict have not been communicated to me and I was not involved in his appeal petition, as we did not see the written judgement. All this while according to the law, the court’s verdict must be communicated to the attorney.

The second point is that he is being detained and is being deprived of his visiting rights with his attorney and there are many more instances.

Radio Farda: What are the latest developments in Mr. Osanloo’s case?

Parveez Khorsheed: Dr. Mowlaei and I intend to re-establish the written judgement for this case and we will discuss the matter of the breaches in the case with high judicial authorities and call for legal analysis. In order to realize that, we need to visit the prison and obtain a power of attorney from Mr. Osanloo however we have not as of yet succeeded in visiting with him in prison. Out of prison, he is free to meet with us.

On Saturday, when he was being treated in the hospital, Dr. Mowlaei and I were able to meet with him for approximately half an hour, however in order for the power of attorney to be officialized and for the prison to approve it, it is imperative that we meet with him inside the prison; nevertheless, we have not yet heard back from judicial authorities regarding this matter.