Web Developer Sentenced To Death In Iran

An anonymous reader points out the case of Saeed Malekpour, an Iranian-born permanent resident of Canada who worked as a web developer. In 2008, during a visit to Iran, Malekpour was arrested and detained by Iranian authorities on charges that he designed and moderated "adult content websites." In 2009, he was sentenced to death for "acting against the national security, insulting and desecrating the principles of Islam, and agitating the public mind." Malekpour wrote photo-uploading software, and in a letter he sent from prison, he said it was used by porn sites without his knowledge. This week an Iranian court reviewed the case and confirmed that the death sentence was an acceptable punishment. According to one Canadian publication, "Human rights monitors believe that Malekpour, one of a number of people held on Internet-related charges, is trapped by a convoluted justice system that is manipulated by rival factions in Iran."

Comments

In other words,

[Anonymous Coward]

You're in danger the second you step into Iran. Don't do business there, don't visit there.

Re:In other words,

[villew]

You are in danger the second you enter a country with a failing justice system and the death penalty, including the U.S....

Re:In other words,

[Racemaniac]

Since when do you have to enter the US to get arrested by it? look at the megaupload guys...

Re:In other words,

[purpledinoz]

What really irks me is that case of American hikers caught by the Iranians in Iraq. First of all, why do they have to go to Iraq to go hiking? They KNOW it's dangerous. By being caught, they gave Iran a bargaining chip. What the hell is wrong with these people?

Re:In other words,

[SuricouRaven]

Because it is remote, inaccessible and dangerous. That's the fun for the hiking hardcore.

Re:In other words,

[Anonymous Coward]

What really irks me is how a random group of Americans can be discovered by Iranians wandering into Iraq, the media is told OH THEY'RE JUST HIKERS, and a single person finds the story credible.

Re:In other words,

[dmesg0]

Great comparison between justice systems in Iran and USA. Those who moderated the parent insightful deserve being sent to Iran to get a clue. They should bring their porn collections for initial evidence.

Re:In other words,

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to the guys at gitmo, or to those who will be detained based on the "National Defense Authorization Act".

Re:In other words,

[Zontar The Mindless]

Get back to us when you can be put to death in the US for making a porno in Canada and we'll talk.

(Who the fuck modded this Insightful?)

Re:In other words,

[Cederic]

No, in the US you only need to be born black in Detroit to be put to death.

Meanwhile hosting a website that links to other websites can earn you 20 years in jail when you've never even fucking visited the fucking country.

I haven't even mentioned the decade of torture and false imprisonment in a foreign country for the evil crime of "pissing off someone that works for the Americans". Or do you really believe that everyone in Guantanamo is guilty?

Trust me, from where I'm sat the US poses are far greater threat to my ongoing life and freedom than Iran does.

Re:In other words,

[Anonymous Coward]

So you accept that the United States is bad, but it just isn't as bad as Iran? Way to set the bar.

Re:In other words,

[TheRaven64]

Why? Most people in both countries can live quite happily without ever being involved with the legal system (I've not been to Iran, but I have a few friends from there, so admittedly I'm only speaking based on second-hand information). In both cases, you can be imprisoned for quite ludicrous things (e.g. owning a specific quantity of a certain kind of plant in the USA). In both places, the state reserves the right to kill its citizens.

Re:In other words,

[SecurityGuy]

It is credible. Hiking's not my passion, but in mine there are "places to go" that are considered way better that what you can find in the US. If you've advanced far enough in your sport and want to push the limits ever further, you have to go to places that are dangerous. The danger you intend to face is environmental, but the countries that happen to house them also contain political dangers, as in your country hates my country.

It's completely plausible. It's also possible they're spies, but it seems like a really dumb cover story. I don't speculate which is true because without direct info I can only say both are possible.

Re:In other words,

[anagama]

More than Gitmo, you can cite Al Awlaki, an American citizen we executed over making partisan videos. The new standard in America is free speech, so long as the Feds don't object to it.

Re:In other words,

[TheRaven64]

Depends. How rich are you?

Re:In other words,

[swillden]

Degree doesn't matter.

That is an utterly ludicrous statement. Degree absolutely does matter, there's a huge difference between killing someone and fining them, for example, even if both are abuses of human rights. The fact that one abuse is of lesser degree doesn't make it right, or acceptable, but it does mean that its less bad than the abuse of greater degree.

If my country tortures just one person, it's lost any kind of moral high ground from which to cast criticism

Now you've changed your argument from "degree doesn't matter" to "quantity doesn't matter". That I can agree with, not so much because quantity truly doesn't matter but because accepting a given degree of abuse in small quantities almost inevitable results in that abuse in greater quantity over time.

I do have to point out that there are different forms of torture, which constitute different degrees of abuse, however. None are acceptable, and I do not approve of my country engaging in torture at all, but there are still differences between playing loud music all night, waterboarding and flaying.

Re:In other words,

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah the usual american "we have more rights than anybody else in the world" mantra. Well guess what, in most european countries you have more rights against government abuse than you do in the good ol' us of a. And we don't even need the right to bear arms. From our perspective the USA is a land of uncivilised savages. Come back to the civilised world once you've banned torture, the death penalty, conviction through the use of "secret" proofs that cannot be disclosed in a courtroom etc....

We've had a similar case here in NL

[bytesex]

The question is: why oh why do all of these people go back to fscking Iran ?!

Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes, against my better instincts, I think that some cultures just don't have the right to exist.

Pay attention to compiler warnings!

[PolygamousRanchKid]

You know, it's easy to just glaze over things like, "conversion from int to long," "unused variable," or "insulting and desecrating the principles of Islam." But it's better to fix them . . . it may save your life!

Death penalty

[lorinc]

This is one of the numerous examples why death penalty should never exist.

Re:Death penalty

[GrBear]

I would go one further and say that situations like this is why RELIGION shouldn't be allowed.

Re:Death penalty

[Anonymous Coward]

While religion can be destructive at times, it does do a lot of good. I'm an atheist, but stating that religion should not be allowed is a violation of human rights. Prosecuting every religion is the same as prosecuting just one, which is often what happens in countries like Iran. However, the death penalty definitely should be banned.

Re:Savages

[MichaelSmith]

I think it is bizarre that Iran apparently has people who track the authors of software used to host pornography and associates it with their residency status and availability for arrest in Iran.

Re:Lets tell it like it is

[Chrisq]

Not, I would say, a particularly PC view, and doubtless one that will get you modded troll quicker than a quick thing. But I would temper your view with a rather more - shall we say diplomatic? - way of putting things.

Some views are fundamentally incompatible and unless both parties are prepared to compromise, conflict will ultimately result. Full stop, end of conversation. Get together people who feel strongly enough to kill to make their point and give them the means to do so, you probably shouldn't be too surprised when they do. There's no way of getting around this, and to pretend there is is probably the most damaging thing extreme political correctness has ever achieved.

In this case, the conflict is between very conservative Muslims who happen to be in charge of a country and the West, but it could just as easily be between animal liberation people and drugs testing labs.

Islam is not just incompatible with the west but fundamental principles such as equality, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to life (for homosexuals etc.), democracy, and a lot more. Its true that some animal testers would go to war with anti-vivisectionists and vice versa, but they would want a reformulation of laws that would apply to everyone - they would not want to prevent certain sections from expressing their view or testifying in court. Islam is fundamentally opposed to our ideas of rights and equality.

A Pitiful lot, these iranians and muslims

[Anonymous Coward]

So, a piece of software for photo uploading can damage islam? WHat a f*cking weak religion.

Looks more like maybe he was the sole inheritor of property of his father, and someone wanted him out of the picture. So they came up with the grand charge of 'insulting islam' and bribed some judges..

Tell me, according to these islamists, is there any person alive on earth (except those unwashed bearded mullas) who are not guilty of insulting islam some way or the other?

Heck, everyone connected with any part of internet would all be guilty of insulting islam and therefore target for murder, then.

Any country controlled by religion

[MindPrison]

...are bound by illogical and fantasy rules & regulations that only makes sense to a fanatically indoctrinated mind.

The headline in this post is also typical of the sensationalist kind, yes - it's sad that it's a web developer that got the death sentence, but it would be equally sad that it would be anyone in any other category as well, it's why they're being judged that we should react on - not what status they have in society.

US versus Iran

[Okian Warrior]

Well, let's see here. Maybe not *in* the US, but *by* the US:

you can be gunned down by Apache helicopters for peacefully assembling
you can be thrown into indefinite jail on the word of a paid informant
If you are a foreign leader, you can be deposed and hung
or deposed and brought into the US to stand trial for breaking US laws
If you are a foreign citizen, you can be extradited and put in jail for breaking civil law
If you are a US citizen the president can have you killed by the CIA
You can be tortured by the US (for some definitions of torture)
You can be shipped to another country and tortured (for all definitions of torture)

I dunno, it's a tough choice. Is Iran worse than the US because it visits harsh penalties on a few people, or is the US worse because it's actions are milder but more widespread?

Because, as we know, we can only oppose one evil at a time. Comparing the relative evil helps us to make that choice.

Oh, and let's not forget China.