Navid Mihandoust, a director imprisoned in Evin Prison, in an interview with Emtedad: Is it possible for someone to be sentenced to three years in prison for filmmaking?/ I have served more than half of my sentence

My case should have been investigated by the Culture and Media Prosecutor's Office, not the Sacred Security Prosecutor's Office!/ In the thirteenth government, my connection with the Ministry of Culture and Guidance was completely cut off/ The Ministry of Culture and Guidance of the fourteenth government should explicitly say that even if they follow up, they will not be able to do so, or in the end, nothing will happen/ Why are we being treated as a means by which we can do media and propaganda work?/ My request to the House of Cinema is that instead of solving it, it should be investigated. In the case of my case, they should look for the content of the verdict

In an interview with Emtedad, Navid Mahindoost, a film director who is currently imprisoned in Evin Prison, while referring to his situation and his concerns and demands, stated: "I have been in Ward 8 of Evin Prison since October 27, 2023, and I have been in Ward 4 of this prison since August 27, 2023. Of course, in the meantime, I was transferred to solitary confinement for four days due to some issues, and I have been in Ward 8 for the past 15 months. 
 
 From the beginning and in 2019, when this case was opened, I also suggested that you should deal with the position that basically the place where this charge and this case was heard was not the Holy Security Prosecutor's Office, and that the place of hearing it should be the Culture and Media Prosecutor's Office. In this case, the minimum expectation is that the gentlemen in the Culture and Media Prosecutor's Office will have knowledge and understanding of the issue of filmmaking and this field so that we can present our cases and defenses. For whatever reason, this did not happen and we did not succeed in this regard. 

In the 13th government, my relationship with the Ministry of Culture was completely cut off, and I was only in contact with the House of Cinema. But in the fourteenth government, when the government was inaugurated, my friends themselves followed up on my case and issue through the House of Cinema and held several meetings with my family in the ministry itself. At the same time, Qassem Khorshidi was appointed as the assistant minister of guidance for special referral affairs and began to investigate the situation of artists, such as the cases or bans of some colleagues. In this regard, friends intervened in the case and made many promises and promises that the issue was being resolved, but since then, nothing has been done.
In fact, my greatest concern and annoyance is that perhaps the same situation – the period of the 13th government – is continuing. My concern increased when I saw in the report of the minister's press conference that he had mentioned in part of his speech that we are following up on the situation of banned artists, but the case of some of them who have judicial convictions is different. 

Before that, I had spoken with Mr. Khurshid and he told me, "In any case, you have been convicted and are serving your sentence." When I put these two positions together, I come to the conclusion that now, for whatever reason, whether they did not have the strength or any other consideration, it is as if they are making an exception to our case.

This was an optimistic view, and from a pessimistic point of view, which unfortunately in our country, is often synonymous with realism, it seems that gentlemen have been more concerned about the situation of banned celebrities, who have more press coverage and are more famous. 

My complaint has been that Mr. Minister, who in every press conference and speech, uses the fact that we are doing such and such a follow-up, and in the same way, why don't they also say that nothing has happened? Why are we still treated as a resume that can be used for news, media, and advertising work? Why don't the gentlemen, at least, say that nothing has happened as a result of all the measures that have been taken, and in the end, they come to the conclusion that those who have been convicted by the judiciary have a different case! 

You! You are the Ministry of Culture and the House of Cinema. In my ruling, it is mentioned that the issue of the case is basically the issue of filmmaking. Mr. House of Cinema and the Ministry of Guidance, you should look for the fact that this ruling was wrong and we object to it. Is it possible – as stated in the verdict – to be sentenced to three years in prison for filmmaking?