The reaction of the former adviser of the Supreme Court to the words of the head of the judiciary regarding the use of peace and compromise capacity for security cases: his intention is good, but we must go his way.

Read
1 minute
-Wednesday 2025/11/12 - 16:56
News Code:23495
واکنش مستشار پیشین دیوان عالی کشور به سخنان رئیس قوه قضائیه در خصوص استفاده از ظرفیت صلح و سازش برای پرونده‌های امنیتی: نیت ایشان خیر است، ولی باید از راهش برویم

  Mohammad Hossein Saket said: "It is very good for the head of the judiciary to set an example for using the capacity of peace and reconciliation in security cases."

  Mohammad Hossein Saket said: "It is very good for the head of the judiciary to set an example for using the capacity of peace and reconciliation in security cases."

Or at least they wanted the security authorities and raised this issue with them and reached an instruction.  It means that their intention is good, but we have to go out of their way.

In my opinion, there is no meaning in "compromise" in the security issue.  Compromise with whom?  For example, I have filed a security complaint against you and we should make peace and compromise?!  Do the security issues belong to you and me?!  There is an assumption that, for example, you put a camera in my private life and jeopardized my apparent security.

In your opinion, as a journalist, who creates the security file?  For example, let the police, intelligence, intelligence, or IRGC file a complaint against me and then go to the peace court together and solve it?!  Can such a thing happen?!  If he would set an example, it would be very good.

Take less than a minute, register and share your opinion under this post.
Insulting or inciting messages will be deleted.
Sign Up