It was also revealed that the lawyer of the deceased man, in a letter to the prosecutors this December, acknowledged that he had not heard from his client for the past nine years.
In the December letter, the lawyer also wrote that in September of 2014, two individuals by the names of Dr. Nouri (presenting himself as a law professor in Tehran University) and Morteza Zahraie (presenting himself as a lawyer) came from Tehran and demanded that the appeal be filed on behalf of the deceased man.
The lawyers of Iranian dissidents, including prominent French lawyers William Bourdon, … Dartoville,… called it an attempt to manipulate the French Judiciary.
The case pertains to the dossier against Iranian dissidents including some members of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), the coalition of Iranian opposition. The case commenced in France in 2001with collusion by Tehran and with the objective of placating the Iranian regime. On September 16th 2014, subsequent to 13 years of investigation, the French judge dropped all the charges. Iranian opposition leader, Mrs. Maryam Rajavi in an official statement called the decision “a devastating and irreparable defeat for the mullahs’ demonization campaign against the resistance.”
The case ended successively in two dismissal decisions in accordance with the prosecutor’s submissions.
As to the first order of dismissal concerning the allegation of terrorism, the decision was final and no appeals were filed.
However, regarding the second dismissal in September 2014 concerning various financial allegations, an appeal by a sole plaintiff Mr. Ziaedin Abdolrazaghi was filed.
Mr. Ziaedin, an Anglo-Iranian had pleaded in fact that over 10 years ago he had fallen victim to an impersonation by a supporter of the NCRI.
The thoroughly whimsical nature of this civil action was elaborated on in detail at that time by the lawyers of the indicted.
In its September 2014 decision, the examining magistrate dismissed the impersonation charge pointing to the incredible gap between the various references of the complainant and those of the alleged usurper. The magistrate reiterated that the movements of the accused hardly match that of the plaintiff.
The advocates of the Iranian dissidents had on numerous occasions, pointed to the fact that all signs support this reality and that this eccentric private plaintiff was only an instrument of the Iranian secret services.
According to the court documents, it became evident that the whole story was a hoax since it was established that Mr. Ziaedin Abdolrazaghi died 10 years ago, in October 2005. This evidence was corroborated beyond any doubt thanks to a death certificate obtained from the British authorities.
During the investigation it was established that following the decision by the investigative magistrate to close the case, Tehran dispatched two of its agents to Paris to urge Abdorazaghi’s lawyer to file an appeal.
The Iranian dissidents maintained throughout the investigation that the case had been orchestrated by the regime in Tehran. The revelations in today’s court lent credence to their position.
The lawyers of the defendants, in their address to the Paris Court of Appeal, pointed to the fact that requesting an appeal by someone dead 10 years ago is certainly a manipulation [of the judicial system]. They pointed out that these facts exposed to the court today, only exacerbated the need for a proper investigation, as they testify to the permanence of activism by the Iranian authorities in France. The goal of these actions is to try to sustain, even at the cost of serious manipulations, the criminalization of the undersigned lawyers’ clients.