Yesterday morning (December 13) the first session of Masoud Behnoud's trial was first held in private and in the judge Mortazavi's office. Then during the public session, Ali Asghar Tashakori the representative of the public prosecutor dealt with Behnoud's accusations in details. He said: "unfortunately, today we are witnessing that the people holding pen are unrestrained in the complex of must nots. Some of them and some of those with certain tendencies do not think about the fact that what is in their hand is the fruit of lots of blood sheds."

According to the representative of the public prosecutor, another word that is not in its proper place is 'reformation'. In our country, some people call themselves reformist that in fact include a class of revisionists and monarchists and wish to follow their own kind of reformation. It is quite obvious that in their view, Islam is against reformation and the atheists are called reformist.

Ali Asghar Tashakori added: 'It is very painful and bitter that it is heard that a writer should hide drugs in books and send it abroad and there has been opium and alcoholic drinks in his house.

He also referred to Behnoud's speeches outside the country comparing the revolutionary period to an era of censorship and then added: 'there is no doubt that transformation of the regime is what those outside the country demand. He referred to Behnoud's speech in Canada where he had said where there is dictatorship, the journalists are exposed to an immense amount of pressure and when freedom starts, journalists are killed. Freedom of press happens with the death of journalists.

The representative of the public prosecutor, after mentioning Behnoud's writings and speeches, dealt with his accusations and said: Publication of lies, commotion of people's minds, transcending the red lines, insulting the authorities, use of drugs and keeping alcoholic drinks in his house, cooperation with foreign radios are only a part of Behnoud's accusations.

The Judge Mortazavi then asked Behnoud to defend himself.

Behnoud first said: 'In order to overcome my fear, I should say that there is a prevalent term in television called parallel editorship in which they stick parts together. Here too, this is exactly what has been done. The representative of the public persecutor reads a few articles and then he sticks some opium to them and then reads some speeches and adds heroin to them. Then he reads a report written by me and wraps it around alcoholic drinks. You very well know that I am tried only for my writings here. This parallel should take place to make my heart stop beating.'

Behnoud then said: 'Expressing my gratitude to the representative of the public prosecutor that out of all my writings and articles that are more than thousand in number, he has chosen only eight. Here I don't refer to my hundred articles and reports in which I have defended the regime, revolution and the values of the society, the necessity for the rule of laws and maintenance of peace. I will only refer to the very articles that the public prosecutor has put parts of them under the microscope. In fact I will quote from the same articles. Where there is a shortcoming I will admit it and if due to my writing, there is now some dust covering a heart, or they have disconcerted a mind, or somebody has felt an insult, I hope to be forgiven. While I am sure that he who has a sieve in his hand follows the caravan and I ask God forgiveness.

Regarding my article 'Sometimes due to an excuse' published in Jame-eh newspaper that the representative of the public prosecutor interpreted it as though I have intended to attribute the act of violence to the commander of Sepah and have compared him with Sadam Hossein, Iraqi dictator, I should say that there is no name of Sardar (commander) Safari in my article at all. There is only a sentence that those days was written in one or two newspapers quoting Sardar Safari and the office of public relations of Sepah had called it a distorted version of Sardar Safari's statement. And when in the court of Jame-eh newspaper I heard the same thing about my article, I forwarded a letter to his office and apologized and asked to be acquited. But now after three years, the representative of the public prosecutor once again has referred to the same subject. So once more I repeat my apology.

Regarding my article 'Be prudent in this play' published in the weekly review, Gounagoun, as I have said before, I accept the explanation of the representative of the public prosecutor. With this extra comment that I was addressing the leadership in my article, but I humbler than that to wish to attribute the leadership to a certain wing and then write such things in the form of admonition and advice.

Regarding the sentence quoted from my article 'Did you see what happened in 2^nd Khordad', I quote another sentence from the same article to show that choosing a single sentence from an article is not a proof of the writer's true feeling and intention. In order to discover one's true feeling and intention, all the sections should be kept in mind. This is what the readers do and at the end of any article, they make their judgements. In that article, I have described the contemporary young generation of Iran, that is the majority of the voters of 2^nd Khordad and I have written that they are not familiar with the language of politics, culture, power and omission and speak with flower and smile. Their God would bless them. They are the children of Hafez and among Sadii Shirazi's descendents.

Is it really possible to accuse an article with such clearly written sentence, a writing that has tried explicitly or implicitly to over-rule the Islamic regime or has intended to advertise against this regime, weakening its foundations? The representative of the public prosecutor has interpreted the same article in such a way as though I have called the main message of 2^nd Khordad a big 'no' to the reactionary thinking and by reactionary thinking I have meant the clergy. Is such interpretation correct?'

In regard to his article '150 years for one word' Behnoud said: 'In this article, it is stated in four different places that in Iran, the reason for staying away from the complete rule of law, is the fact that some people are impatient, some show extremist reactions, and the authorities loose patience out of fear of anarchy and insecurity. This is my opinion that is discussed in other articles too. Please pay attention to one of the sentences of this article. The impatients, the extremists and the absolutists, even when they talk they infuse the horror of loss of security into the hearts so much that would not help us at all. Now we have accepted that the day of 2^nd Khordad show that the majority of people believe that reaching a peak by climbing an erring path with a deep slope that takes away the breath out of the fear of stumbling, has already been tested and has proved to be in vain. There is a curvy path with a mild slope that for a caravan so intolerable and foreign to patience is nearer to the destination. And that is to take refugee behind the wall of law. The era of heroism and gallantry is over.'

Referring to his article 'Ruling over this society is more difficult' that was one the cases for his accusation, he said: 'We should not forget that the way that Iranian nation has gone through, others have passed by going through a sea of blood and have sometimes reached the wilderness of insanity and have thus regretted it. If we tell those, who have been away but at least do not write a prescription, that quite a few of you would no longer recognize many of these alleys and streets and this new generation. If we tell the political shopkeepers and cloth-sellers of the world of politics and bazar (market) and messengers to tune another instrument as this instrument is deficient and spiritless, they should not be offended as we have experienced this story with our own flesh and blood.

In relation to the article 'The article of the seedling that bloomed in 20 years' Behnoud said: 'this article is a report of Norouz 99. The fact that the imprisonment of the Mayor of Tehran has been interpreted as a political act and another sentence of the same article has been interpreted as an attack on the Guardian Council, to me it is again due to inattention to the distinction between a report and an analytical article. Sometimes, a report gets all its words from different proclamations, newspaper reports, statements and speeches. These interpretations have in their own time been used by the authorities, critics, MPs and political groups. It is a critique of the course of events that to me is the right of the person holding the pen. The right that the Islamic constitutional laws has bestowed to him. The only thing remaining is the subject of intrigues, sharp words and violence that are contemptible and can be considered as sin and liable to persecution. Show me such examples in my stated and written sentences and words, and I would surely not hesitate to express my regret.

I am just a journalist, nothing more or less. I have always been writing, not just now that I am on trial and I am not a political fighter nor am I interested in politics. I have written two or three times last year that I don’t consider heroism and hero-making suitable for this age and reformation, but I consider it opposed to the ideal of reformation. I don't claim that in an article or even in my choice of the words, I have never made a mistake. I have written it over and over again that we are 'men of blame', and reproach ourselves for even the uncommitted sins and ask for redemption, let alone the cases that the representative of public persecutor has mentioned and I have admitted. But up to this very minute that I am at this court, I have never been on trial. There has been no protest against me and when I was sent to Evin prison from this court by the order of juridical authorities120 days ago, it was in fact the first time that I went to prison under the rule of Islamic Republic. And as I have lived and written in such a way as not to provoke any protest, I hope the court with its concern for the person on trial, the person who has always protested against violence, aggression and any kind of extravagance, would acquit me. This is my hope and I have my confidence in. O God would you forgive me as you are all and everything. O God you don't change your mind about me.

Masoud Behnoud then referred to his resignation from journalism and said: 'I collected the last volume of my articles this last spring, some two weeks before my imprisonment. I have chosen the title Perhaps the Last Word for this collection. In the Introduction of this book, I have explained that after 36 years of writing and journalism I intend to resign and I have decided to devote the rest of my life to the contemporary history of Iran and Literature that is my prime love of life. It is a custom to hold a ceremony for a writer who is announcing his resignation to say good bye to him. It was predestined that in my case this ceremony would be held at the court. I am not complaining. Or perhaps it is gratitude mixed with complain. As my writings prove I have never driven that rapidly, and have never insisted too much to conjure up the possibility of imprisonment. I was not prepared and I can say I didn't even dream about it. But it happened. Now I use this opportunity and put an end to this story. That is to my professional life in journalism.

Though I have now surrendered the armor,

May the amorous gestures of bowed eyebrows be always remembered.

-- Translated for payvand.com by Roya Monajem, royamonajem@yahoo.com