The Challenge of Iranian Criminal Law to Citizens' Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech, a cornerstone of democratic societies and a legal-political tool is one of the most contentious issues in human societies. Due to its special nature, it is both a fundamental right and a potential threat to those in power. Consequently, it serves as a key indicator of a democratic system  Freedom of speech plays a vital role in preventing tyranny by fostering public awareness and critical thinking, which holds rulers accountable. However, defining its limits and preventing government overreach remains a challenge. The government has a dual obligation: to refrain from unnecessary intervention and to guarantee this right for its citizens.
This descriptive-analytical article examines the relationship between Iranian criminal law and citizens' freedom of speech. It seeks to answer the following questions:
- Does Iranian criminal law guarantee freedom of speech?
- Conversely, do criminal regulations themselves violate citizens' freedom of speech?
-What are the examples of these violations?[1
The analysis begins by defining freedom of speech and its limitations as outlined in international documents. It then compares these provisions to the Iranian Constitution. Subsequently, it examines regulations in Iranian criminal law that both support and violate freedom of expression.
Freedom of speech allows individuals to express their beliefs without fear of government reprisal. It encompasses the expression of thoughts, theories, values, and opinions through various means, including speech, writing, images, and the press. "Expression" is used broadly, encompassing linguistic (speech, etc.), non-linguistic (images, gestures, etc.), written (books, newspapers, etc.), and non-written forms. Today, art forms like paintings, caricatures, films, theater, and music are also prominent expressions. Even silence is a part of freedom of speech; individuals can choose not to reveal their views.
The right to freedom of expression, a cornerstone of human rights, guarantees that all members of society can express ideas and opinions, access resources and information, create and enjoy art, and participate in cultural life and scientific development. This right is characterized by eight key components:

Universality: Everyone has this right equally, regardless of race, color, nationality, gender, language, religion, opinion, social origin, or property.
Global Scope: This right extends beyond geographical borders.
Content: This right encompasses a wide range of information and opinions.
Two-Way Communication: This right includes both receiving and transmitting information, ideas, and opinions.
Positive Obligation: The right imposes a positive obligation on governments party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They are required to take necessary measures, such as establishing laws and providing compensation for violations, to ensure its observance.
6. Method of Expression: There are no limitations on the method of expression. Individuals can use any media of their choice to communicate their ideas.
No Indirect Interference: Any attempt by the government to directly or indirectly limit this right constitutes interference. Examples of indirect limitations include imposing special taxes on media outlets to hinder their activities or requiring them to broadcast government-approved content or refrain from criticism.
Positive Duty of Governments: Freedom of speech necessitates the free flow of information and ideas. This right places a positive duty on governments to ensure its existence.

The research findings suggest that Iranian legislators have violated this right by introducing ambiguous and complex terms like "Islamic standards," "Islamic principles," "Islamic rules," "national interests," "public rights," and "contrary to Sharia content and Ethics." These violations occur in both the Constitution and ordinary laws. The Iranian Constitution does not fully recognize this right as an independent and fundamental legal right. Furthermore, criminal legislation implements this right minimally through strict regulations, depriving citizens of its full potential.
Iranian laws do not guarantee freedom of speech. The Islamic Penal Code, Press Law, Law on Punishing Unauthorized Activities in Audiovisual Matters, Law Prohibiting the Use of Satellite Receiving Equipment, Law on Political Crimes, and Law on How Parties Operate criminalize acts such as insulting authorities and holy places, assembly and collusion to disrupt security, forming or managing groups with the intention of disrupting national security, acting against national security, propaganda against the regime or for opposing groups, conspiracy against the Islamic Republic of Iran, cooperating with hostile governments, disrupting public peace and order, publishing lies to disturb the public mind, publishing content against public morals, and anti-Islamic educational activities. These all restrict freedom of speech.
Moreover, legislators have further hindered the future of freedom of speech by opposing proposals and bills such as "Establishment of Supreme Courts for the Protection of the Constitution," "Amendment of the Press Law," and "Guarantee Freedom of Assemblies and Marches." Conversely, they have proposed legislation like "Protection of Cyberspace," "Punishment of Publishers of Fake News in Cyberspace," "Punishment of Commenting Against the Opinion of Official Authorities," and "How to Hold Ral ...lies." Conversely, they have proposed legislation like "Protection of Cyberspace," "Punishment of Publishers of Fake News in Cyberspace," "Punishment of Commenting Against the Opinion of Official Authorities," and "How to Hold Rallies and Marches." These proposals suggest a potential for further restrictions on freedom of speech.
 
Conclusion
In conclusion, Iranian criminal law presents a significant challenge to citizens' freedom of speech. The use of ambiguous terms and strict regulations within the legal framework significantly limits the ability of citizens to express themselves freely. The opposition to reforms and proposals for stricter online control suggest a bleak outlook for the future of free speech in Iran.