Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Ameneh Bahrami in 2009. She now lives in Spain. Manu Fernandez/AP/Press Association Images

Poll: Would Iran be right to blind criminal with acid in 'eye for an eye' justice?

The country’s judiciary ruled that a man who poured acid over a woman, blinding and disfiguring her, seven years ago was to suffer the same fate. Is this a punishment that fits the crime or a step to far?

IRAN WAS TO blind a man with acid as punishment for him doing the same to a female victim seven years ago but the retributive punishment has been postponed indefinitely.

The so-called eye for an eye retribution was demanded by the victim Ameneh Bahrami. She was severely disfigured and blinded by a jar of acid thrown over her by Majid Movahedi in 2004 after she rejected several marriage proposals.

The punishment was to be carried out under a sentence called qisas, meaning retribution in kind, which is in accordance with Islamic sharia law before it was postponed today.

No reason for the postponement has been given and there is no indication of if and when it will take place.

But was Iran right to consider the punishment of blinding the convicted criminal with acid?


Poll Results:

No (745)
Yes (673)

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
53 Comments
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute vv7k7Z3c
    Favourite vv7k7Z3c
    Report
    May 14th 2011, 3:29 PM

    Matthew,

    It’s quite clear from interviews with Ms Bahrami that she is in favour of the punishment. She even wanted to carry it out herself. See this interview – http://www.rferl.org/content/blinding_retributive_sentence_iran_victim/24107939.html

    And by all means link to ‘the enemy’ who we do not in anyway view as ‘the enemy’ but their story doesn’t sound like it is very clear from what you’re saying.

    Hugh

    9
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute vv7k7Z3c
    Favourite vv7k7Z3c
    Report
    May 14th 2011, 4:13 PM

    Thanks for the link. As I said no problem with posting it and your comment was taken in jest but just wanted to point out that we don’t see any of our competitors as ‘the enemy’, they’re merely ‘our competitors’.

    Also just wanted to point out that its clear from interviews Bahrami has given that she is in favour of the punishment.

    As for the question, it stemmed from the quite strong views being expressed in the two stories we’ve run on this. It’s a fair and admittedly, upfront question which by the looks of it has quite evenly split opinion right down the middle.

    Thanks for your feedback and keep reading,

    Hugh

    5
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds