Saed News: The guardian of the murdered girl is the father, but when the father himself is the killer, it must be considered that, aside from the parent-child relationship, one citizen has taken the life of another, and in this case, the government should approach the matter with a sense of pragmatism.
Saed News: According to a report by Saed News, quoting Asr-e-Iran, the theory of pragmatism is for moments like this... If the father, as the guardian of the victim, does not find himself deserving of retribution and forgives, can the public prosecutor not take action because a citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran has deprived another citizen of their life? Moreover, the murder occurred on the sidewalk, in public, causing fear in society and disturbing public safety, which also allows the government to intervene.
When you look at the image of the young girl, you realize the depth of the crime, and it is, of course, unbelievable. Only the father of a daughter can understand how repulsive and heinous the act committed by that man against his daughter is.
Because the girl had worked independently in a beauty salon, the savage man attacked her and, with knife wounds, killed a girl with a thousand hopes, probably doing so in the name of honor and probably thinking that since he is her guardian, he would not face severe punishment.
If the father, as the guardian, does not consider himself worthy of retribution, can the public prosecutor not intervene because a citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran has deprived another citizen of their life? The murder took place in public, in a sidewalk, causing fear in society and undermining public security, which means the government can intervene.
Does every man have the right, just because he is a father, to take the life of his child? Just because he suspects or disagrees with their actions?
Naturally, this is not a religious discussion of retribution, and it is understood that the guardian of a murdered child is the father, but the law and religious views presume that the father decides whether to forgive or demand retribution regarding the blood of his child. But where should one go when the enemy is also the one making the decision?
What kind of patriarchal, anti-life culture is this, where instead of looking into the eyes of his beautiful daughter and drawing energy, he stains his hands with her blood?
One of my former colleagues, who is still quite young and carries the main burden of rent in the family in a moderate area, said, "My greatest joy is that my father, in his old age, stays awake at night and does not go to bed until he sees me come back home from my media work and kisses me." The kiss symbolizes his gratitude for my help with the rent, so we do not have to move to another neighborhood. We've lived in the same place for years, not in our own home, but in a rental home with high rent that increases every year.
The daughter, however, helps the family, and the father gives his love to the daughter, even though she is now of an age where she could be a mother. But this innocent girl, so much younger and more in need of love, was drowned in her blood instead of being embraced with kisses!
In a society where brothers do not care for each other and everyone is busy with earning their daily bread and making ends meet, the killer believes that the work of a daughter is not accepted by friends and acquaintances, and the only sign of honor and masculinity is in killing one's own child. But whatever name this crime is given, it is not honor. It is cowardice.
Apart from the parent-child discussion, in this case, one citizen has taken the life of another, in public, in front of others, and the government should act with pragmatism. The theory of pragmatism exists for moments like this, just like the case of the "batman" in Mashhad, who claimed his hands had never touched those women, yet was executed and even accused of adultery with a married woman, though he denied it, even though society, and even opponents of the death penalty, were glad he was executed.
Yes, according to religious law, a guardian can forgive his child’s blood, and according to the Quran, life is found in retribution, and forgiveness is better, but here, a father has killed his daughter, and this daughter was acting legally under the laws of the Islamic Republic. Even if her actions were illegal or sinful, the relevant authorities should have dealt with the charges, not allow another citizen, even if he is the father, to administer punishment. Because she was a trust with the father, not his property, and what the father did is both a crime and a betrayal of the trust, and deserving of punishment, which, even if not outlined in religious law, can be defined under pragmatism. Just as in religious law, buying and selling drugs is not a crime, but the legislature has criminalized it, as it has many other issues where pragmatism outweighs religious law or fits within the needs of modern law and religious regulations.
