Jun

7

Prosecutors “Clarify” Misstatements Made during Alavi Bail Hearing


Posted by at 10:05 pm on June 7, 2007
Category: Criminal PenaltiesSanctions

Ouch!It seems that the story that the prosecutors told to keep Mohammed Alavi in jail pending his trial on charges that he violated the Iranian Sanctions Regulations was just that — a story. On May 31, the trial court issued an order reversing its previous decision that Alavi should be held without bail pending trial, citing a “Clarification” filed by the prosecution. That “Clarification” backed off two significant claims made by the prosecution that the court relied on to deny bail to Alavi.

As we reported earlier, Alavi was accused of having downloaded, while in Iran, simulation software used for training employees at various power facilities, including nuclear generation plants. The prosecution also alleged that Alavi took to Iran detailed schematics of the Palo Verde nuclear plant.

Neither of these key allegations turns out to have been true. The trial court judge noted that the prosecution contended that Alavi had taken “the blueprints of Palo Verde to Tehran.” The court then noted:

The Government has now advised the Court, “Although the program contains schematics and other detailed information relating to Palo Verde’s reactor control room and other systems, those schematics and other details do not amount to architectural blue prints or designs of the physical layout of the Palo Verde site.”

Nor did Alavi download the simulation software while in Iran as alleged by the Government. According to the court, the prosecutors have now admitted:

Alavi would not have downloaded the 3 Key Master program from the Western Services website. He would have only obtained the registration key to make the program operational.

This last admission is crucial to the viability of the Government’s case against Alavi. Downloading a program would almost certainly violate the Iranian Transaction Regulations. Carrying a program to Iran on a laptop for personal use, however, would arguably qualify under the baggage exception set forth in section 560.507. And downloading a key to make that program function is arguably permitted under the information and informational materials exception in section 560.315 of the Iranian Transactions Regulations.

Thanks to reader and commenter Mike Deal for sending me a copy of the court’s order.

Permalink

Bookmark and Share

Copyright © 2007 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)


2 Comments:


Just so Clif won’t worry that I’m having another senior moment, I note that the statutory exclusion under IEEPA Section 1702(b)(3), i.e., the Berman Amendment as expanded by theFree Trade in Ideas Act, is far broader than OFAC’s miserly expression of it in ITR Section 560.315, a point made by PENN and IEEE in their suits which forced OFAC to issue a general license for editing Iranian authors in order to moot the suits and avoid setting precedent.

Comment by Mike Deal on June 8th, 2007 @ 6:46 pm

The story reminds me of the bit in Monty Python’s Holy Grail; “She’s a witch!! She turned me into a newt!” “But, you’re not a newt.” “Well, I got better.”

Comment by Scott K. on June 11th, 2007 @ 7:27 am