CPJ’s census of journalists imprisoned on April 15 also highlights the severe deterioration of freedom of expression in Iran over time. In December 2004, during the last full year of President Mohammad Khatami’s tenure, CPJ documented just one journalist in prison during its annual worldwide prison census. By December 2009, after a contested presidential election returned Mahmoud Ahmedinejad to office, the number had grown to 23 in CPJ’s annual census. CPJ surveys since that time have consistently shown 35 to 50 journalists in prison in Iran at any given time.

Only Turkey, with 48 in jail, was detaining more journalists on April 15, CPJ research shows.

As devastating as the imprisonments are to the individual journalists and their families, the Iranian government’s tactics have had an intimidating effect on the press, choking off the flow of information. This census and CPJ’s past surveys are simply snapshots in time—they do not include the large numbers of journalists convicted of crimes or facing charges who are temporarily free on bail or furlough. Iran has pursued a revolving-door policy in imprisoning journalists, freeing some detainees on short-term furloughs even as they make new arrests. The pattern of rotating critical journalists in and out of prison has sown fear and self-censorship across the entire press corps, according to CPJ research. At least 68 Iranian journalists fled into exile between 2007 and 2012 due to harassment and the threat of imprisonment, according to CPJ research. Only Somali journalists have gone into exile in higher numbers during that period.

The Iranian government has used several other tactics to intimidate journalists. Authorities have blocked millions of websites, banned reformist publications, and conducted widespread electronic surveillance in an effort to make a wide range of topics off-limits to public debate. “Many of the topics we could cover five years ago, like cultural issues, we couldn’t do anymore,” Omid Memarian, an exiled Iranian journalist, told CPJ. “Journalists were even prevented from covering the earthquake relief efforts that happened in Iran last year.”

In 2013, as the Iranian government began a new wave of detentions aimed at silencing journalists ahead of the elections, Intelligence Minister Heydar Moslehi announced that 600 Iranian journalists were part of an anti-state network. He said the arrests were an attempt to “prevent the emergence of sedition prior to the elections.”

The 16-page report, “Iraq’s Information Crimes Law: Badly Written Provisionsand Draconian Punishments Violate Due Processand Free Speech,” is a legal analysis of the draft law. It finds that the draft law is part of a broad effort by authorities to suppress peaceful dissent by criminalizing legitimate information sharing and networking activities. The proposed law had its first reading before Iraq’s Council of Representatives on July 27, 2011; a second reading is expected as early as July 2012.

“This bill would give Iraqi authorities yet another tool to suppress dissent, especially on the Internet, whichIraqi journalists and activists increasingly turn to for information and open debate,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “The Council of Representatives should reject lawsthat would undermine the freedoms enshrined in Iraq’s2005 constitution.”

The proposed law’s overbroad restrictions on content impose draconian criminal penalties that would silence dissenting voices, Human Rights Watch said.Article 3 provides for lifeimprisonmentand a large fine for “intentionally” usingcomputer devices and an information network to undermine the country’s “supreme economic, political, military, or security interests,” which are not defined.

Article 3 also violates Iraqis’ freedom of association by authorizing life imprisonment for involvementwith a “hostile entity for the purpose of upsetting security and public order or endangering the country.” This provision could be the basis for prosecuting anyone involved in an organization, movement,or political party that the government deems “hostile” because of the group’s criticism of the government or its policies, Human Rights Watch said.

The law as currently drafted would undermine guarantees in the Iraqi constitution of freedom of speech and assembly, and would violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Iraq is a state party. The ICCPR holds that, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression … to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds.” International standards only allow content-based restrictions in extremely narrow circumstances, such as cases of slander or libel against private individuals or speech that threatens national security. Restrictions must be clearly defined, specific, necessary, and proportionate to the threat to the interest protected.As a state party to the ICCPR, Iraq must also guarantee “the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of [one’s] interests.”The ICCPR allows for restrictions on these freedoms, but only as provided by law and as necessary “in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

The report finds that this draft law fits a pattern of increasing restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly. In May 2011, the Council of Ministers approved a draft of the Law on Freedom of Expression of Opinion, Assembly, and Peaceful Demonstration, which contains provisions that would criminalize peaceful speech with penalties of up to 10 years in prison. Since February 2011, Human Rights Watch has documented numerous violent attacks by Iraqi security forces and gangs, apparently acting with the support of the Iraqi government, against peaceful demonstrators demanding human rights, better services, and an end to corruption.

“How lawmakers handle this bill will be a signal to the world about the kind of country they want Iraq to become,” Stork said. “They can look backward and come down on the side of repression or they can look ahead and stand up for a rights-respecting society.”