Why Is Dog Walking Prohibited In Iran? Authorities Extend The Ban To More Cities
Iran has expanded a ban on walking dogs in public to more than 20 cities, due to concerns over public health, social order and safety, local media reported. The cities where the ban has been imposed include Kermanshah, Ilam, Hamadan, Kerman, Boroujerd, Robat Karim, Lavasanat and Golestan, according to a report by Tehran-based Faraz News. Similar restrictions were first introduced in the capital city of Tehran in 2019, sparking controversy and criticism among citizens.
The Iranian authorities claim that dog walking poses health risks to the public. They also argue that dog walking can lead to safety issues. However, they haven't provided specifics on these concerns.
Authorities have been cracking down on dog owners who violate the ban, leading to arrests and resistance, as per reports.
Etemad, which is a reformist newspaper, on Sunday quoted an official from Ilam city as saying that "legal action will be taken against violators". The quote didn't have any other details.
The latest measures were aimed at "maintaining public order, ensuring safety and protecting public health", the state newspaper Iran said on Saturday.
As quoted by the Iran newspaper, Abbas Najafi, the prosecutor of the western city of Hamedan, said, "Dog walking is a threat to public health, peace and comfort."
Why is dog walking banned in Iran?
The ban has been imposed through local directives and police orders as no national legislation has been passed. However, there are some articles in Iran's Penal Code and Constitution that enable authorities to impose such bans, which are Article 638 on public morality, Article 688 on threats to public health and Article 40 of the Constitution, which prohibits harm to others.
Some reports have claimed that the ban aims at maintaining social order and upholding the country's official religion, Shia Islam. Some think the ban is a force against Western cultural influence. Many religious scholars believe that petting dogs or coming into contact with their saliva is ritually impure.
"Offenders will face consequences if they are seen walking dogs in parks, public spaces, or carrying them on their vehicles," Khalkhal's public prosecutor, Mozaffar Rezaei in northwest Iran's Ardabil province, said in remarks to Islamic Republic News Agency (ILNA) published Sunday. The ban came into effect on June 6.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
26 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Who is Iranian rapper Tataloo, a former President Ebrahim Raisi endorser who now faces death sentence
Iranian singer-cum-rapper Amir Hossein Maghsoudloo, popularly known as Tataloo, is facing death sentence after being convicted on charges of blasphemy and 'insulting Islamic sanctities'. Tataloo, who once supported a hard-line Iranian presidential candidate, now stands out against the gray prison uniform. The court sentenced him to the death penalty in May after he was found guilty of blasphemy in January this year. The 37-year-old rapper's songs reverberated with the Islamic Republic's youth at a time when the opposition to the country's government was splintered and largely remained leaderless. His music became popular as it challenged Iran's theocracy and the hierarchy of the system. In a major turn of events in 2022, the Iranian rapper's lyrics became more political after the death of 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman Mahsa Amini and the subsequent wave of nationwide protests. Amini was detained and died in state custody of Iran in relation to state-imposed religious dress in September 2022. Tataloo also appeared in videos that criticised the government. Tataloo started his music career in 2003. He is known for combining rap, pop, rhythm-and-blues and rock with Farsi lyrics. He comes from the underground genre and released his first album in 2011 which reportedly polarized the audiences. However, Tataloo never played publicly in Iran, where all the concerts are controlled by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. Tataloo appeared in a 2015 music video which supported Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard and the controversial nuclear program of the Islamic Republic, which has concerned the West for years that it could lead to Iran developing atom bombs. In the video for 'Energy Hasteei,' or 'Nuclear Energy,' Tataloo sang 'This is our absolute right: To have an armed Persian Gulf.' He endorsed hard-liner Ebrahim Raisi in 2017 and sat with him for a television appearance as part of Raisi's failed presidential campaign against Hassan Rouhani. Raisi later became the president in 2021 but was killed in a helicopter crash in 2024. Tataloo faced legal issues in Iran in 2018 and was allowed to leave the country for Turkey, where many Persian singers and artists performed lucrative stage concerts. T he singer started hosting several live video sessions on social media and became an instant rage among the youth, along with his tattoos covering his face and body. Among the tattoos he boasted, one was an Iranian flag and another image of his mother next to a key and heart. In 2020, Instagram deactivated his account after he called for underage girls to join his 'team' for sex. The Iranian singer even acknowledged taking drugs. Tataloo's long run in music came to a halt in late 2023 when his passport expired and he was deported from Turkey. Upon his arrival in Iran, the singer was immediately taken into custody. The Iranian Supreme Court upheld his death sentence in May this year.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Why is Iran cracking down on dog-walking in public spaces?
Iran has expanded its ban on public dog-walking to over 25 cities, citing health, safety and morality concerns. With no national law outlawing pet ownership, local prosecutors are enforcing restrictions using penal codes. Critics argue the crackdown reflects deeper efforts to suppress personal freedoms and cultural shifts seen as un-Islamic by the regime read more An Iranian child looks at the dog as he walks, in Tehran, Iran, March 30, 2021. File Image/WANA via Reuters Iranian authorities have drastically widened restrictions on dog ownership and public pet activity by banning dog-walking in at least 25 cities across the country. While there is no nationwide legislation banning dog ownership outright, these local-level prohibitions are being enforced using Iran's penal provisions and religious-cultural rationale. The measures, first implemented in Tehran in 2019, have now become a countrywide trend. Judicial officials in numerous provinces have justified the crackdown by citing concerns over hygiene, safety, morality and social order. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The renewed focus on dog bans puts a spotight the Iranian state's enduring discomfort with what it considers Western cultural infiltration, and is a continuation of the post-1979 Islamic regime's efforts to suppress behaviours seen as un-Islamic or foreign in origin, reported AFP. How Iran is enforcing a ban on dog walking Over the past week, prosecutors and judicial officials in cities across Iran have imposed fresh restrictions against dog walking, including in Ilam, Kermanshah, Hamadan, Kerman, Boroujerd, Robat Karim, Lavasanat, Golestan, Kashmar and Khalkhal, among others. The restrictions follow a precedent set by Tehran in 2019, where police first issued a directive against walking dogs in public places. According to domestic news outlets, cities like Isfahan and Kerman recently joined the expanding list. In Isfahan, public prosecutor Mohammad Mousavian announced that the act of walking a dog is considered a violation of 'public rights' and that it jeopardises the 'health, comfort, and peace of citizens.' As per Mousavian's directive, all forms of dog walking — whether in public areas, parks or inside private vehicles — are now banned. 'Any form of dog walking in the city — whether in parks, public spaces, or vehicles — is prohibited and will be dealt with seriously,' he said. Law enforcement has been directed to confiscate vehicles transporting dogs and to shut down pet shops and unlicensed veterinary clinics. Authorities in Ilam echoed a similar position. According to local media, a city official said, 'Legal action will be taken against violators,' though further details were not provided. In Khalkhal, a city in Ardabil province, prosecutor Mozaffar Rezaei confirmed the prohibition, stating, 'Offenders will face consequences if they are seen walking dogs in parks, public spaces, or carrying them on their vehicles.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Rezaei also stated that 'in addition to the financial and physical damages, religious rulings and cultural considerations must be taken into account, as this practice reflects the promotion of a Western lifestyle.' In Kashmar, a city in northeastern Iran, the public prosecutor declared that the purpose of the ban was to protect 'public hygiene and the physical and psychological safety of the public.' The reformist-leaning Faraz News reported that more than 20 cities had announced new restrictions over a single weekend. Despite the lack of a uniform national policy, local authorities have relied on articles from Iran's Penal Code and Constitution to impose these restrictions, notably Article 638 concerning public morality, Article 688 on threats to public health, and Article 40 which prohibits actions that cause harm to others. Why Iran is banning dogs in public spaces Iran's theocratic establishment has long opposed dog ownership, perceiving it as a sign of Westernisation and cultural deviation. Religious interpretations that classify dogs as najis, or ritually impure, underpin much of this opposition. Contact with dogs, especially their saliva, is viewed by many scholars as religiously unacceptable. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In 2017, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei weighed in on the issue, stating: 'Keeping dogs for reasons other than herding, hunting and guard dogs is considered reprehensible.' He added via Tasnim News Agency, 'If this practice resembles that of non-Muslims, promotes their culture or causes harm and disturbance to neighbours, it is deemed forbidden.' The religious establishment's influence on public lawmaking was also visible in 2021 when 75 lawmakers signed a letter denouncing dog ownership as a 'destructive social problem' that could 'gradually change the Iranian and Islamic way of life.' This echoed earlier efforts in 2010 when Iran's Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance barred advertisements for pets or related products. In 2014, lawmakers introduced legislation that proposed fines or even corporal punishment for dog-walkers, though the bill failed to pass. The controversial 'Protection of the Public's Rights Against Animals' bill, first floated over a decade ago, also attempted to curb pet ownership. Dr. Payam Mohebi, president of the Iran Veterinary Association and a vocal critic of the draft law, noted, 'Over the years, they have changed this a couple of times and even discussed corporal punishment for dog owners. But their plan didn't get anywhere.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He also recalled earlier legislative proposals that sought to confiscate dogs and abandon them in deserts or hand them over to zoos. What that means for dog owners in Iran With the latest directives, police have been authorised to take more aggressive measures. Authorities have been instructed not only to confiscate dogs and impound vehicles but also to track and prosecute social media accounts promoting pet ownership or selling animals. Mousavian called on Iran's cybercrime units to dismantle such accounts and launch legal proceedings against those behind them. The justification given was that the bans were 'in response to serious public demands.' These developments come amid increasing reports of dog owners being fined, harassed or facing threats of eviction. In some cases, dogs have been confiscated or owners arrested for walking their pets in public. This video that I've received today made me angry. A young man being beaten up savagely by the police in Iran just because he resisted to give his dog away. His mother is trying to help him but see what happens. According to the laws in Iran, walking a dog in public is a crime. — Masih Alinejad 🏳️ (@AlinejadMasih) July 13, 2021 Given the heightened scrutiny, many citizens have started walking their dogs late at night or driving them around to avoid police detection. Despite these efforts, enforcement has remained inconsistent. In cities like Tehran, many residents continue to walk their pets in less visible locations, revealing the difficulty of fully enforcing the ban in urban environments where pet ownership has steadily grown. How pet ownership is evolving into a form of resistance in Iran Owning a pet — especially a dog — has, over time, evolved into a subtle form of resistance in Iran. For younger generations in particular, having a dog is a lifestyle choice that also expresses personal identity and rejection of rigid state norms. The act of walking a dog in public is increasingly being interpreted as a symbolic challenge to the state's attempts to control everyday life. This dynamic is comparable to other forms of passive resistance in Iran — such as violating the compulsory hijab, participating in underground gatherings, or consuming banned substances. All are behaviours that exist in legal grey areas and continue despite government disapproval. Public frustration is growing over what some perceive as misplaced priorities. Critics argue that with rising concerns over violent crime and economic instability, law enforcement should focus on genuine threats to public safety rather than cracking down on pet owners. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In Isfahan, a group of animal rights activists gathered outside the governor's office to protest what they alleged was municipal culling of stray dogs and called for a reversal of recent bans, reported Iran International. It remains uncertain how effective the government will be in curbing a social trend that continues to gain popularity, despite — or perhaps because of — official disapproval. Also Watch: With inputs from agencies
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC refuses immediate hearing as Tamil Nadu accuses Centre of withholding over Rs 2,150 crore in school funds
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has declined an urgent hearing request from the Tamil Nadu government regarding their plea against the central government. The state claims that Rs 2,151 crore in central education funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme for 2024-2025 is being withheld by the Centre. The state government sought immediate intervention from the Supreme Court in this matter on Monday. The dispute centers around the allocation and disbursement of funds meant for education initiatives in Tamil Nadu under the federal education scheme. A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan took note of the fact that the state government filed the petition in May alleging withholding of central funds for 2024 and this year also. "There is no urgency and it can be taken up after the 'partial working days' (the new name of summer vacation)," the bench said. In May, the Tamil Nadu government moved the top court against the Centre for allegedly withholding the funds. The DMK government's plea, filed against the Union Ministry of Education, invokes Article 131 of the Constitution which provides exclusive jurisdiction to the top court to hear pleas between the Centre and one or more states, or between one or more states. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo The state government alleged the Centre attempted to force the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the associated PM SHRI Schools Scheme which it strongly objected to, particularly the contentious three-language formula. The top court, therefore, was urged to declare that the NEP and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme are not binding on the plaintiff state unless and until a formal agreement is entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant for their implementation within Tamil Nadu . The lawsuit has also sought a declaration that the action of the Centre to link Tamil Nadu's entitlement to receive funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme to the implementation of the NEP, 2020, and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme within the state are unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable . It has also urged the top court to declare the Centre's letters of February 23, 2024 and March 07, 2024 as illegal, null, void ab initio and not binding on the state government. The plea sought a direction to the Centre to pay "Rs 2,291,30,24,769 (two thousand two hundred and ninety-one crore thirty lakhs twenty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty-nine) within a time frame to be fixed by this court" along with a future interest of 6 per cent per annum on the "principal sum of Rs 2,151,59,61,000 (two thousand one hundred and fifty-one crore fifty nine lakh and sixty one thousand) from May 1, 2025 until realisation of the decree". The dispute stems from the non-release of central funds under the Scheme, a flagship centrally sponsored programme for school education aimed at universalising quality education. The Project Approval Board (PAB) of the Ministry of Education had approved a total outlay of Rs 3,585.99 crore for Tamil Nadu for FY 2024 25, of which the Union Government's committed 60 per cent share amounted to Rs 2,151.59 crore. The plea said despite this approval, no instalments have been disbursed by the Centre as yet. The Centre, it said, unilaterally linked the release of these funds to Tamil Nadu's full implementation of NEP 2020 and the signing of an MoU for the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, conditions which were neither part of the original Samagra Shiksha Scheme nor agreed upon by the state. The reason for such non-disbursement is that the defendant has linked the release of Samagra Shiksha Scheme funds with the implementation of national education policy and NEP exemplary PM SHRI Schools' Scheme despite the fact that these policy/scheme are separate schemes, it said. Referring to the impact of non-release of Samagra Shiksha funds, the plea said paying salaries was crucial in maintaining competent and motivated teachers and supporting staff. It directly impacts the quality of education provided to students and contributes to overall societal development by nurturing the next generation with the skills and knowledge needed for success, it added. PTI Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
