“Now I am a captive. My body is chained in a dark, damp cell, and my soul imprisoned in the shadow of a deadly thought… I am condemned to die, condemned to die! This doom is my only companion, haunting me relentlessly. My entire being is frozen by the chilling weight of it, my body bent under the crushing, unbearable burden…”
(“The Last Day of a Condemned Man”, Victor Hugo)
Written by Dr. Aziz Fouladvand
Part Two – Execution: An Irreversible Process
The possibility of error in the issuance of legal verdicts is ever-present. For example, since 1973, nearly 200 individuals sentenced to death in the United States have been exonerated after being proven innocent.[1] Others have been executed despite serious doubts about their guilt.
It can never be overlooked that an individual sentenced to death may, in fact, be innocent, and that their statements or “confessions,” which form the basis of the case proceedings, may have been extracted under duress or torture during the interrogation process. In Iran, during the harrowing 1980s, many detainees were summarily executed without proof of guilt or fair due process. Under the clerical regime, severe psychological pressure and physical torture have been the prevailing norms. These forced confessions and statements become the foundation of case cases, which ultimately lead to death sentences. In reality, many such sentences rely solely on coerced confessions obtained under torture, devoid of any credible evidence. The majority of executions carried out against participants in the 2022 uprisings followed a similar process.
All this clearly implies that death sentences may encompass individuals who, despite their innocence, were coerced into confessing under torture.[2] Furthermore, the judges presiding over the so-called “Revolutionary Courts” function as extensions of the regime’s security apparatus. Consequently, their rulings are better understood as instruments of state security considerations rather than impartial judicial determinations based on democratic judicial principles.
The regime’s longstanding approach to issuing death sentences for political prisoners, particularly members of the main opposition People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), exemplifies this pattern. Mere membership in or even sympathy for the organization is deemed sufficient to warrant charges of “enmity against God” (moharebeh), “corruption on earth” (fesad-e fel-arz), or “rebellion” (baghi), all of which carry the death penalty. This remains true even in the absence of any violent actions by the accused. Furthermore, proving such charges requires neither definitive evidence nor a confession. By the regime’s own admission, the mere existence of the organization serves as justification for imposing the severest punishments on anyone associated with it.
In a recent show trial targeting the PMOI and 104 of its members in Iran, the regime’s religious legal expert declared that all members of the organization are “rebels” (baghi), emphasizing that, unlike “moharebeh”, the sole penalty for “baghi” is death.[3]
Considering the irreversible nature of the death penalty, its defensibility becomes even more questionable when applied in a system rife with injustice, particularly against prisoners of conscience. In the case of the regime’s treatment of members and sympathizers of the PMOI/MEK, the death penalty is wielded not as a judicial measure but as a tool of political suppression. The regime’s weaponization of the death penalty against political opponents not only heightens the risk of executing innocent individuals but also reveals the broader aim of perpetuating fear and crushing opposition under the guise of the law.
[1] Amnesty International has stated: “The death penalty is irreversible, and there is always the possibility of error. The possibility that a person sentenced to death may be innocent can never be entirely ruled out. For example, since 1973, more than 184 prisoners who had been sentenced to death in the United States were later found to be innocent. Several others have been executed despite serious doubts about their guilt.”
[2] “The detailed report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Committee regarding the 2022 uprising includes numerous references to confessions extracted under torture, which led to the execution of victims. Among these are articles 727-879, and then 940 and 954 to 962.”
[3]In the sixteenth session of this court, the religious scholar (a scholar of Islamic jurisprudence) stated that “Baqi is one step above Muharebah. In the crime of Muharebah, the judge has the discretion to issue one of four sentences, but in Baghi, the sentence is only execution.”
