“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 Four – The Use of the Death Penalty as a Tool for Political Repression
In certain countries, the death penalty functions as a tool of political repression, designed to suppress opposition and instill fear, thereby securing the regime’s survival. In Iran, under the rule of the religious fascism, dissidents, activists, and defenders of freedom and human rights are condemned to death on vague and arbitrary charges such as “moharebeh” (waging war against God), “baghi” (rebellion), and “fesad fel-arz” (spreading corruption on earth)—terms that have no legitimate basis in international law.[1] The imposition of these charges rests with an individual—always male—occupying the position of “judge.”[2] These ideological labels effectively preclude any possibility of a fair trial, as defined by modern standards of justice. For the “judges” and the ruling regime, these security-driven terms carry significant weight, serving multiple purposes: suppressing dissent and cultivating an atmosphere of fear.
In practice, the clerical judiciary system consistently overlooks the principle of strict interpretation of criminal laws in favor of the defendant. Strict interpretation refers to the application of the law in a manner that benefits the defendant, meaning that charges should be minimized in the defendant’s favor. This principle is a cornerstone of criminal law and is recognized in most legal systems around the world as a fundamental element of legal interpretation. However, in cases in Iran involving charges such as moharebeh (waging war against God), baghi (rebellion), or *fesad fel-arz* (spreading corruption on earth), a broad or expansive interpretation is applied. In such instances, the crime is interpreted arbitrarily, often to the detriment of the accused. The clerical judiciary has no interest in reducing charges based on the principle of strict interpretation. Rather, the mechanisms of the judiciary appear to be inherently geared toward ensuring the accused’s physical elimination through a death sentence.
This process, characterized by a blatant disregard for the defendant’s rights, begins during the interrogation phase. Through escalating pressures, inflated charges, the use of horrific torture, forced confessions, and coercion of the accused’s family members, the Iranian regime’s judiciary effectively steers the individual toward the gallows. At no point is there a fair trial process or adherence to established modern judicial standards.
A Tool for Repression?
According to numerous human rights analysts and observers, the escalating frequency of executions serves as a deliberate strategy by the regime to instill fear and terror within society. The clerical regime in Iran appears to exact a form of societal vengeance. Investigations into the timing of death sentences in relation to political events reveal a discernible pattern linking the two. For instance, the number of executions tends to decrease in the two weeks leading up to presidential and parliamentary sham elections, yet rises significantly during periods when the regime perceives threats of social unrest and protests. This correlation strongly suggests that the regime employs the death penalty as a tool of intimidation, aimed at suppressing dissent and quelling any potential challenges to its authority. While it is true that most of those executed during such times are not political prisoners, the underlying message is unmistakable: the executions serve as a stark display of the regime’s power, its unyielding determination to suppress, and its willingness to resort to lethal force in order to maintain control, an outward show of strength masking an underlying reality of fragility. [3]
When the fluctuation of executions depends on the political climate or the needs of the regime, it becomes difficult to argue that even executions for ordinary crimes are not political in nature.
The message behind the increase in executions following the 2022 uprising, when the regime’s grip weakened significantly, was nothing but the expansion of an atmosphere of intimidation, terror, and the display of perceived state power. The astonishing rise in the number of executions over the past two years further proves this point.
[1] In the current text of Iran’s Islamic Penal Code, the following punishments are mentioned:
– Rajm=”Stoning” (6 times),
– “Retribution” (Qisas) (398 times),
– “Hadd” (109 times) and its plural form “Hudud” (22 times),
– “Execution” (20 times),
– “Moharebeh” (waging war against God) (10 times),
– “Corruption on Earth” (6 times),
– “Rebellion” and “Rebel” (Baghi) (3 times),
– and “Crucifixion” (1 time).
[2] In Iran’s judicial system, according to Article 1 of the Judges’ Employment Law, “Judges are selected from among men who meet the following criteria.”
[3] According to the Iran Human Rights Monitor(IRANHRM), during the Iranian elections, the number of executions in Iran was 63 in both June and July. However, in the following three months—August, September, and October—the total number of executions reached 359, averaging 120 executions per month.
