Deprivation of the Right to Life as a Tool for Political Suppression
The systematic escalation in the issuance and implementation of death sentences following the widespread protests of December 2025/January 2026 (Dey 1404) constitutes a flagrant violation of the fundamental Right to Life. According to Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), this is an inalienable right. By transforming capital punishment into a mechanism for “Organized Political Suppression,” the judiciary has bypassed even its own historically flawed procedures. Following explicit directives from top judicial officials, such as Mohseni-Eje’i, the process of issuing and executing these sentences has been accelerated to intimidate society. Authorities are exploiting regional tensions and “emergency conditions” to discard minimum legal formalities in favor of “hasty executions” and “security purges.” This approach stems from an ideological alignment within judicial-security cadres that has institutionalized the physical elimination of protesters as a primary strategy for regime survival.
Bloody Facts: Judicial Terror and Show Trials (April 2026)
A) Hasty Executions: Retaliation Against the Right to Assembly and Freedom of Expression
Erfan Kiani: Executions in Field Courts
The execution of Erfan Kiani in Isfahan (April 25, 2026) sent shockwaves through the framework of fair trial standards. A protester from the December 2025/January 2026 uprising, Kiani was executed in a process mirroring “Summary/Field Executions”:
- Obstruction of Judicial Transparency: The judiciary accused Erfan Kiani of participating in the protests and engaging in “violent acts.” However, no transparent information regarding court dates, evidence, access to legal counsel of choice, or trial details was ever released. This total lack of transparency precludes any independent judicial assessment.
- Extra-Legal Speed as an Instrument of Intimidation: The execution was carried out following explicit orders for the “extraordinary acceleration” of security-related cases. The judiciary is weaponizing the death penalty as a tool for “General Deterrence” to raise the cost of dissent and preempt future mass mobilizations.
- The Isfahan Suppression Model: Simultaneously with Erfan’s execution, heavy sentences were issued for 15 other individuals in Isfahan, indicating a systematic approach to crush the centers of protest in this pioneering city.
Violations:
- Violation of the Presumption of Innocence (Article 11 UDHR): Leveling definitive accusations through state media without presenting independent evidence or due process.
- Violation of the Right to Life (Article 3 UDHR): Deprivation of life in a case lacking the minimum standards of judicial transparency.
- Violation of the Prohibition of Arbitrary Punishment (Articles 5 & 10 UDHR): The issuance and execution of death sentences in a rushed manner, maximizing the risk of arbitrary deprivation of life.
Amer Ramesh: A Tragedy of Torture, Security Blackmail, and Execution
The case of Amer Ramesh, a Baluch political prisoner executed on April 26, 2026, serves as a showcase of the flagrant and systematic violation of fundamental human rights:
- A Case Rife with Due Process Violations: From the moment of his arrest, this young prisoner faced extensive legal ambiguities, documented allegations of torture, and the broadcasting of forced confessions. He was deprived of family visits for 8 months and was even denied the right to a final meeting with his family prior to his execution.
- Disproportionate Use of Force (Arrest in a War-like Setting): In October 2024, when he was about 18, Amer Ramesh was targeted during a security forces’ raid on a grocery store in Chabahar. The use of heavy weaponry, including RPGs and mortars, against a civilian location is a clear example of the disproportionate use of force. Furthermore, security agencies subjected the family to severe psychological torture by falsely claiming he had been killed during the raid.
- The Face of Torture and the Nullity of Confessions: In the forced confession video aired by state media, visible bruises and deep injuries were evident on Amer’s face. These physical marks serve as undeniable evidence of interrogation under brutal torture, which, under international law, nullifies any legal validity of the obtained confessions.
- State Terrorism and Transnational Repression (Family Blackmail): One of the most horrific aspects of this case was conditioning Amer’s release on his family’s cooperation in “assassinating opponents abroad.” This act constitutes state-sponsored extortion and the use of a prisoner as a hostage for transnational terrorist operations. Threatening the family with his execution unless his brother (a political activist abroad) surrendered is a gross violation of the principle of individual criminal responsibility.
- A Symbol of Persistent Executions in Marginalized Regions: The execution of Amer Ramesh is part of the government’s security policy to exert pressure and instill fear in protesting and marginalized regions, particularly Sistan and Baluchistan.
Violations:
- Violation of the Prohibition of Torture (Article 5 UDHR): Obtaining confessions through physical and psychological torture.
- Violation of the Right to a Fair Trial (Article 10 UDHR): Opaque proceedings and prolonged deprivation of the right to communicate with family and legal counsel.
- Violation of the Presumption of Innocence (Article 11 UDHR): Broadcasting televised confessions before guilt is proven in a competent court.
- Violation of the Right to Life (Article 3 UDHR): Deprivation of life based on a flawed case lacking legal standards.
B) Gender-Based Targeting and Retaliation Against Protesting Women
Maryam Hadavand: Death Sentence in a Vacuum of Judicial Transparency
The issuance of a death sentence for Maryam Hadavand, a political prisoner held in the women’s ward of Evin Prison, signals a new phase in the intensified crackdown on women at the forefront of protests:
- Rising Number of Women Sentenced to Death: With the death sentence issued for Maryam Hadavand by Branch 26 of the Revolutionary Court, the number of women sentenced to death in recent protest-related cases has reached three. This list includes Maryam Hadavand and Bita Ali-Hemmati, indicating a systematic targeting of women activists and medical personnel.
- Closed-Door Proceedings and Deprivation of Defense: Throughout all stages of her case, Maryam Hadavand was denied access to a lawyer of her choice. Her trial was conducted without adherence to fair trial standards. The absolute ambiguity regarding her arrest date, the case formation, and legal evidence completely undermines the legitimacy of this verdict.
- Reliance on Confessions Under Torture: Reports indicate that the case against Maryam Hadavand is built solely on confessions extracted under extreme pressure and security interrogations—a method recognized as the primary axis for framing protesters in recent years.
Violations:
- Violation of the Prohibition of Torture (Article 5 UDHR): Extracting confessions under physical and psychological pressure, which constitutes inhuman treatment.
- Violation of the Right to a Fair Trial (Article 10 UDHR): Conducting a trial in a rushed, opaque manner without the presence of chosen counsel.
- Violation of the Presumption of Innocence (Article 11 UDHR): Relying on forced confessions as the sole basis for a verdict without independent and verifiable evidence.
- Violation of the Right to Life (Article 3 UDHR): Issuing a death sentence in a case fraught with serious legal ambiguities, threatening the fundamental right to life.
The Vicious Cycle of Death Sentences and Judicial Torture
The Case of Nasser Bekrzadeh:
The situation of Nasser Bekrzadeh in Urmia is a prime example of judicial torture and the persistent attempt to physically eliminate a defendant:
- Insistence on Execution Under Security Pressure: Nasser Bekrzadeh faces an unprecedented legal situation: being sentenced to death three times in less than two years. Despite the Supreme Court overturning his death sentence twice due to fundamental flaws and case deficiencies, the lower court—presided over by Judge Shahini and acting under pressure from security agencies—issued the death penalty for a third time, which has now been upheld by the Supreme Court.
- 14 Months of Interrogation and the “Maximum Penalty” Scenario: He was held in a security detention center for 14 months under grueling physical and psychological torture. Interrogators used the “threat of issuing and implementing the maximum penalty (execution)” to coerce him into accepting a fabricated “espionage” scenario. In effect, the interrogators first forced him into false confessions through the threat of death, and then the judiciary imposed the maximum penalty based on those very coerced statements.
- Repetition of Flawed Judicial Processes: A timeline of the case reveals a circular and futile process; death sentences were issued in November 2024 and September 2025, both of which were overturned by the Supreme Court due to fundamental irregularities. Re-issuing the sentence without addressing the actual flaws proves that the lower courts are merely following dictated security decisions.
Violations:
- Violation of the Prohibition of Torture and Cruel/Degrading Treatment (Article 5 UDHR & Article 7 ICCPR): Subjecting a prisoner to a repeated cycle of “death row” status and systematic psychological pressure.
- Violation of the Principle Against Self-Incrimination (Article 14, Paragraph 3(g), ICCPR): This article explicitly states that no one shall be compelled to testify against themselves or to confess guilt (prohibition of coercion and duress).
- Nullity of Proceedings due to Reliance on Forced Confessions (Exclusionary Rule): According to international legal standards, a confession obtained under the threat of the “maximum penalty” is void of legal value; relying on it for a verdict renders the entire trial illegal.
- Violation of the Right to Life (Article 3 UDHR): Insisting on the deprivation of life through a judicial cycle built on tainted and involuntary evidence.
Warning Against the Creation of “Security Dungeons”; Isolation in Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar and Fears of Secret Executions
Shocking reports of clandestine transfers indicate new strategies for suppressing resistant prisoners:
- Transfer of 80 Prisoners from Fashafuyeh: During the past two weeks of April 2026, approximately 80 prisoners were transferred in two stages to Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar Prison in complete secrecy and without notifying their families. These transfers occurred without prior notice or official explanation, sparking widespread concern, particularly as Ghezel Hesar has recently become a primary site for executing political prisoners.
- Isolation and Inhuman Conditions: Unit 3 has effectively been transformed into an isolated detention center for security agencies. Prisoners in this section are kept in “total isolation” with no communication with the outside world or other wards. This level of secrecy leaves the identity and health status of the transferred individuals in complete ambiguity.
- Absolute Lack of Information and “Short-term Enforced Disappearance”: Many families remain unaware of the exact location or physical condition of their loved ones. This systematic cut-off of communication constitutes “Enforced Disappearance,” aimed at removing the prisoner from the protection of the law.
- Biological and Medical Deprivation: Prisoners in Unit 3 are deprived of basic amenities, adequate nutrition, and medical care. The restriction of food and medicine, especially for those with pre-existing conditions, is an intentional act of physical attrition.
- Concerns Over Security Frame-ups: The sudden consolidation of prisoners in an isolated environment beyond public oversight is viewed as a precursor to intensified pressure, new fabricated charges, or the secret implementation of death sentences.
Violations:
- Violation of the Right to Personal Security (Article 3 UDHR): Threatening the physical and mental security of prisoners by holding them in unknown conditions.
- Violation of the Prohibition of Inhuman Treatment (Article 5 UDHR): Organized deprivation of food, medical treatment, and basic human rights.
- Violation of the Nelson Mandela Rules (Rules 1, 24, and 58): The requirement to guarantee communication with family and the prohibition of absolute isolation that harms a prisoner’s health.
- Violation of the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Article 12 ICESCR): Depriving ill prisoners of essential medical care.
Summary and the Necessity of International Accountability
The evidence documented in this report reveals more than scattered judicial errors; it demonstrates a “systematic assault on the Right to Life” designed to safeguard the survival of the power structure. The transformation of Ghezel Hesar Prison into a slaughterhouse for dissidents and the creation of isolated security units constitute clear examples of crimes against humanity, manifested through “enforced disappearances” and “state-sponsored killings.” The international community, particularly the UN Human Rights Council, must not allow the Iranian judiciary to exploit domestic immunity and manufactured “emergency states” to dismantle the rule of law. Silence in the face of this wave of preemptive executions serves as a green light for a repression machine that now targets medical professionals, female protesters, and ethnic minorities.
Conclusion: The Necessity of Referral to the UN Security Council
Inaction against a regime that has turned “Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar” and the gallows of Zahedan and Isfahan into a battlefield against its own citizens is a betrayal of global security.
Urgent Demands and Executive Steps Given the critical situation in Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar and the issuance of rushed death sentences, the following actions are urgently demanded:
- Immediate Moratorium on All Executions: Specifically for Maryam Hadavand, Nasser Bakrzadeh, and other detainees of the December 2025/ January 2026 (Dey 1404) uprising.
- Deployment of a Fact-Finding Mission: Immediate access for the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights to Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar to verify the identity and health of the 80 transferred prisoners.
- Annulment of Forced Confessions: A comprehensive review of all security cases built on torture and the threat of the “maximum penalty,” in accordance with the international “Exclusionary Rule” regarding tainted evidence.
- Ending Enforced Disappearance: Compelling the judiciary to provide transparent accountability regarding the location and legal status of unnamed prisoners.
- Referral to the UN Security Council: To adopt binding resolutions to halt the execution machine.
- Conditionality of Relations: Any diplomatic engagement with Tehran must be contingent upon the immediate cessation of executions and the release of prisoners transferred to Unit 3 of Ghezel Hesar.
- Activation of Universal Jurisdiction: Issuing international arrest warrants for judges and perpetrators of repression (including Judge Afshari and Judge Shahini).
