Inefficient economic policies, rampant inflation, and the consequences of regional escalation have exposed Iranian society to an unprecedented livelihood crisis. Analysts note that this crisis carries the inherent potential to spark a new wave of widespread protests across diverse social strata. Faced with this prospect, the ruling apparatus—instead of rectifying livelihood budget deficits and reforming economic structures—has prioritized escalating pressure and instilling an atmosphere of intimidation.
While the execution of countless death sentences—spanning ordinary crimes, politically motivated executions, and cases linked to protesters—remains the primary instrument of intimidation, the scope of state repression extends far beyond execution statistics. Recent trends demonstrate that the authorities are systematically shutting down all avenues of protest, assembly, and civic critique through expedited arrests, university disciplinary sanctions, social pressure regarding ideological mandates, and sweeping legislative criminalization to preempt the emergence of livelihood protests and their structural ramifications.
The Livelihood Crisis, Mass Layoffs, and the Violation of Fundamental Workers’ Rights
As the deepening economic crisis deprives vulnerable populations of a dignified existence, widespread workforce attrition and the severe erosion of purchasing power have shattered job security and social welfare for the working class. Official reports published in national newspapers underscore the dimensions of this structural deprivation:
“The Executive Secretary of the House of Worker in Bandar Abbas, citing the unemployment of approximately 20,000 workers in Hormozgan Province, called for urgent government action to improve livelihoods and safeguard job security.
Speaking to ILNA, Esmail Hajizadeh elaborated on the sharp decline in purchasing power and mass workforce attrition in Hormozgan, stating: ‘Wage increases under present conditions are a vital necessity, but wage adjustments will only improve workers’ lives if the government simultaneously formulates solutions to preserve employment and maintain employers’ capacity to pay. Under current circumstances, workers’ purchasing power has plummeted while many economic units have lost the capacity to sustain operations and cover labor costs.’
The Executive Secretary of the House of Worker in Hormozgan stressed: ‘Today’s worker struggles not only with housing and food, but also with crushing healthcare and energy costs. For instance, the electricity bill for a working-class household jumped overnight from 3–4 million Tomans to 26 million Tomans in recent months. This cost surge stems from energy price hikes, the burden of which falls directly on lower-income strata. Therefore, the government must draft a fundamental program to rescue workers’ livelihoods.'” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper- https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93083)
This economic reality demonstrates that the deprivation of the right to work, fair wages, and affordable energy severely violates the right to an adequate standard of living enshrined in Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), pushing the working-class community to the brink of social upheaval.
Securitized Environment and Judicial Crackdowns on Protesters
In response to recurring crises and the threat of popular protest, security institutions have expanded arbitrary arrests and fabricated judicial cases against citizens. A recent security statement reflects the systemic pattern of targeting defendants and levying severe accusations:
“The Ministry of Intelligence announced in a statement the identification and arrest of 30 individuals in connection with the January events. The statement reads: ‘These mercenaries engaged in widespread destruction during the January 2026 coup, burning citizens’ homes, large municipal retail stores, banks, emergency and private vehicles, government buildings, several mosques, attacking the rail transit network, threatening passengers’ lives, and looting commercial shops…’ According to the statement, several cold weapons (machetes, axes, and knives), along with significant quantities of alcoholic beverages and narcotics, were seized from these foreign agents.” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper – https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93009)
The deployment of exaggerated terminology and generalized charges by security entities prior to adjudication by a competent tribunal directly undermines the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence (Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – ICCPR), as well as the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty (Article 9, ICCPR).
Disciplinary Sanctions in Universities: Suppressing the Academic Sphere and the Right to Education
Universities, as catalysts for civic critique and peaceful protest, remain primary targets of punitive disciplinary sanctions designed to prevent livelihood and social grievances from crystallizing within academic spaces. Explanations provided by university officials regarding punitive measures highlight the severity of these sanctions:
“The Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at Sharif University stated: ‘To date, 6 Sharif students have received expulsion orders, some of which have been upheld by the Appeals Council and forwarded to the Central Council. One case has been confirmed by the Central Council and formally communicated to the student.’ According to Fars News, Mahmoud Bahmanabadi added: ‘In cases related to the March unrest, issues such as physical altercations, inciting disturbance, possession of cold weapons, disrespect toward the flag, and certain cyberspace violations were reviewed. In this regard, 236 students were referred to the Disciplinary Committee, and formal cases were opened for 115 individuals due to sufficient documentation.’ He noted that approximately 40 individuals with more serious infractions were summoned to the committee, while discussions and written commitments without case entries were designated for others.” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper- https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93080)
The expulsion and prosecution of students—when executed in response to peaceful civic or union activities or the expression of critical views—violate the right to education enshrined in Article 13 of the ICESCR and serve as a tool to dismantle protest channels within universities.
Escalation of Ideological Pressure and Social Control over Women’s Attire
Another facet of the state’s strategy of public intimidation is the enforcement of mandatory behavior and social pressure to control public spaces. Statements by religious-political figures and pressure groups highlight ongoing efforts to reinforce social control:
“The Tehran Friday Prayer Imam stated: ‘The war against the hijab began with Reza Shah’s measures and continued under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi through the promotion of the regime’s favored culture. This process must be understood as an extension of the same cultural project aimed at weakening modesty, chastity, and the foundation of the family.’ Mohammad-Javad Haj-Ali-Akbari added in his sermon: ‘The Iranian nation dismantled the dependent Pahlavi regime and sent it to the dustbin of history—a regime that, in our view, stymied national progress. Their dream of returning that degenerate culture to the country is an ambition the Iranian nation will never allow to materialize.'” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper – https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93084)
Simultaneously, organized mobilizations aim to enforce intrusive societal measures:
“A video circulated on social media shows individuals holding placards and chanting slogans demanding the promulgation of the Hijab Law during a meeting in Yazd attended by the Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance. Seyyed Abbas Salehi, the Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance, encountered chanting participants during an event on his tight one-day visit to Yazd. The video, published by a local Yazd media outlet, depicts individuals carrying placards, shouting slogans demanding the implementation of the Hijab Law and demanding retribution.” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper –https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93038 )
This approach, relying on social controls and state interference in citizens’ attire and lifestyle, raises grave concerns regarding the right to privacy (Article 17, ICCPR), freedom of expression and individual identity (Article 19, ICCPR), and the principles of equality and non-discrimination (Articles 2 and 3, ICCPR). The continuation of such policies shrinks civic space, heightens social pressure on women, and impedes citizens’ ability to freely express social and economic demands.
Securitization of the Law and the Eradication of Fundamental Liberties
The state’s ultimate mechanism for structural containment is legislative revision—granting security institutions total control over the economic, cultural, and legal dimensions of public life. A legal analysis of a draft bill published in Tose’e Irani illustrates the erosion of foundational legal principles:
“Seyyed Mahmoud Alizadeh Tabatabaei, an attorney-at-law and member of the Central Bar Association, commented on the draft bill ‘Countering the Influence of Enemy Intelligence Services’ recently approved in principle by Parliament… Emphasizing that ‘legally, criminal terminology must not be subject to broad interpretation,’ he stated: ‘All terms used in this bill carry broad interpretive latitude—such as “oversight,” “intelligence direction,” “intelligence dominance,” “training,” or “strategies of foreign intelligence services.” Security agencies inherently operate under suspicion; if we securitize economy, culture, education, and everything else, we will become North Korea.’
Alizadeh Tabatabaei added: ‘I believe the drafters translated North Korea’s security law and presented it as legislation. In this bill, even unintentional conduct lacking criminal intent (mens rea) has been criminalized, which is a legal catastrophe. Article 18 explicitly states that an individual acting without knowledge or intent is guilty of a crime. Crime requires three elements: material, mental, and legal. The mental element (mens rea) is knowledge and intent; how can someone lacking intent be deemed a criminal? Article 14 criminalizes educational courses deemed inconsistent with Iranian culture, leaving that determination to security agencies. Cooperation with international organizations has been criminalized, as has the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. What is the 2030 Agenda? It is anti-corruption.’
He further noted: ‘Article 10 addresses foreign economic activity. We already have Foreign Investment Law. A foreign entity investing in Iran requires legal protection, yet Article 10 criminalizes any foreign economic activity operating outside intelligence oversight. Even the list of universities authorized to engage with scientific centers must be prepared by security agencies, and media interviews with foreign press must occur under security supervision. In truth, all legitimate freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution are criminalized in this bill. This draft directly conflicts with Article 9 of the Constitution, which specifies: “No authority has the right to abrogate legitimate freedoms, even by enacting laws and regulations, under the pretext of preserving independence and territorial integrity.” Yet, legitimate freedoms and human rights under Chapter Three of the Constitution are completely nullified here.'” (Tose’e Irani Newspaper – https://www.toseeirani.ir/fa/tiny/news-93097)
This legal analysis demonstrates that criminalizing conduct lacking intent, employing vague criminal terminology, and expanding security powers directly conflict with the principle of legality (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege, Article 15, ICCPR). These provisions severely undermine freedom of expression and access to information (Article 19), freedom of association (Article 22), and the right to participate in public affairs (Article 25, ICCPR), significantly restricting civil liberties guaranteed under international law and domestic constitutional frameworks.
Conclusion and Analytical Epilogue
The convergence of a profound economic crisis with waves of formal and informal repression reflects a structural strategy aimed at preventing public unrest. Aware that the worsening living conditions of workers and low-income groups carry the potential to evolve into large-scale nationwide protests, the authorities have responded not through legal accountability or remedial measures, but by substantially increasing the costs of dissent through arrests, dismissals from employment, social control, and the excessive securitization of laws and public policies.
From the perspective of international human rights standards, such practices do not indicate stability; rather, they constitute evidence of the systematic violation of civil, political, economic, and social rights. The international community and the United Nations human rights mechanisms should recognize that the restriction of legitimate freedoms, the rapid expansion of security-based criminalization, and the obstruction of socio-economic demands have severely undermined the fundamental right to peaceful assembly and protest under Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), while eroding the basic foundations of human dignity.
From an international human rights law perspective, the continuation of these developments requires a response that goes beyond expressions of concern. The United Nations Human Rights Council, Special Rapporteurs, the International Labour Organization (ILO), and other relevant mechanisms should, through sustained monitoring, documentation, and preservation of evidence of violations, help lay the groundwork for future accountability of those responsible for ordering or carrying out such actions. In addition, states and international institutions may, within the framework of their human rights commitments, review economic, technical, and institutional cooperation with entities and officials implicated in serious violations of fundamental rights, and condition such cooperation on compliance with international human rights obligations and the implementation of recommendations issued by United Nations oversight mechanisms. International organizations and governments should also support the public disclosure of entities and officials that, according to credible international reports, have been involved in serious human rights violations, in order to prevent the continuation of impunity.
Furthermore, support for fact-finding mechanisms, the public dissemination of documented findings, and the strengthening of international accountability processes can increase the legal and diplomatic costs of ongoing violations and create incentives for reforming practices that undermine human rights. Failing this, the risk of normalizing fundamental rights violations, expanding impunity, and perpetuating structural repression will continue to grow.
