Iran’s escalating use of the death penalty against protesters and those accused of assisting them marks a grave intensification of the suppression of fundamental rights.

The decision by Branch One of the Revolutionary Court in Shiraz to sentence Mojtaba Dehbandi, 23, and Kianoush Hamzehi Kazeruni, 27, to death in connection with the January 2026 nationwide protests constitutes a serious violation of international human rights law.

According to information received from Iran on 20 July, the court convicted the two men of moharebeh (“enmity against God”) on charges including setting public property on fire and “acting against national security” for sheltering protesters. In fact, the two had brought injured protesters to their workplace to provide medical assistance. Iranian security forces identified them through CCTV footage and arrested them at their homes eight days later. Both remain detained at Adelabad Central Prison in Shiraz. The fate and whereabouts of four injured protesters arrested in the same case remain unknown.

The case raises serious concerns that vaguely defined capital offences are being used to criminalize humanitarian assistance and retaliate against those who support injured protesters. Providing medical care or temporary shelter must not be construed as evidence of moharebeh or a threat to national security. The duty to protect life and facilitate access to medical treatment does not depend on the political identity of the injured, and those who respond to urgent humanitarian need must not be criminalized.

Successive Executions and Trials Shrouded in Doubt

These sentences follow the executions, in the early hours of 19 July 2026, of Erfan Esfandiyari and Gul Mohammad Mohammadi, an Afghan national, in connection with the Ali Khani Square protests in Isfahan. State‑affiliated judicial media confirmed the executions, attributing to the defendants participation in acts that led to the deaths of four security personnel. No independent verification of this account has been possible, and fundamental questions remain concerning the evidence, the defendants’ right to choose their own lawyers, the duration of proceedings, and their ability to mount an effective defence.

Esfandiyari and Mohammadi were among twelve defendants sentenced to death in the same case. Following their execution, ten others remain at risk: Shervin Bagherian, Abolfazl Ebrahimi, Amir Hossein Maleki, Ali Dashti, Amir Hossein Ebrahimi Analoujeh, Qa’em Hosseini, Ali Reza Raeisi, Abolfazl Sepahi, Ali Reza Sepahi, and Amir Hossein Safari. Several have been transferred to solitary confinement and granted family visits widely feared to be final farewells.

Information relating to Ali Reza and Abolfazl Sepahi indicates that the defence was denied full access to the case file, the lawyer was prevented from obtaining a copy of the verdict, video recordings believed to establish the defendants’ presence elsewhere at the time of the incident were ignored, and allegations have been made that statements against them were extracted from other defendants under pressure and torture.

The refusal to investigate these claims — in a case that may end in deprivation of life — undermines the integrity of the entire process and renders any execution an arbitrary killing that cannot be undone.

These cases form part of a broader wave of politically motivated executions following the January 2026 protests. Over recent months, summary trials have been documented in which some convictions rested on “confessions” allegedly obtained through beatings, electric shocks, threats, and solitary confinement, while defendants’ access to independent lawyers was severely restricted. Amnesty International had previously warned that dozens of protesters and dissidents faced the death penalty following trials it described as grossly unfair and tainted by torture.

The Death Penalty as a Tool for Silencing Society

The expanding application of moharebeh (“enmity against God”) and mofsed‑e‑fel‑arz (“corruption on earth”) charges against protesters or those accused of assisting them transforms the judiciary from a guardian of rights into an instrument of fear and intimidation. When death sentences are handed down in expedited proceedings — often in one‑hour hearings — with case files withheld, counsel selection restricted, exculpatory evidence disregarded, and torture allegations dismissed, the trial itself becomes part of the violation rather than a safeguard against it.

Even in states that have not abolished the death penalty, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — to which Iran is a party — limits its application to “the most serious crimes,” a standard United Nations bodies have interpreted as encompassing only grave offences involving intentional killing. The penalty must not be imposed on the basis of vague charges, collective responsibility, presumed association with protests, or the provision of medical and humanitarian assistance, nor for acts not proven to have directly and intentionally caused loss of life.

The execution of a death sentence following a trial that fails to meet stringent fair‑trial guarantees constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of life. International law requires the exclusion of any confession or statement extracted under torture, the prompt and independent investigation of every credible allegation, and the defendant’s entitlement to a lawyer of their own choosing, full access to evidence and the opportunity to challenge it, and adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence and to appeal effectively.

To read more click here