The family of Vahid Ben Amerian did not know their son would be executed that morning. No notice arrived from the court. His lawyers were not informed that the sentence would be carried out, even as his case was still pending before Iran’s Supreme Court. The family learned through state media that the top electrical engineering student had been executed on April 4 alongside five other prisoners.
Before his execution, Vahid sent his mother a final message: “What greater honor is there than for you and me, Mother, to pay the price of resilience, to endure this pain, and to have made an impact on the fate of our people?”
Vahid’s case was not exceptional. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in political prosecutions inside Iran, according to rights groups and Iranian lawyers: arrest by security forces, solitary confinement, closed-door interrogations, expedited trials before revolutionary courts, and sentences that can end at the gallows.
The charges vary, ranging from participation in protests to alleged support for opposition groups. But legally, they are framed under provisions of Iran’s Islamic Penal Code, including “enmity against God,” “corruption on earth,” “insulting the Supreme Leader,” “disturbing public order,” and “armed rebellion.”
According to Amnesty International’s annual report on the death penalty for 2025, Iranian authorities carried out at least 2,159 executions in a single year — the highest number documented by the organization in Iran since it began systematic monitoring in 1981.
Iran accounted for roughly 80 percent of all documented executions worldwide that year. The figures do not include cases rights organizations were unable to verify because of the secrecy surrounding executions inside Iranian prisons.
Human rights sources who spoke to Alhurra said Iranian authorities carried out more than 200 executions in the past month alone, suggesting that the pace of executions has not slowed since the country recorded its highest annual total in 2025.
Hussein Raeisi, an Iranian lawyer who follows dozens of cases from Canada after leaving Iran under pressure from the authorities, said the Iranian system is built on the principle that the Islamic state embodies divine will, making political dissent — in the eyes of the regime — both a crime against the state and against God.
“The regime uses the concepts of ‘enmity against God’ and ‘corruption on earth’ to criminalize political and social opposition and justify issuing more death sentences,” Raeisi said.
To understand the roots of this system, it is necessary to return to the years immediately following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Revolutionary courts were initially established to try officials of the former regime, and executions were carried out under a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini authorizing the execution of anyone cooperating with those he described as “hypocrites,” regardless of the nature of the case.
More than four decades later, those courts have evolved into some of the most powerful judicial institutions in Iran.
Lawyers and rights advocates say that fatwa still serves as an intellectual and legal reference point for Iran’s revolutionary judiciary. Article 286 of Iran’s Islamic Penal Code — one of the main provisions used to prosecute dissidents under the charge of “corruption on earth” — is rooted in the same concepts established by the decree.
Today, revolutionary courts handle cases involving national security, espionage, political activism, protests, and charges such as “corruption on earth” and “enmity against God.”
Human Rights Watch says the courts suffer from chronic violations of fair trial standards, including denying defendants prompt access to independent lawyers, relying on coerced confessions, and holding brief closed-door hearings away from public scrutiny.
Following the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests that erupted after the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, the use of the death penalty entered what rights groups describe as a new phase. Amnesty International says Iranian authorities increasingly turned to executions against protesters and political dissidents after trials the organization described as “sham proceedings” lacking minimum due process guarantees. Amnesty also documented dozens of cases in which individuals faced death-eligible charges for participating in protests or opposition activities.
Rights organizations say ethnic minorities, particularly Baluch and Kurdish communities, are disproportionately affected by execution sentences compared with other groups in Iran.
Raeisi also points to what he describes as a notable shift in the behavior of Iran’s judiciary. For years, executions were often carried out away from public attention. Now, authorities increasingly announce many of those sentences after they are implemented through official media outlets, especially Mizan, the judiciary’s news agency.
“Things are completely different today,” Raeisi said. “The regime is carrying out these practices to pressure society and prevent any potential social mobilization.”
He added that the recent war provided Iranian authorities with another opportunity to tighten security controls and expand the use of capital punishment.
A review of multiple cases documented by rights organizations reveals a recurring sequence that has become almost formulaic: arrest, solitary confinement, security interrogation, confessions, revolutionary court proceedings, then execution sentences.
Raeisi said many defendants in political cases are denied fair trials and are not allowed to freely choose their lawyers. In some national security cases, Iranian law requires defendants to use only lawyers approved by the judiciary, effectively barring most independent attorneys from access to such files.
According to informed Iranian sources who spoke to Alhurra, around 30 lawyers have been arrested in recent months, with some still imprisoned for independently practicing law or attempting to defend political prisoners.
In Vahid Ben Amerian’s case, a relative told Alhurra that lawyers were still awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision when the execution was suddenly carried out.
Vahid, an outstanding electrical engineering student, was first arrested in 2018 and sentenced to prison. He was later accused of inciting opposition against the regime, before ultimately receiving a death sentence on charges of “enmity against God.”
The relative said defense lawyers were only allowed to meet the defendants inside the courtroom itself, and that the six accused men shared between one and two hours total to defend themselves.
Raeisi said this pattern has repeated itself in a number of recent cases, adding that the regime increasingly treats any potential opposition as a security threat to be contained through arrests and executions.
But a review of publicly available records, along with information obtained by Alhurra from rights sources, reveals another striking pattern: the same names repeatedly appear in political trials and execution cases — among judges, revolutionary courts, and security agencies overseeing investigations.
A preliminary analysis of the judicial network tied to these cases suggests that a large share of political death sentences may be concentrated within a limited circle of judges and courts rather than spread broadly across Iran’s judicial system.
Cross-referencing data on prisoners, judges, courts, and prisons also helps map the institutional relationships within Iran’s execution apparatus, identifying the officials and entities most frequently involved in cases ending in death sentences and tracing recurring patterns in prosecutions and executions.
The data indicates that four principal judges in branches 15, 26, and 28 of Tehran’s Revolutionary Court alone oversaw hundreds of political cases and handed down dozens of death sentences along with thousands of years in prison terms against dissidents and activists.
Between March 2016 and December 2020, those courts handled at least 836 political cases, issuing 76 death sentences and nearly 3,994 years in prison against critics and opponents of the regime.
Four judges in particular repeatedly appear in political execution cases: Abolqasem Salavati, Mohammad Moghiseh, Mohammad Reza Amoozad, and Iman Afshari.
A broader analysis of available records suggests that what is commonly referred to as “the Iranian judiciary” does not function as a uniform institutional body, but rather as a narrower and more concentrated network responsible for a significant portion of the country’s political executions.
But the story does not end with the executions themselves.
A relative of Vahid said authorities refused to return the bodies to their families and prevented public mourning ceremonies. Families were subjected to continued pressure, including efforts to stop neighbors and relatives from offering condolences.
The most painful question facing Vahid’s family — as well as dozens of other families across Iran — remains unanswered:
Where were their children buried?
Adapted and translated from the original Arabic.
Randa Jebai
Randa Jebai is an award-winning journalist with more than 20 years of experience. She joined Alhurra TV’s investigative team in 2020, earning honors from the AIBs, New York Festivals, and the Telly Awards. She previously worked with major Lebanese outlets and holds master’s degrees in law and journalism.
