Skip to main content

Pedram Madani: The AI Engineer Iran Promised to Free, Then Hanged

Pedram Madani
For six years, authorities of the Islamic Republic assured Pedram Madani and his family that silence would save his life.

They promised the 41-year-old software engineer that his espionage case was being resolved. They told his mother, a retired teacher, that speaking out publicly would guarantee his execution.

On May 28, Iran executed Madani anyway.

Madani, who specialized in artificial intelligence, was arrested in 2019 on charges of spying for Israel.

Over the years, interrogators repeatedly told him that his case would be resolved favorably if his family stayed quiet, according to sources who spoke to IranWire.

Iran’s Supreme Court overturned Madani’s death sentence three times before finally confirming it on the fourth attempt.

Each reversal fed both the prisoner and his family renewed hope, reinforcing interrogators’ promises of eventual freedom.

“Every time his interrogators came, he would go talk to them,” filmmaker Mohammad Rasoulof wrote on Instagram, quoting one of Madani’s cellmates. “He said they told me, ‘Don’t worry, we know an injustice has been done to you. We’ll fix it ourselves.’”

Three months before his execution, one of Madani’s interrogators visited him in prison and instructed him to “submit another request for retrial because the case will be fixed,” a source said.

Instead, authorities transferred him to Qezel Hesar Prison and executed him shortly after.

According to human rights advocates and legal experts, the tactics used against Madani’s family follow a well-documented pattern.

Authorities use a combination of explicit threats such as “If you speak out, we’ll execute him” and promises of freedom conditional on silence.

“Often, the families forced into silence are not politically active and are uninformed,” said a source familiar with several similar cases.

“They’re threatened with the arrest of other family members. It’s a calculated mix of threats, promises, warnings, deception, and false hope to ensure no information about the case leaks out.”

This strategy often targets families employed by the government. Both of Madani’s parents were teachers, making them especially vulnerable to economic and institutional pressure.

Espionage charges also carry a social stigma that discourages media coverage and public sympathy.

“In these cases, the label of ‘spy’ gives Iranian domestic media an excuse not to report or conduct interviews,” the source added.

The campaign to silence Madani was so effective that, even hours after his execution, no public photographs of him existed. The only image eventually released was a black-and-white photo shared by a human rights group on Instagram.

Evin prison
Former cellmates described Madani as calm and always smiling during his time in Evin Prison.

Olivier Grondeau, a French national who spent over two years in Evin, said he and Madani would share pizza on Fridays. Despite facing four death sentences, Grondeau recalled, Madani “always had a smile on his face.”

Louis Arnaud, another former French prisoner, referred to Madani as a brother in an article for IranWire.

“He was my master in the art of wood, my companion of soul, my refuge,” Arnaud wrote. “He, who knew how to reignite the embers of my smile. He taught me how to be a man and carved for me the paths of virtue, courage, and dignity.”

The only public plea for Madani came in a short video released by his mother two days before his execution.

In it, she described her son as “faithful and believing” and said he “loves his country.” She also revealed that her husband had died of a heart attack while praying, devastated by their son’s imprisonment.

She spoke of “extensive ambiguities in the judicial process” and urged authorities to “allow her son to return to life.”

She added that Madani was denied the right to choose his own lawyer. Even with a court-appointed attorney, his death sentence had been overturned multiple times by the Supreme Court.

According to jurist and legal advisor Musa Barzin, Iranian law does not prohibit families from publicizing their relatives’ cases.

“Making it public is not a crime at all. In fact, it is recommended,” Barzin said. “Court verdicts are not confidential. There might be a confidential letter in a case, but court verdicts, whether primary or appellate, are not classified.”

Nonetheless, authorities routinely claim that publicity will harm the case. “In security and political cases, the intelligence services and judiciary will definitely tell you that going public will cause problems,” Barzin explained.

The deception extends beyond legal misrepresentation. According to Barzin, fear, threats, and even cultural shame combine to enforce silence. “Some families don’t even speak out after an execution.”

Madani’s case bears striking resemblance to that of Mohsen Langarneshin, a network security expert executed less than a month earlier on similar espionage charges.

Authorities persuaded Langarneshin’s family to tell neighbors and relatives that he had traveled abroad, rather than admit he was imprisoned.

As with Madani, details of Langarneshin’s case only surfaced days before his execution.

Iran’s judiciary-affiliated Mizan news agency reported Madani’s execution with the headline: “Pedram Madani, spy of the Zionist regime, was hanged.”

The report claimed he had traveled to Berlin, Brussels, and Israel for training and was “seeking to recruit people and collect and transfer classified information.”

Mizan listed his charges as “espionage for the intelligence service of the Zionist regime” and “illegally obtaining property in the form of receiving foreign cash currency in Europe and digital currency.”

“After identification, arrest, and judicial proceedings against Pedram Madani, who was spying for the Zionist regime, and following the complete process of criminal procedure and the final confirmation of the verdict by the Supreme Court, he was brought to justice and executed,” the agency reported.

Human rights advocates say silencing families serves a broader purpose beyond suppressing dissent.

It conceals the frequency of death penalty use - especially in national security cases and prevents families from organizing, connecting, or supporting one another.

The psychological toll extends to the families, who are forced into silence and made to feel complicit in their loved one’s disappearance.

“This regime still has a thirst for bloodshed, and its victims are the most oppressed, quietest, and most invisible people,” Rasoulof wrote.

In recent years, Revolutionary Court judges have increasingly barred the participation of lawyers chosen by defendants, particularly human rights attorneys, in cases involving protesters or political prisoners sentenced to death on security charges.

Source: Iran Wire, Staff, May 30, 2025




"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
— Oscar Wilde


Comments

Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term:   Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight.  In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution.  Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order. 

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

Alabama | Judge bars nitrogen gas execution, says method is unconstitutionally cruel

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A federal judge on Tuesday permanently blocked Alabama from executing an inmate with nitrogen gas after declaring it violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. District Judge Emily Marks issued the ruling hours after an appeals court reversed her initial finding that the method was constitutional. Marks permanently enjoined the state from executing Jeffrey Lee, 49, by nitrogen gas. He was scheduled to be executed Thursday. The decision, for now, blocks the use of the controversial new execution method that the state has championed since 2024, but the issue will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Idaho will soon turn to firing squad executions. Police will pull the triggers

Trained members of Idaho law enforcement with demonstrated firearms proficiency are expected to fill slots for carrying out the death penalty by firing squad as the state prison system transitions to the controversial execution method next month.  Six volunteers certified for no less than three years apiece through Peace Officer Standards and Training, or POST, will be recruited to ensure the Idaho Department of Correction is ready to comply with a state law that prioritizes shooting prisoners to death over lethal injection starting July 1.  No one on the team may have faced disciplinary action over firearms, use of force, or related conduct over the prior year, according to new execution protocols the prison system released this week. 

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.