Trends recorded so far in 2025 indicate that executions have significantly increased in some countries, when compared to figures registered in recent years. Among these rises, some governments have shown renewed determination to use this cruel punishment as a tool of repression and control. This has frequently happened in the context of flawed narratives intended to create a false impression of security through a display of heavy-handed responses from the state, and to score political points. These narratives have also fostered a flagrant disregard for safeguards and restrictions under international human rights law and standards that have been established to protect people facing execution from being arbitrarily deprived of their lives.
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception. As progress towards abolition has also been recorded in some countries this year, Amnesty International renews its call on all states that still retain this punishment to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and take prompt steps towards its full abolition.
1. ALARMING RISES IN EXECUTIONS IN SEVERAL COUNTRIES, INCREASING ARBITRARINESS
Global execution totals recorded by Amnesty International every year have been on a constant rise since the historical-low figures registered during the Covid-19 pandemic. In more recent years – and more so in recent months – the use of the death penalty has been increasing in a global context marked by insecurity, political and economic instability and, in some countries, military operations. Among a broader weakening of the rule of law and respect for international human rights law and standards, the recent increases in executions expose both the arbitrariness of the death penalty and the politicization of its use.
Recorded executions have soared in several countries in the first nine months of 2025, with yearly totals in some states having already surpassed – or even doubled – the respective 2024 totals.
As of end of September 2025, the Iranian authorities have executed more than 1,000 people, overtaking the grim total of 972 executions recorded in 2024. This is the highest number of yearly executions that Amnesty International has recorded for this country in at least 15 years.
The authorities of Saudi Arabia have also carried out executions at a higher rate this year, and are likely to exceed the record-high total of 2024 (at least 345).
The 34 executions carried out in 10 US states in the first 9 months of 2025 represent an increase by more than a third compared to 2024 (25). The authorities of Florida, whose Governor Ron DeSantis has been a staunch advocate of the death penalty, are primarily responsible for the alarming rise in the national total, accounting for 13 executions. As tracked by the Death Penalty Information Centre, an additional nine execution warrants were active as of 30 September 2025. This could result in the USA reaching its highest yearly execution total in more than a decade, equaling the figures of 2011 and 2012 (43 in each year). Of further concern is that the Department of War has begun the process to resume military executions for the 1st time in more than 6 decades.
3 countries have resumed executions so far in 2025: the government of Japan carried out its 1st execution in nearly 3 years in June; Taiwan saw in January its 1st hanging since 2020; and the authorities of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) carried out in February their 1st known executions since 2021.
Figures on the use of the death penalty in China, North Korea and Viet Nam remain shrouded in secrecy, but reports gathered by Amnesty International indicate that the resort to the death penalty in these countries continued to be sustained and estimated executions to be in the thousands in China alone.
International law and standards have long established abolition as the goal to be achieved in countries that still retain the death penalty. This abolitionist vision renders increases in the use of this punishment inconsistent with the protection of the right to life. States that have not yet abolished the death penalty can only apply it in a manner that is not arbitrary.
Concerningly, the use of the death penalty has been increasingly politicized in recent months in a way that has been increasing its arbitrariness. This has taken 2 main manifestations: 1 linked to repression of dissent and another to flawed narratives on security and the intention of the state to show a heavy hand against crime.
2. DEATH PENALTY AS A TOOL TO CRUSH POLITICAL DISSENT
In some countries, governments have been pursuing the death penalty as a tool for political repression, with a disproportionate impact on marginalized groups, to control the population by instilling fear or to give a false impression of security and strong government. In recent years, the Iranian authorities increased their use of the death penalty to punish individuals who challenged, or were perceived as having challenged, the Islamic Republic establishment during the Woman Life Freedom uprising of September-December 2022. Since then, authorities have arbitrarily executed at least 11 people in connection to the Woman Life Freedom uprising, including Mojahed (Abbas) Kourkouri in June 2025, who was sentenced to death following a grossly unfair trial by a Revolutionary Court in Ahvaz. Several others arrested in connection with the protests remain under sentence of death.
Under the guise of national security, the Iranian authorities intensified their use of the death penalty in the aftermath of the escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran, following Israeli military strikes against Iran in June 2025. Senior officials, including the Head of Judiciary, Gholamhossein Mohseni Eje’i, have called for expedited trials and executions for “supporting” or “collaborating” with hostile states, including Israel. Iran’s parliament also passed legislation expanding the use of the death penalty, including for vaguely-worded national security charges, such as “cooperation with hostile governments”, and “espionage”. The bill was approved by the Guardian Council on 1 October 2025 and must now be signed by the president to take effect. Since 13 June 2025, at least 18 men have been executed on politically-motivated charges, including at least 15 who the authorities accused of espionage for Israel.
This increased repression has relied extensively on grossly unfair trials by Revolutionary Courts, which exercise jurisdiction over national security and drug-related offences. These courts lack independence, operate under the influence of security and intelligence bodies and routinely rely on torture-tainted forced “confessions” to issue convictions and death sentences. Reliance on overly broad and vaguely defined charges of “enmity against God” (moharebeh), “corruption on earth” (efsad-e fel-arz), and “armed rebellion against the state” (baghi) have also led to scores being at risk of execution following grossly unfair trials and after convictions on politically-motivated charges. In this context, the use of the death penalty has disproportionately impacted marginalized minorities, particularly those belonging to the Afghan, Baluchi, and Kurdish communities. Violations of the right to a fair trial, as recognized under international law and standards, resulting in the imposition of the death penalty render the death sentences arbitrary in nature.
Several children have been affected by the death penalty in these flawed prosecutions, including Abdullah al-Derazi who is at imminent risk of execution. He was arrested in 2014 while he was 17 years old for protesting against the treatment of the Shiite minority in al-Qatif. He was convicted and sentenced to death after a grossly unfair trial for his alleged participation in violent attacks and possession of illegal weapons during anti-government protests in 2011 and 2012. During his trial, he told the court he was held in pretrial detention for three years, during which he had no access to legal representation, and was tortured into “confessing”. The court failed to investigate his torture allegations and an appeals court upheld his death sentence on 8 August 2022. The use of the death penalty on those who were below 18 years of age at the time of the offence is absolutely prohibited under international law.
In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the number of death sentences imposed has soared in recent months, while the government has repeatedly threatened to restart executions as a justification for the need to combat “treason” within the army. Former President Joseph Kabila was sentenced to death without being present (in absentia) by a military court on 30 September 2025, after he was found guilty of treason, murder, sexual assault, torture and insurrection in relation to his alleged support for the M23 group backed by Rwanda, charges that he denied. Military courts are frequently used in the DRC to try and sentence civilians to death, in breach of international fair trial standards.
Moreover, the DRC has also pursued the death penalty against Gradi Koko Lobanga and Navy Malela, two whistleblowers who exposed a sophisticated money-laundering network allegedly implicating their former employer and a sanctioned mining magnate. The revelations, shared with the Platform to Protect Whistleblowers in Africa (PPLAAF) and Global Witness, set off investigative reports on how networks linked to the mining magnate moved millions of US dollars out of the DRC, at the time under US sanctions. Instead of launching a genuine probe, those exposed orchestrated a ruthless retaliation against those who exposed allegations of wrongdoing. In September 2020, in a trial that has been called by observers as deeply flawed, Gradi Koko Lobanga and Navy Malela were sentenced to death in absentia without being present or properly informed of the charges. To date, no appeal has been filed on their behalf.
3. DEATH PENALTY TO SHOW STRONG HAND OF THE STATE AMONG FLAWED SECURITY NARRATIVES
3.1 Flawed security narratives and “scapegoating”
The 2nd element that has characterized an increased politicized use of death penalty in recent months relates to the promotion of flawed narratives around security, intended to project an image of strong government. In this context, particularly in countries where those in power have been expanding authoritarian practices and closing civic space, the death penalty has been portrayed as an effective and necessary tool to protect public safety. Yet, in many instances, the death penalty has been instead used as a way to exert control over the population and give a false impression of security and strong government, often to score political points. This approach has not only deliberately ignored the human rights violations that have long been documented in the use of the death penalty in those countries, but also has had the effect of delegitimizing the international human rights law and standards framework.
The promotion of the death penalty in the context of these flawed security narratives has particularly driven dangerous and dehumanizing “scapegoating” descriptions of risks, in which specific groups – which are often among the most marginalized sectors of the population – have been identified as threatening public security, political and economic stability, cultural identities or exclusivist understandings of “morals” of those in power.
Among other examples, on 5 January 2025, the Minister of Justice of the DRC Constant Mutamba announced that more than 170 people, allegedly linked to criminal groups commonly known as “Kulana” or “bandits”, had been transferred from the capital Kinshasa to Angenga prison in north-west DRC for execution, under the ill-conceived assumption that the death penalty would end deadly violence in several cities.
In the USA, where the federal government has increased the use of authoritarian practices such as the domestic deployment of the US military, heavy-handed enforcement against migrants and curtailing of freedom of expression and civic space, President Donald Trump has repeatedly promoted the use of the death penalty in the name of security, emboldening its supporters in a way that is having a ripple-effect across the country. In late 2024, as President Trump prepared to take office, he repeatedly invoked the death penalty as a tool to protect people “from violent rapists, murderers, and monsters”. Although not altering existing US federal laws, 2025 directives issued by President Trump on the death penalty have used inflammatory language towards those accused of committing serious crimes against “American citizens”; attacked judges that have not supported the death penalty as constitutional; and aimed at giving the impression of zero tolerance on crime.
3.2 Disinformation on crime and deterrence hypothesis of the death penalty
These flawed security narratives have contributed to the spread of disinformation on crime and on the false claim that the death penalty has a unique deterrent effect. For example, a directive issued by US President Trump in September to seek the death penalty in all eligible cases in Washington, DC came shortly after the deployment of the national guard to the District to tackle an alleged security crisis, even though homicide trends rates have been declining.
There is no convincing evidence to support the argument that the death penalty has a unique deterrent effect. The most comprehensive survey of research findings carried out by the UN on the relationship between the death penalty and homicide rates concluded: “research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment. Such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole still gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis.”
Disinformation on the death penalty has been frequently justified by favourable public opinion polls. However, these arguments not only ignore human rights violations associated with the use of the death penalty, but also hide the responsibility of governments to inform the public about the impact of this cruel punishment on crime and enjoyment of human rights. The methodological validity of opinion polls in determining the support for the death penalty has long been challenged.
However, by their continued justification of executions in the name of the will of the people, the authorities have prioritized political gains over the protection of human rights. The case of Matsumoto Kenji, who has been on death row in Japan for more than 30 years, shows this clearly. He has severe intellectual and mental disabilities that have impacted his ability to defend himself and, at present, does not have a rational understanding of his punishment, yet he remains at risk of execution. His lawyer said that the “confession” used to convict him was coerced through pressure during police interrogation. The imposition of the death penalty on those with mental and intellectual disabilities who cannot defend themselves on an equal basis with others is prohibited under international human rights law and standards. Even though the Minister of Justice can initiate under Article 479 of Japan’s Code of Criminal Procedure a review of cases where there is credible evidence that people sentenced to death have a severe mental disability and stay the execution, the authorities have continued to pursue the death penalty in his case.
3.3 Death penalty as a tool in the “war on drugs”
International safeguards and restrictions to the use of the death penalty have also been frequently flaunted in the name of the so-called “war on drugs”, amidst alarming increases of drug-related executions in recent years. In 2024, Amnesty International recorded more than 630 drug-related executions, which constituted 42% of total executions globally (1,518) and a 25% increase on the known total executions for these offences in 2023 (508 out of 1,153), making 2024 the deadliest year on record since 2015.
There is also no proof that the death penalty has a unique deterrent effect on drug use or trafficking. After decades of sustained use of the death penalty and other punitive responses to drug-related crime, the global drug market is growing steadily and shifting rapidly, as noted by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. In fact, the UN has long highlighted that the death penalty has the potential to become an obstacle to effective cross-border and international cooperation against drug trafficking.
The flawed security narratives related to the drug trade also appear to be behind initiatives to unlawfully expand the scope of this cruel punishment. Most recently, the President of the Republic of the Maldives, Dr. Mohamed Muizzu, was reported on 30 July 2025 as indicating that he had instructed legislative amendments to introduce the death penalty for drug trafficking. President Muizzu portrayed the death penalty as a tool “to save the society from the scourge of drugs and to build a generation free from drugs”.
The promotion of highly punitive “zero tolerance” and “iron-fist” on crime approaches that are not rooted in evidence supports a culture of misinformation and human rights violations. Effective drug control policies must be centred around public health and human rights, addressing the root causes that lead people to engage in the drug market, including poverty, unemployment and marginalization.
6. DESPITE SETBACKS, HOPES FOR A DEATH PENALTY FREE WORLD UNSHAKABLE
The first 9 months of 2025 have highlighted the need to strengthen the resistance against the judicial machinery of death. The harrowing choice of a handful of governments that continue to pursue this cruel punishment as a tool for repression and control, in violation of international standards, not only risks reverting the progress that the abolitionist movement has fought so hard for, but also opening the doors to a starker expansion of authoritarian practices. This must not remain unchallenged.
As of today, 113 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes and close to 3/4 of all countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.
In view of the clear goal of the abolition of the death penalty set out under international law and standards, and the violations of human rights inherently associated with the use of the death penalty and the arbitrariness and politicization of its use, Amnesty International urges governments in all countries that still retain this cruel punishment to immediately establish a moratorium on all executions with a view to its full abolition and commutation of all death sentences as a matter of urgency.
Source: Amnesty International, Staff, October 10, 2025
"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
— Oscar Wilde