Iran | Four 'Woman, Life, Freedom' Protesters Sentenced to Hang by 'Death Judge' in Sham Trial

Islamic Justice incarnated: “Death Judge” Salavati

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO); 25 May 2026: Milad Armoun, Navid Najaran, Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Hosseini and Mehdi Imani, four “Woman, Life, Freedom” protesters, were sentenced to death by “Death Judge” Salavati after a grossly unfair trial. Defence counsel representing the defendants in what became known as the “Ekbatan case” have detailed the severe procedural and substantive flaws that violated fundamental due process rights and undermined the legitimacy of the rulings issued by Branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court. News of the judgement comes just days after the Criminal Court acquitted the defendants of murder charges.

IHRNGO considers the case to be a travesty of justice and entirely void of legal legitimacy. Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, the organisation’s director stated: “The Ekbatan case demonstrates the arbitrary and deeply unjust nature of the Islamic Republic’s judiciary. The Revolutionary Court functions as a tool of repression rather than justice, where judges issue death sentences with absolute disregard for the evidence or basic fair trial standards.”

According to Emtedad, Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court has sentenced “Woman, Life, Freedom” protesters Milad Armoun, Navid Najaran, Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Hosseini and Mehdi Imani to death. Four other defendants in the case, Amir Mohammad Khosheghbal, Alireza Barmorzpournak, Alireza Kafayi and Hossein Nemati, received seven year prison terms for charges of “assembly and collusion against national security" and "propaganda against the system."

The judiciary’s Mizan News Agency reported that the protesters were sentenced to death on charges of efsad-fil-arz (corruption on earth) without naming them.

In the interview with Emtedad, Mohammad Hossein Aghasi, the legal counsel for Milad, criticised the court's failure to provide a written verdict, stating, "We do not know what the content of the ruling is, what the judge’s justifications are, and we have fundamentally neither seen the verdict nor been present at the sentencing." He emphasised that under the law, rulings must be served electronically or transcribed by legal teams, yet "none of this has happened." Aghasi also exposed severe contradictions in the capital charge itself, noting that "Milad has been sentenced to death on the charge of moharebeh, despite the fact that the charge of moharebeh had essentially been dropped from the case and amended to efsad-fil-arz."

Regarding the court's irregular method of handling appeals directly with the prisoner behind closed doors, Aghasi recounted that when Milad objected to the verbal verdict, court officials told him they would file the appeal on his behalf themselves. He condemned this procedure, stating, "This method is fundamentally illegal; the Supreme Court does not accept this method of appeal." Furthermore, he highlighted the extreme physical restrictions placed on the legal teams, explaining, "We practically have no access to the court. To visit Branch 15, you have to go to the beginning of Moallem Street, have them call the branch from there, and if Mr Salavati grants permission, we can enter!"

Babak Paknia, the lawyer representing Alireza, strongly condemned the court's absolute disregard for statutory legal procedures, revealing that Judge Salavati had systematically shut him out of the proceedings. Protesting his exclusion, Paknia stated, "Mr Salavati did not allow me into any of the court hearings. He did not provide any legal justification for this either. How is it possible to bar a lawyer from both the trial hearings and the session where the verdict is served? There is absolutely no form of due process in this procedure." Confirming the irregularities of the notification process, Paknia stated that his client was verbally informed of his sentence and forced to sign confirmation of its delivery, pointing out that "the legal method for serving a verdict is entirely different from what the head of Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court did today. Our question is, which law does this method of adjudication and notification originate from?"

Milad Armoun, Navid Najaran, Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Hosseini and Mehdi Imani

Paknia emphasised that by withholding official judgment numbers, the court is intentionally disrupting the defence's ability to challenge the rulings, noting, "The defence lawyers do not even know exactly under what charges their clients have been sentenced to death or imprisonment. They have not even given the judgment number to my client, making it impossible to appeal the ruling." On a substantive level, Paknia legally challenged the validity of the state's accusations altogether, explaining that "the actions committed by the defendants in the Ekbatan case do not constitute examples of efsad-fil-arz, because they did not disrupt the balance of society." He added that under Iranian law, moharebeh strictly requires drawing a weapon to terrorise the general public, asserting that "drawing a weapon against an officer cannot be categorised as moharebeh," which leaves the core substance of the case subject to serious legal challenge.

Ali Sharifzadeh, another lawyer representing Milad, confirmed that Judge Salavati had barred him from attending the trial hearings as well.

The proceedings at Branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court constitute a flagrant violation of Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Iran is a State party. By systematically barring defence counsel from hearings and delivering verbal sentences to the prisoners in secret, the court stripped the defendants of their fundamental rights to legal representation, a public trial and proper notification of charges. Furthermore, by actively withholding official judgment numbers, the judiciary intentionally paralysed the statutory appeal process. This parallel trial also directly breached the international principle against double jeopardy (ne bis in idem), as these death sentences were pushed through just days after a standard criminal court had already adjudicated the same conduct and acquitted multiple defendants of murder.

On 20 May, Emtedad reported that Milad Armoun, Alireza Kafayi, Amir Mohammad Khosheghbal, Navid Najaran, Hossein Nemati and Alireza Barmazpournak were acquitted of murder charges. Milad, Alireza and Amir Mohammad Khosheghbal’s sentences were commuted to 5 years imprisonment for “complicity in inflicting non-fatal injuries” and they were ordered to pay diya (blood money). Hossein will only have to pay diya and Navid and Alireza were fully acquitted.

At least 14 protesters have been executed in connection to the 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” nationwide protests and at least 14 others are at risk of the death penalty.

Source: Iran Human Rights, Staff, May 25, 2026

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

Death Penalty News For a World without the Death Penalty

Comments

Iran: Flogging still a common practice

Flogging of Sufis in Gonabad: Fourteen Ne’matollahi dervishes received 25 lashes each for allegedly disturbing the public security "The lash ruling against 14 Ne'matollahi dervishes of Gonabad was carried out. They were residents of Baydokht and had been arrested and condemned by the Public Prosecutor of Gonabad after a protest against the illegal treatment dealing with the Sufis in June of last year [2010]. According to the website of Majzuban-e-Nur, Mr. Sa'id Kashani, Mr. Amir Roshan-Mojaver-Sufi, Mr. Alimohammad Amanian, Mr. Ruhollah Safari, Mr. Ali Abbasi-Baydokhti, Mr. Ebrahim Abbaszadeh, Mr. Mohammadali Ja'fari, Mr. Hossein Mahdavi, Mr. Hossein Abbaszadeh-Baydokhti, Mr. Rahmat Hosseini, Mr. Reza Kakhki, Mr. Behruz Mojaver-Sufi, Mr. Ali Mir, and Mr. Hassan Baluchi-Baydokhti are the fourteen dervishes whose requests were not only rejected, but who were condemned to 25 lashes for disturbing the public security. It should be mentioned that Ruhollah Safari, the ...

Japan’s Internet Wants Uchida Riko Executed. Here’s Why That Won’t Happen

This week, the prosecution in the case of a murder of a 17-year-old girl in Hokkaido came out with its sentencing recommendation. Japanese social media reacted by clamoring for the accused woman’s blood. But, while the facts of the case are heinous, the prosecutor’s decision not to seek the death penalty is grounded in long-standing precedent. Murdered for looking at the accused wrong Uchida Riko (内田梨瑚), 23, and her friends stand accused of murdering 17-year-old Murayama Runa (村山瑠奈) in Hokkaido’s Asahikawa. Prosecutors say the dispute began after Murayama posted a photo of Uchida to social media. They say Uchida’s group abducted the girl, made her undress, and then forced her to jump from a bridge.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

Two men executed with AK-47 for raping and murdering boy, 12, in Yemen as children watch on

“Public execution is an even more grotesque violation of human rights, particularly in a country where the ability of the accused to obtain adequate legal representation and the coverage of the process is highly limited.” -- Human Rights Watch director Sarah Leah Whitson TWO paedophiles have been executed with AK-47s in front of a bloodthirsty crowd for raping and murdering a 12-year-old boy in Yemen. Chilling images show Wadah Refat and Mohamed Khaled being marched at gunpoint through the port city of Aden. Yemen is one of the few countries in the world where capital punishment is legal, and even children were in attendance to watch the gruesome event. Refat, 28, and Khaled, 31, were condemned for the abduction, rape, and murder of a young boy who was snatched after playing next to the house of one of the men. The pair reportedly dragged him into their home and raped him. When sentencing the pair, The Daily Star reported that the judge said: “Afte...

Florida execution of 74-year-old death row inmate Dusty Ray Spencer reignites debate

Florida has set an execution date of June 25, 2026, for 74-year-old death row inmate Dusty Ray Spencer, a move that would make him the oldest person ever executed in the state’s history . Governor Ron DeSantis signed the death warrant on May 26, 2026, marking the tenth such warrant issued this year as the state continues its current pace of capital punishment. Spencer was convicted in 1992 of the first-degree murder of his wife, Karen Spencer, in Orange County. Court records detail a prolonged and violent pattern of abuse preceding the homicide. On January 18, 1992, after prior incidents of physical assault and threats, Spencer stabbed his wife to death in their backyard. The trial evidence included testimony that the victim was alive and conscious during the attack, which involved blunt force trauma and multiple stab wounds while the couple's son was present.

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.

Death Penalty News

Search This Blog