Six More Young Protesters Sentenced to Death in Iran After Grossly Unfair Trial

Judges Violate Iran’s Own Laws Under Pressure from the Security Establishment

Ruling Meant to Intimidate Public on Eve of Anniversary of Bloody November 2019 Protests 

November 14, 2024—Six protesters involved in Iran’s “Woman, Life, Freedom” uprising in 2022 have been sentenced to death in a case marred by severe due process violations, torture-tainted confessions, lack of evidence, and breaches of Iran’s own laws, the Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) said today.

“The six protesters in the Ekbatan case join many others in Iran whose lives hang by a thread, after being stripped of all due process rights, coerced into false confessions, and tortured,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of CHRI.

“People are being sentenced to death simply for daring to dissent in the Islamic Republic. The international community must be willing to impose stronger diplomatic and economic consequences on Iran before more young men and women are sent to the gallows,” he urged.

CHRI urges the UN, governments, human rights organizations, and legal associations worldwide to demand that Iranian authorities immediately halt all executions and impose a moratorium on the death penalty, due to the Islamic Republic’s consistent refusal to uphold basic international standards on capital punishment and fair trial rights.

On November 13, 2024, Branch 13 of Tehran’s Criminal Court issued death sentences for six protesters—Milad Armoun, 26, Alireza Kafaei, 34, Amir Mohammad Khosheghbal, 26, Navid Najaran, 32, Hossein Nemati, 27, and Alireza Bamerzpournak, 28—on alleged charges of “participation in the murder and intentional assault” in connection with the killing of a Basij militia member during protests at the Ekbatan housing complex in Tehran in October 2022.  

Case Reassigned to New Judges after Presiding Judge Refuses to Sign Order

According to highly informed sources who cannot be named for security reasons, the death sentences were issued through the influence of intelligence forces and the involvement of two new judges, Ehsan Sheikh al-Hokmaei and Saeed Sherafati, who were not previously assigned to the case. The judge who opposed the death sentence was Asghar Khalili, who is the Head of Branch 13.

“The head of the Branch disagreed with this ruling and issued a minority vote,” one of the lawyers in the case, Babak Paknia, announced on X.

Due to the decision to transfer the case to two judges with security affiliations after the presiding judge refused to sign a re-arrest order for the defendants and issue a death sentence, alongside reports of torture, forced confessions, denial of due process rights, and the government’s refusal to disclose any incriminating evidence, there is ample evidence of a profoundly illegal judicial proceeding that has been commandeered by the security forces in order to deliver more death sentences and instill fear amongst society.

“Two security judges have interfered in the case and signed the sentences without any legal foundation.”

A source with detailed knowledge of the case told CHRI: 

“One of the most important points of the case is that according to the verdict’s minority opinion, written by the presiding judge [in Branch 13 of the Criminal Court], none of the defendants can be convicted of intentional murder because the blows inflicted on the victim were by a large number of people. Apart from that, it has not been proven that the blows inflicted by any one of the defendants caused the murder.

“The strange and unprecedented thing that happened was that when the presiding judge refused to sign an order to re-arrest the defendants, he was put on mandatory leave, and two security-affiliated judges took over the case. The important point here is that these two judges were not present in most of the court sessions, which is a violation of judicial procedure. They were only present in the final session. But subsequently, they were the ones who signed the death sentences.

“The verdict reads more like a security report rather than a legal opinion. It’s obvious that these two security judges have interfered in the case and signed the sentences without any legal foundation.

“Moreover, the decision to transfer the case to new judges violated Iran’s own laws, specifically Article 339 of the Criminal Code of Procedure, which states, ‘After a case is assigned, it cannot be referred to another unless prescribed by law. Note 1: The application of this Article is mandatory for branches of the lower courts, the Appeals Court, and the Supreme Court. Note 2: Violating this Article is punishable as a crime up to the fourth degree.’”

Lawyer: Ruling was “intended to intimidate opponents of the Islamic Republic on the eve of the November 2019 anniversary”

Prominent human rights lawyer Saeid Dehghan told CHRI that given the numerous violations of Iran’s own laws in this case, the ruling reflected the Islamic Republic desire to seek revenge against its opponents, intimidate the citizenry, and silence any possible public protest as the anniversary of the state’s bloody suppression of the November 2019 protests approached. Dehghan said:  

“This judicial ruling was a political statement. The Islamic Republic, under the guise of ‘retribution’ and on behalf of the family of the deceased, has been seeking revenge against its own opponents.

“The opinion of the presiding judge, which is noted as a minority opinion in the ruling, clearly shows that these six young protesters should not have been sentenced to death. The claims made by the two security judges who were recently added to the court are entirely at odds with the forensic medical report and even the Islamic Republic’s own laws.

“Rather than a ‘judicial’ decision, the ruling was a security measure intended to intimidate opponents of the Islamic Republic on the eve of the November 2019 anniversary.”

Subjected to Torture, Coerced into False “Confessions”

Armoun and Khosheghbal were arrested by security forces on November 7, 2022, with Kafaei and Bamerzpournak detained two days later on November 9. Nemati was arrested on December 14, 2022, while Najjaran was apprehended at a later, unspecified date.

Their final court session took place on November 2, 2024, after which four of the defendants—Namati, Bramarzpournak, Kafaee, and Khosheghbal—who had been released on bail since last February, were arrested after new detention orders were issued and taken to Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj. The arrest orders were issued by the two new judges after the presiding judge refused.

A source with detailed knowledge of the case previously told CHRI that all detainees had suffered both physical and psychological torture, forcing some to give false “confessions.” The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) also claimed to have video footage allegedly proving the defendants’ guilt and insisted they be executed—but its intelligence branch classified the footage and refused to present it in criminal court.

Armoun and Kafaei were both detained for at least two months in the police investigations office. Armoun, held in solitary confinement for weeks, endured severe torture and, on November 3, 2022, was coerced into making false “confessions” on camera. Kafaei also faced torture in police detention.

Khosheghbal, due to the brutal treatment he suffered at the Air Force Intelligence Unit detention center and the police investigations office, reportedly attempted suicide.

“This is an act of intimidation and a threat against the citizens”

Shirin Ebadi, one of Iran’s first female judges and a Nobel Peace laureate, described on Telegram how the death sentences of these six protesters reflected the Iranian authorities’ desire for vengeance against the Ekbatan region for its prominent role in the “Women, Life Freedom” protests:

“Ekbatan became one of the main hubs of protest, drawing much of the regime’s repressive forces. However, protests in this area did not stop and it remains one of the centers of resistance. Nighttime graffiti and various forms of protest continue in the region. Therefore, it can be said that the death sentences issued…are more about the regime’s deep animosity and its repressive apparatus’s hatred toward Ekbatan than the details of the case. This is an act of intimidation and a threat against the citizens.”