IRAN - 4 protesters

IRAN - Four 'Woman, Life, Freedom' Protesters Sentenced to death

May 25, 2026:

May 25, 2026 - IRAN. Four 'Woman, Life, Freedom' Protesters Sentenced to death

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

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.

IHR 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?"

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.