Head of the Judiciary demands the removal of normal trial procedures; Coinciding with the execution of two members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq and the increase in the number of executions of political prisoners in the past month
Iran Human Rights Society, Monday, April 20, 2026 – Recent statements by Mohseni Eje’i regarding “extraordinary” handling of cases, coinciding with the intensification of repression and the increase in executions of political prisoners, have raised widespread concerns about the violation of principles of fair trial and the use of the judicial system as a tool of repression.
What instructions has Mohseni Eje’i issued regarding the judicial process?
Mohseni Eje’i, in a meeting with judicial officials and heads of provincial justice departments, explicitly announced that in handling cases related to what is called “collaboration with the enemy,” the normal procedure should not prevail. He emphasized that these cases must be examined in all stages, from the prosecutor’s office to the Supreme Court, in an “extraordinary and special” manner.
He has also referred to the elimination of usual investigation deadlines and stated that even the standard times for reviewing cases should be minimized. Among the examples mentioned are reducing the review time from several days to several hours and even direct interrogation in prison to accelerate the preparation of the indictment.
How is the intensification of repression carried out through hasty courts?
The order for proceedings outside the normal procedure, according to observers, means accelerating the issuance of verdicts without fully going through the legal stages. In such conditions, principles such as careful examination of evidence, the right to defense, and access to a lawyer face serious restrictions.
This approach in practice leads to the formation of hasty courts; courts in which the process of reviewing cases is set in such a way that the outcome is considered predetermined. Such conditions remove the judicial system from the legal path and turn it into a tool for exerting pressure on opponents.
What is the connection between these policies and the increase in executions?
Coinciding with these statements, reports indicate an increase in the execution of political prisoners. In the past month alone, at least 12 political prisoners have been executed. Also today, two members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq organization have been executed.
This increase has occurred while many of these verdicts have been carried out in conditions where the trial process has been accompanied by ambiguity and the families and lawyers of the accused have been unaware of the details of the cases. Observers consider this trend to be the direct result of the new policies in accelerating the proceedings.
Do these actions comply with judicial laws?
From a legal perspective, Mohseni Eje’i’s statements are in conflict with the fundamental principles of fair trial. According to Articles 36 and 37 of the Constitution, no one should be punished without undergoing a fair trial and providing sufficient evidence.
The emphasis on accelerating the proceedings and eliminating legal deadlines means disregarding the right to defense, the principle of presumption of innocence, and the necessity of careful examination of cases. This issue gains even more importance, especially in cases where the death penalty is involved.
Violation of the principles of judicial independence and equality before the law
The order for “extraordinary” proceedings is also considered a violation of the principle of judges’ independence and equality before the law. The judicial system is obligated to act based on specific and transparent rules, not to adopt exceptional procedures under the influence of political or security conditions.
According to experts, such an approach indicates the instrumental use of the judicial system to repress opponents. This can seriously undermine public trust in the justice system.
What are the consequences of the judicial system’s “war formation”?
Using the term “war formation” to describe the situation of the judicial system indicates a change in approach from a legal system to a security structure. In this framework, law gives way to immediate decisions based on security considerations.
This change, according to observers, can lead to the practical suspension of the law; a situation in which the fundamental rights of citizens are disregarded and judicial processes are turned into a tool for exercising power.
What does the increase in pressures and confiscation of property mean?
Alongside the intensification of judicial processes, Mohseni Eje’i has demanded the rapid confiscation of the property of individuals who are introduced as “convicted elements.” This action has also been raised without fully going through the legal processes.
Reports indicate that these policies are being implemented simultaneously with an increase in arrests and pressure on citizens. Such actions can also expand the economic dimensions of repression.
Intensification of repression under the cover of judicial process
The totality of these developments shows that the judicial system is moving towards implementing policies that are defined more within the framework of security considerations than based on legal principles. The increase in executions, hasty courts, and the elimination of legal processes are all signs of this change in approach.
In such conditions, concerns about the future of fair trial and citizens’ rights have increased, and many observers have called for serious attention to this trend.
Widespread violation of the principles of fair trial in recent judicial processes
The order for hasty proceedings, the increase in executions, and the elimination of legal processes indicate a serious violation of the fundamental principles of human rights and the use of the judicial system as a tool of repression.
Violated articles:
- Violation of the right to fair trial – Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Eliminating legal deadlines and hasty proceedings seriously violate the process of fair and impartial trial.
- Violation of the principle of presumption of innocence – Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Accelerating the issuance of verdicts without complete examination of evidence calls the principle of presumption of innocence into question.
- Violation of the right to life – Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: The increase in executions in conditions where fair trial has not been observed violates the fundamental right to life.
- Violation of human dignity – Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Using judicial processes to exert pressure and repression damages the human dignity of individuals.
See also the below articles:
- One Year After Execution, Family Still Searches for Hamid Hossein-Nejad Heidranlou Burial Site
- Secret Execution of Hamed Validi and Nima Shahi Sparks Global Outrage
Follow Iran Human Rights Society on social networks:
Telegram /Twitter /Instagram / YouTube / Facebook
Join Iran Human Rights Society on Twitter
