Alireza Peyghambari, a 26-year-old young man and one of the detainees of the nationwide protests of 2025-2026, was sentenced to execution by Branch 23 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court on the charge of “enmity against God (muharibeh)”. This sentence was issued while he had previously been released on bail due to lack of sufficient evidence, and informed sources emphasize that he was not present at the protest gatherings at all.
Iran Human Rights Society, Tuesday 9 June 2026 – The issuance of execution sentences for detainees of the nationwide protests continues. In the latest case, Alireza Peyghambari, a 26-year-old young man and prisoner held in Tehran Great Prison, has been sentenced to execution by Branch 23 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court on the charge of “enmity against God (muharibeh)”. This sentence was issued while he had been released on bail after his initial arrest; a matter that, according to legal observers, indicates serious doubts about the existence of sufficient evidence to prove the attributed charges.
How Was Alireza Peyghambari Arrested?
Based on the received information, Alireza Peyghambari was arrested by security forces on 8 January 2026 simultaneously with the nationwide protests. After a period of detention, he was released in February 2026 upon posting bail.
His release on bail has been evaluated by many observers as a sign of the weakness of the case documents. In many security cases, if there is sufficient evidence to prove serious charges, the accused are usually not granted temporary release.
However, Alireza Peyghambari’s case was reviewed again in the Revolutionary Court in the following months and ultimately led to the issuance of an execution sentence.
Did Alireza Peyghambari Participate in the Protests?
An informed source, denying some of the claims raised in the case, has stated that Alireza Peyghambari did not participate in the protest gatherings at all.
According to this report, after the end of his working hours and while returning from his workplace, in conditions where the streets were crowded due to protests and population congestion, he unintentionally found himself in the location. This source has emphasized that his presence in that area did not mean participation in the protests or committing the acts attributed to him.
These statements have once again raised serious questions about the basis of the charges raised against this prisoner.
How Did the Trial Process Lead to the Issuance of the Execution Sentence?
The first trial session for Alireza Peyghambari’s case was held in April 2026 in Branch 23 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court. Then the second trial session was held in early June 2026.
Based on existing reports, after the end of the second court session, he was arrested again and transferred to Tehran Great Prison. A short time later, Branch 23 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court issued his execution sentence on the charge of “enmity against God (muharibeh)”.
This prisoner’s case is now under review in Branch 9 of the Supreme Court. His family and relatives hope that this sentence will be overturned in the cassation stage.
Concerns About Torture and Forced Confessions
Human rights activists have repeatedly warned that in many cases related to nationwide protests, detainees in security detention centers are subjected to severe psychological and physical pressures to confess against themselves.
Although complete details of Alireza Peyghambari’s detention period have not been published, the recurring pattern in similar cases shows that confessions obtained in detention conditions and without full access to defense rights have repeatedly been used as the main document in issuing heavy sentences.
Human rights institutions emphasize that any confession obtained as a result of pressure, threat, torture, or deprivation of the accused’s basic rights lacks legal validity and cannot be the basis for issuing an execution sentence.
Why Is the Issuance of the Execution Sentence Facing Serious Doubts?
One of the most important ambiguities in Alireza Peyghambari’s case is the contradiction between his initial release on bail and the issuance of the execution sentence in subsequent stages.
Critics say that if there were sufficient evidence and documents to prove the charge of “enmity against God (muharibeh)”, the initial release of the accused on bail is not explainable. On the other hand, existing reports about his lack of effective presence in the protests have also added to the doubts.
According to legal experts, the death penalty should only be applied in conditions where the attributed crime is established with the highest level of judicial proof standards and without any reasonable doubt. In cases where there are multiple ambiguities about the manner of arrest, charge documents, and the trial process, issuing an execution sentence creates serious human rights concerns.
Continuation of Issuing Heavy Sentences for Detainees of the Protests
Alireza Peyghambari’s case has led to the issuance of an execution sentence while in recent months, a number of other detainees of the nationwide protests have also faced heavy sentences including execution, long-term imprisonments, and exile.
Human rights activists believe that the widespread use of security charges and issuing heavy sentences for protesters is part of the policy of intimidation and suppression of society. They warn that the continuation of such a trend will not only not reduce social dissatisfactions but will deepen the gap between society and the ruling structure.
Violation of Human Rights; Execution Based on a Case With Serious Ambiguities
Alireza Peyghambari’s case encompasses a set of human rights concerns; from arrest during protests and initial release due to lack of sufficient evidence to the issuance of an execution sentence in conditions where there are multiple ambiguities about his role in the claimed events.
Violated Articles:
Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Right to life; issuing an execution sentence in a case with serious ambiguities threatens this fundamental right.
Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment; any pressure to obtain forced confessions violates this principle.
Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Prohibition of arbitrary arrest; arresting citizens without providing sufficient evidence is contrary to this article.
Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Right to be tried by an independent and impartial court; trying political and security cases in revolutionary courts has always faced criticism from human rights institutions.
Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Right to a fair trial and enjoying sufficient opportunity for defense; issuing an execution sentence without full observance of these guarantees violates international commitments.
See also the below articles:
- Ameneh Beiraqdari in Critical Condition Amid Family Crisis
- Noushin Mahmoudi: Security Pressures Target Mother of 2019 Protest Martyr
Follow Iran Human Rights Society on social networks:
Telegram /Twitter /Instagram / YouTube / Facebook
Join Iran Human Rights Society on Twitter
