In continuation of the issuance of heavy judicial sentences against the detainees of the 2025–2026 nationwide protests, the death sentence of Arman Ma’refati was confirmed by the Supreme Court, and three other citizens in Mashhad were also sentenced to death on charges of “Moharebeh” (enmity against God); a trend that has heightened concerns regarding the use of the death penalty against protesters.
Iran Human Rights Society, Monday, November 2, 2026 – The death sentence of Arman Ma’refati, one of the detainees of the 2025–2026 nationwide protests, has been confirmed by the Supreme Court.
Ma’refati, who is approximately 38 years old, originally from Saqqez and residing in Tehran, was arrested during the protests in Tehran and after some time was transferred from Greater Tehran Prison to Ghezel Hesar Prison in Karaj. He is currently being held in Unit 3, Hall 37 of this prison.
Simultaneously, three other citizens arrested in connection with the nationwide protests in Mashhad were sentenced to death on charges of “Moharebeh” by Branch 5 of the Revolutionary Court of this city, headed by Judge Hossein Yazdankhah. The identity of one of them has been announced as Matin Farnian, 23 years old, while the identities of the other two defendants have not yet been released. These three individuals are being held in Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad.
Confirmation of Arman Ma’refati’s Death Sentence in the Supreme Court
Arman Ma’refati had previously been sentenced to death by Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court, headed by Judge Abolqasem Salavati. The charges brought against him include “participation in operational actions against national security,” entering religious sites with the intent to destroy, participation in setting fire to a mosque and a seminary, and causing damage.
Ma’refati’s case was joint with two other prisoners, Mehrdad Mohammadinia and Ashkan Maleki. The death sentences of these two individuals were executed earlier, and now, with the confirmation of Arman Ma’refati’s sentence, the risk of execution for the third defendant in this case has also increased.
During the handling of the case, Ma’refati’s charge title was altered in the court session. The prosecutor’s representative initially cited his charge as “assembly and collusion to commit crimes against internal security through presence in protests,” but the court, citing Article 280 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, brought forth other charges including participation in operational actions against national security, entering religious sites with intent to destroy, and participation in setting fire to a mosque and seminary.
Three Other Death Sentences in Mashhad
In a separate case, three detainees of the 2025–2026 nationwide protests in Mashhad were sentenced to death by the ruling of Branch 5 of the Revolutionary Court of this city.
According to published information, these individuals were arrested by security forces on January 19 and 20, 2026, in connection with the nationwide protests and, after being transferred to Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad, were held in various wards of this prison, including Ward 6/1.
Only the identity of Matin Farnian, 23 years old and a resident of Mashhad, has been announced so far, while the identities of the other two defendants are under review. The announced charge against all three individuals is “Moharebeh,” and the punishment of execution has been issued for them.
The issuance of these sentences comes while cases related to the detainees of the 2025–2026 nationwide protests remain at various judicial stages, and simultaneously reports of the issuance of death sentences for other protesters have also been published.
Ambiguity in the Judicial Process and Confessions
The background of the case of Arman Ma’refati and his two co-defendants shows that the manner of judicial proceedings in cases linked to the nationwide protests has faced serious questions.
In the court session for the three defendants, a significant portion of the indictment relied on the statements and confessions of the defendants. At the same time, clear explanations were not provided regarding the interrogation conditions, the length of detention prior to trial, and the defendants’ manner of access to chosen legal counsel. Furthermore, it was unclear whether the lawyers whose presence was mentioned in the court report were chosen by the defendants or court-appointed.
This issue is of importance because when heavy charges and the death penalty are presented on the foundation of defendants’ confessions, an independent investigation into the conditions under which these confessions were obtained and the possibility of effective access to legal defense are considered fundamental guarantees of a fair trial.
In the case of Arman Ma’refati as well, the court altered his charge title during the proceedings and expanded the scope of the charges. Such changes, especially in a case that ultimately leads to the issuance of a death sentence, double the importance of fully observing the defendant’s defense rights.
Precedent of Issuing Death Sentences for Nationwide Protest Detainees
The issuance of new sentences continues while previously, other instances of death sentences issued for detainees of the 2025–2026 nationwide protests had also been reported.
In one of the previous cases, Arman Ma’refati and two other defendants faced heavy security charges following their trial and ultimately received death sentences. His two co-defendants, Mehrdad Mohammadinia and Ashkan Maleki, were executed in May/June 2026, and now Arman Ma’refati’s sentence has also been confirmed by the Supreme Court.
In another case, human rights reports regarding the trial of three protesters in Tehran pointed to ambiguities in the judicial process and substantial reliance of the case on defendants’ confessions. This background demonstrates that the issuance of death sentences for nationwide protest detainees is not limited to a few cases and has turned into one of the most significant human rights concerns connected to the consequences of these protests.
Increased Concern Regarding the Execution of Death Sentences
The confirmation of Arman Ma’refati’s sentence in the Supreme Court has brought the risk of sentence execution into a more serious stage. Simultaneously, the issuance of three other death sentences in Mashhad indicates that the judicial cases of nationwide protest detainees remain on the path of issuing heavy sentences.
Under such conditions, the situation of prisoners who have received death sentences, particularly regarding access to legal counsel, the possibility of effective appeal against sentences, handling claims related to interrogation methods, and independent review of evidence, holds special importance.
The issuance of the death penalty in cases related to protests, in addition to direct consequences for the convicts and their families, creates broader concerns regarding the use of the death penalty as a tool to deal with protest and dissent.
Legal Review of the Case of the 2025–2026 Nationwide Protests Convicts Based on Domestic Laws
The laws of the ruling dictatorship in Iran have always been criticized due to restricting human rights. Reviewing this matter does not mean endorsing these laws, but rather takes place to demonstrate the non-compliance with even these very laws. Articles 32 and 35 of the Constitution emphasize the legal formalities of arrest, notification of charges, and the right to have a lawyer, and the Code of Criminal Procedure also recognizes the defense rights of the accused. In cases resulting in execution, altering the charge title during proceedings, ambiguity regarding effective access to legal counsel, and reliance on defendants’ confessions heighten the necessity of a meticulous review of adherence to legal trial guarantees.
Review of the Case from a Human Rights Perspective and Instances of Standard Violations
Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes the right to life, and Article 5 prohibits cruel and inhuman treatment.
Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also emphasize the prohibition of arbitrary arrest and the guarantee of a fair trial. In cases leading to execution, any ambiguity regarding interrogation conditions, effective access to legal counsel, and the use of confessions can create serious concerns about adherence to fair trial standards. The issuance or execution of the death penalty following an unfair trial is also in conflict with the right to life and the fundamental principles of criminal justice.
See also the below articles:
- Arbitrary Detention of Abdolrahman Dorostaran in Zahedan
- Shahab Zohdi Sentenced to Death a Second Time in Tehran
Follow Iran Human Rights Society on social networks:
Telegram /Twitter /Instagram / YouTube / Facebook
Join Iran Human Rights Society on Twitter
