Ahmad Seyedabdollahi, a counselor and psychologist residing in Borujen, was arrested by security forces about ten days ago and transferred to an unknown location. This arrest took place while he had previously been convicted to imprisonment and deprivation of public services due to the publication of a video, and at the same time, he was facing the formation of a new case with the charge of “propaganda against the system.”
Iran Human Rights Society, Wednesday 10 June 2026 – The arrest of Ahmad Seyedabdollahi, a counselor and psychologist residing in Borujen, has once again increased concerns about the increase in security pressures on critical citizens. His family and close associates say that since the time of his arrest until now, they have no information about the place of his detention, his physical condition, and the process of handling his case. This is while he had previously also faced security case-building, arrest, and judicial conviction due to media activities and expressing political views.
How and in what conditions was Ahmad Seyedabdollahi arrested?
Based on received reports, about ten days ago security forces arrested Ahmad Seyedabdollahi by referring to his father’s house in Borujen and transferred him to an unknown location. The agents also seized mobile phones, computer, and a number of electronic devices belonging to him and his family members during this operation.
According to available information, Ahmad Seyedabdollahi has only had one short contact with his family after the arrest. However, in this contact, he has provided no explanation about the place of detention, his physical condition, or the process of handling his case. The continuation of the lack of news about his status has caused serious concern for his family and close associates.
What is the new charge against Ahmad Seyedabdollahi and at what stage is his case?
Some time before the arrest, Branch One of the Public and Revolutionary Prosecutor’s Office of Borujen, presided over by Prosecutor Vahid Qadirdoxt Qahfarrokhi, had summoned Ahmad Seyedabdollahi by issuing a summons to defend against the charge of “propaganda against the system.”
In this summons, which was issued on 25 May 2026, he had been required to appear at the branch within five days. However, before the process of handling this case began, security forces took action to arrest him.
This issue has raised questions about the necessity of arresting and transferring him to an unknown location in conditions where the legal process of judicial summons was underway, and has created ambiguities about the manner of handling his new case.
To what charges had Ahmad Seyedabdollahi been previously convicted?
Ahmad Seyedabdollahi had previously been tried in another case by the Revolutionary Court of Borujen. Based on the issued verdict, he was found guilty due to the publication of an English-language video addressed to the President of the United States and sending it to a media outlet opposed to the government.
The court, citing the law “Intensification of Punishment for Espionage and Cooperation with the Zionist Regime and Hostile Countries against National Security and Interests” approved in 1404, sentenced him to seven months of ta’zir imprisonment. Also, five years of deprivation of government and public services was considered as a supplementary punishment for him.
This verdict was issued in February-March 2026, and the court in its ruling pointed to the lack of effective criminal record and acceptance of the primary verdict as mitigating factors.
Why are the charges raised against Ahmad Seyedabdollahi facing legal ambiguities?
One of the most important ambiguities in this case is the proportionality between the behavior attributed to Ahmad Seyedabdollahi and the security charges raised against him. Based on published information, the main basis of his conviction is the publication of a political video message and sending it to a media outlet. However, the court has handled this action under regulations related to national security and a law that is primarily drafted to counter espionage and security cooperation.
Many jurists believe that there is a fundamental difference between expressing opinion, publishing content, or sending a video with concepts such as espionage, security cooperation, or organized action against national security. In such conditions, using security laws to deal with the expression of political views can lead to the expansion of broad interpretations of security crimes; an approach that conflicts with the principle of legality of crime and punishment as well as the principle of narrow interpretation of criminal laws.
In addition, issuing a supplementary punishment of five years of deprivation of public services for a person whose activity is described within the framework of expressing political views and media activities also faces serious questions from the perspective of the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment.
What is the history of Ahmad Seyedabdollahi’s arrest and detention in security detention centers?
Ahmad Seyedabdollahi was also arrested by the intelligence forces of the IRGC in December 2025-January 2026. He spent about 32 days in solitary confinement in Borujen Prison and after that was transferred for about two weeks to the IRGC intelligence detention center in Isfahan.
Reports indicate that after weeks of detention and interrogation, he was ultimately temporarily released by posting a heavy bail of 18 billion tomans. Now his re-arrest has taken place while there are still many ambiguities about the reasons for this action, the place of detention, and the process of handling his new case.
What human rights dimensions does Ahmad Seyedabdollahi’s case have?
The arrest and detention of Ahmad Seyedabdollahi in conditions of lack of news, depriving the family of information about his status, and using security charges in connection with media activities and expression of opinion have created widespread concerns from a human rights perspective.
Violated Articles
Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Prohibition of arbitrary arrest; detaining a person in an unknown location and not informing the family conflicts with this principle.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: The right to freedom of opinion and expression; judicial prosecution due to the publication of political views and media is considered a restriction on freedom of expression.
Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: The right to a fair trial; using general security charges and lack of transparency in the handling process violates this fundamental right.
Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: The right to privacy; seizing personal and family equipment without providing clear and transparent explanations about its legal basis creates concerns about violation of privacy.
Ahmad Seyedabdollahi’s case is another example of the increase in security pressures on citizens who face security charges due to expressing their views or their media activities; a trend that continues to face criticism from human rights institutions and defenders of civil liberties.
See also the below articles:
- Alireza Peyghambari Sentenced to Execution Despite Weak Evidence
- Ameneh Beiraqdari in Critical Condition Amid Family Crisis
Follow Iran Human Rights Society on social networks:
Telegram /Twitter /Instagram / YouTube / Facebook
Join Iran Human Rights Society on Twitter
