Mehdi Nazer Mahnaz Chardouli Death Sentences Spark Outcry in Iran Protests

Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court sentenced Mehdi Nazer and Mahnaz Chardouli to death and Atefeh Nazer to 10 years in prison; rulings that have been accompanied by ambiguities regarding the trial process.

Iran Human Rights Society, Sunday July 5, 2026 – Mehdi Nazer, one of the detainees of the 2025-2026 protests, was sentenced to death by Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court presided over by Abolghasem Salavati. At the same time, Mahnaz Chardouli, his fiancée, has also faced a similar ruling of death sentence and 10 years in prison, and Atefeh Nazer, Mehdi Nazer’s sister, has been sentenced to 10 years in prison. These rulings have been issued while informed sources have raised ambiguities about the charges presented and the process of handling this case.

Names of Prisoners: Mehdi Nazer, Mahnaz Chardouli, Atefeh Nazer

Place of Trial: Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court

Judge: Abolghasem Salavati Date of Arrest: January 10, 2026

Announced Charges: Attacking a mosque with Molotov cocktails, presence in illegal gatherings, assembly and collusion

Issued Ruling: Mehdi Nazer and Mahnaz Chardouli death sentence and 10 years in prison / Atefeh Nazer 10 years in prison

Why Were Mehdi Nazer and Mahnaz Chardouli Sentenced to Death?

Based on the published information, Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court has sentenced Mehdi Nazer to death on the mentioned charges. Also, Mahnaz Chardouli, his fiancée, has faced a similar ruling and in addition to the death penalty, has been sentenced to 10 years in prison. Atefeh Nazer, Mehdi Nazer’s sister, has also been sentenced in the same case to 10 years in prison on the charge of “assembly and collusion.”

What Are the Charges Raised in the Case?

Based on the available information, judicial authorities have raised charges including “attacking a mosque with Molotov cocktails,” “presence in illegal gatherings,” and “assembly and collusion” against these three political prisoners. However, informed sources have announced that on January 10, 2026, at the same time as the arrest of these individuals, no public report about holding a gathering or attacking a mosque had been published; a matter that, according to these sources, has created questions about the documents of the case.

How Was the Arrest of Mehdi Nazer and Mahnaz Chardouli Carried Out?

Mehdi Nazer, Mahnaz Chardouli, and Atefeh Nazer were arrested in Tehran on January 10, 2026. After the arrest, their case was handled in Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court and finally heavy rulings were issued against them. At the same time, sources close to the families of these prisoners have reported that family members have been put under pressure not to inform about the process of the case and the issued rulings.

Ambiguities About the 10-Year Prison Sentence

One of the other notable points in this case is the issuance of a 10-year prison sentence for the charge of “assembly and collusion.” According to informed sources, the determined punishment for this charge is beyond the punishment foreseen in the law, and this matter is also among the ambiguities raised about the process of handling this case. These sources believe that examining this part of the case also requires further clarification from the judicial authorities.

The issuance of death sentences for Mehdi Nazer and Mahnaz Chardouli as well as the conviction of Atefeh Nazer to 10 years in prison has turned the case of these three detainees of the 2025-2026 protests into one of the newest cases related to the issuance of heavy rulings against political prisoners.

Alongside the issued rulings, the raised ambiguities about the documents of the charges, the amount of punishment determined for some charges, and reports related to pressure on families are among the issues that have drawn the attention of human rights institutions and public opinion to this case.

Examination of the Rights of the Case Based on Domestic Laws Introduction

Regardless of the extensive criticisms of human rights institutions regarding the laws and procedures of handling political and security cases, even based on domestic laws, judicial authorities are obligated to observe the principles of fair trial, the right to defense, proportionality of punishment, and handling based on sufficient evidence. Therefore, examining this case based on domestic laws can also help clarify some legal ambiguities.

Legal Ambiguities of the Case

The documents of the raised charges, including the claim of attacking a mosque, have not been published publicly. Reports have been raised regarding the lack of public information about the occurrence of a gathering or attack on the date of the arrest of these individuals. Questions have been raised about the basis for determining a 10-year prison sentence for the charge of “assembly and collusion.” Reports have been published about exerting pressure on families to refrain from informing.

Related Legal Articles

Article 32 of the Constitution: The arrest of individuals must be carried out in accordance with the law and with observance of legal formalities.

Article 34 of the Constitution: The right to seek justice is one of the basic rights of all citizens.

Article 35 of the Constitution: The accused has the right to choose a lawyer and enjoy effective defense.

Article 37 of the Constitution: The principle is innocence and no one is recognized as a criminal unless his crime is proven in a competent court.

Article 38 of the Constitution: Any torture for obtaining confession or gaining information is prohibited.

Article 39 of the Constitution: Violating the dignity of arrested or imprisoned individuals is prohibited.

Instances of Law Violation

In case the published reports are proven, the following cases may require examination: Failure to observe the principle of proportionality between the charge and the punishment. The necessity of presenting sufficient evidence for the attributed charges. Examination of the possibility of full access of the accused to defense rights. Examination of reports related to pressure on the families of the accused.

Which Human Rights Laws Have Been Violated in This Case? Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Right to life and personal security Issuing death sentences in cases where ambiguities have been raised about the trial process or its documents is considered from the perspective of the right to life by human rights institutions.

Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights– Right to enjoy a fair trial The trial must be conducted by an independent, impartial court with full observance of defense rights.

Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights– Right to a fair trial This article emphasizes access to a lawyer, sufficient opportunity for defense, fair trial, and observance of the rights of the accused in all stages of the proceedings.

Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights– Right to life In countries where the death penalty is established, the implementation of this punishment must only be carried out after precise observance of fair trial guarantees and within the framework of international commitments.

See also the below articles:

Follow Iran Human Rights Society on social networks:
Telegram /Twitter /Instagram / YouTube / Facebook

Join Iran Human Rights Society on Twitter