In a move that has drawn international scrutiny and renewed debate over Iran’s use of capital punishment, Iranian authorities executed seven men on October 4, 2025, over a series of violent incidents that included the killing of security forces and a prominent cleric. The executions, which took place at dawn, were reported by multiple Iranian news agencies and confirmed by the judiciary’s official outlet, Mizan.
According to Reuters, six of those executed were identified as ethnic Arab separatists, accused by Iranian officials of carrying out armed attacks and bombings in the southwestern Khuzestan province. These attacks, which occurred in 2018 and 2019, resulted in the deaths of four security personnel—specifically, two police officers and two members of the Basij paramilitary force. The men were also said to have confessed to planning and executing acts of sabotage, including the making and planting of bombs and the destruction of the Khorramshahr gas station, as detailed by Mizan.
The seventh man executed was Saman Mohammadi Khiyareh, a Kurd who had been convicted in connection with the 2009 assassination of Mamousta Sheikh al-Islam, a pro-government Sunni cleric in the Kurdish city of Sanandaj. Iranian authorities accused Mohammadi of membership in terrorist and Takfiri groups—a term the government uses for Islamist militants—and of committing armed robberies, kidnappings, and the killing of a conscript. Mohammadi was reportedly arrested in 2013, years after the assassination, and had spent over a decade in detention before his execution.
Iranian officials have frequently alleged that such separatist and militant groups maintain ties to Israel, which the Islamic Republic refers to as the "Zionist regime." In these latest cases, the men were accused of acting as agents or proxies for foreign interests, with links to Israel specifically cited in official statements. Mizan reported, "The death sentence for six separatist terrorist elements, who in recent years had carried out a series of armed operations and bombings targeting security in Khuzestan province, was carried out at dawn today."
However, these allegations of foreign involvement are not universally accepted. Rights groups and activists have long argued that Tehran routinely invokes supposed foreign ties to delegitimize domestic dissent, particularly among Iran’s ethnic minorities. As Reuters notes, activists have questioned the legitimacy of the charges and convictions, especially in the case of Mohammadi Khiyareh. They point out that he was only 15 or 16 at the time of the assassination he was accused of, arrested at 19, and held for more than a decade before his execution. According to these advocates, Mohammadi’s conviction rested heavily on confessions extracted under torture—a practice they allege is common in Iran’s judicial system.
Amnesty International, one of the world’s leading human rights watchdogs, has expressed alarm at the scale and nature of executions in Iran. The organization reports that Iranian authorities have executed more than 1,000 people so far in 2025, marking the highest annual figure recorded by the group in at least 15 years. This surge in executions has cemented Iran’s position as the world’s second most prolific executioner, trailing only China, according to Amnesty International and other rights organizations.
The context surrounding these executions is as complex as it is fraught. Khuzestan province, where the six separatists were accused of operating, is home to a significant Arab minority and has been a flashpoint for unrest, often fueled by allegations of discrimination, economic marginalization, and heavy-handed security measures. The region’s strategic importance—rich in oil and bordering Iraq—has made it a focal point for both domestic and geopolitical tensions. Iranian authorities have historically responded to unrest in Khuzestan with a combination of force and rhetoric linking local militants to foreign adversaries, especially Israel and Saudi Arabia.
The case of Saman Mohammadi Khiyareh adds another layer of controversy. Kurdish activists and international rights groups have highlighted what they describe as deep flaws in his prosecution and sentencing. They argue that his youth at the time of the alleged crime, the protracted pre-trial detention, and the reported use of torture to obtain confessions all point to a miscarriage of justice. These concerns echo broader criticisms of Iran’s judicial process, particularly in cases involving ethnic minorities and politically sensitive charges such as “Moharebeh”—a religiously charged term meaning “waging war against God.”
The executions also come on the heels of another high-profile hanging less than a week earlier, in which Iranian authorities announced the execution of a man described as one of Israel’s top spies. This pattern of linking executions to alleged espionage and terrorism underscores a narrative often employed by the Iranian government: that internal dissent and violence are orchestrated by hostile foreign powers seeking to destabilize the country.
Iran’s use of the death penalty, especially for crimes deemed political or related to national security, has long been a point of contention between the Islamic Republic and the international community. Human rights organizations contend that many of these cases are marred by a lack of due process, coerced confessions, and closed-door trials. Amnesty International’s recent figures have only intensified calls for greater transparency and reform.
For its part, the Iranian government maintains that its actions are necessary to preserve national security and deter terrorism. Officials have repeatedly defended the use of capital punishment in cases involving violent attacks, sabotage, and what they characterize as threats to the state. In their view, swift and decisive justice is essential to maintaining order in a region beset by external threats and internal unrest.
Yet, as the number of executions climbs and the stories of those put to death become more widely known, the international spotlight on Iran’s justice system grows ever brighter. The executions of October 4, 2025, have become emblematic of the broader struggle between state security and human rights, between the imperatives of sovereignty and the demands for justice and accountability. Whether these actions will serve as a deterrent or further inflame tensions within Iran’s diverse and restive population remains to be seen.
With the world watching and the stakes as high as ever, Iran’s approach to dissent and punishment continues to raise difficult questions—questions that, for now, remain unanswered.
