Iran’s death row executions: systemic suppression of dissent under militarised state violence

Iran’s execution practices target ethnic minorities like Kurds, Baloch, and Ahwazi Arabs, whose traditional lands are rich in resources coveted by the state. Indigenous legal systems in these regions often prioritise restorative justice over punitive measures, but these are systematically dismantled by the Iranian judiciary. The state’s use of capital punishment echoes colonial-era tactics to suppress cultural autonomy and land claims, framing dissent as existential threats to national unity.

Iran’s modern execution regime traces back to the 1988 mass killings of political prisoners, where thousands were hanged in weeks under Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa. The current wave of executions mirrors this pattern, with the IRGC and judiciary targeting leftists, ethnic activists, and journalists under the guise of 'national security.' Historical parallels exist in other authoritarian states, such as Turkey’s 1980s purges or Indonesia’s 1965-66 anti-communist massacres, where judicial violence was used to consolidate power.

Comparative studies show that militarised states often use capital punishment to eliminate political opponents, as seen in Saudi Arabia’s execution of Shi’a dissidents or Egypt’s post-2013 crackdowns. In Latin America, 'disappearances' and extrajudicial killings serve similar functions, blending legal and extralegal violence. Non-Western legal traditions, such as South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, offer alternatives to punitive justice, but these are rarely adopted in authoritarian contexts.

Research in political science links high execution rates to authoritarian regimes’ need to deter dissent and maintain elite cohesion, particularly in ethnically divided societies. Studies also show that sanctions can exacerbate state repression by reducing economic alternatives for marginalised groups, increasing their reliance on illicit networks and radicalisation. The IRGC’s control over Iran’s economy—via front companies and smuggling—further entrenches its power, making judicial violence a cost-effective tool for social control.

Artists and poets in Iran’s ethnic minority regions often memorialise execution victims through music, poetry, and visual art, creating a counter-narrative to state propaganda. Sufi and Baha’i communities, despite persecution, use spiritual practices to resist state violence, framing executions as attacks on sacred life. In Kurdish culture, oral histories of martyrs are passed down as acts of defiance, preserving collective memory against erasure.

If current trends continue, Iran’s execution rate may rise as economic crises and geopolitical tensions fuel domestic unrest, particularly in resource-rich regions. A shift toward restorative justice models—like those in Rwanda’s gacaca courts—could reduce state violence but would require international pressure and domestic reform. The rise of digital surveillance and AI-driven repression (e.g., facial recognition) could further entrench judicial violence, making dissent even more perilous.

Ethnic minorities like Kurds, Baloch, and Ahwazi Arabs bear the brunt of Iran’s execution regime, with their leaders systematically targeted. Women’s rights activists, LGBTQ+ individuals, and religious minorities (e.g., Baha’is) are also disproportionately affected, facing charges like 'corruption on earth' or 'moharebeh' (waging war against God). International human rights organisations often amplify these voices but lack the cultural and linguistic access to fully document their experiences.