At the highest rate in decades: How the iranian regime uses the gallows to suppress protests

As Iran’s streets boil with demands for change and waves of popular protests continue to surge intermittently amid the predicament of a U.S. confrontation, the “noose” has emerged as a central political instrument in the hands of the Iranian regime.

In Iran, the death penalty is not viewed merely as a criminal measure to deter crime; rather, it is a strategic weapon employed with precision for a single purpose: preserving the regime’s survival by instilling systematic fear and paralyzing society.

Shocking Figures: 2025 the Deadliest Year in Decades
Statistics and data issued by international human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International and the Iran Human Rights Organization (IHRNGO), indicate that 2025 witnessed a terrifying surge in executions.

At least 1,639 executions were officially recorded, while unofficial reports suggest the real figure may have exceeded 2,000 cases.

This marks the highest number recorded in the country since 1989, reflecting a state of heightened security alert within the authorities. With the beginning of 2026 specifically following the nationwide “January 2026” uprising the pace of executions accelerated further, extending to young protesters.

Death sentences were carried out against teenagers, including 19-year-old Saleh Mohammadi, who was executed in proceedings described by human rights organizations as “retaliatory” and lacking even the most basic standards of a fair trial.

The Psychology of Intimidation: How Execution Is Used Repressively
The Iranian regime relies on a strategy of “public terror” to achieve specific political objectives.

Executions whether carried out publicly in squares or heavily publicized through state media such as the judiciary-affiliated Mizan News Agency are intended to convey an implicit message to every citizen: the price of protest is your life.

This form of deterrence aims to break the morale of demonstrators before they even take to the streets.

Protesters are routinely brought before “Revolutionary Courts,” where verdicts are issued on vague charges imbued with religious and political overtones, such as “enmity against God” (moharebeh), “corruption on earth,” and “collaboration with foreign entities.” In these courts, confessions are extracted under physical and psychological torture, defendants are denied access to independent legal counsel, and rulings are issued in closed sessions that sometimes last no more than a few minutes.

Under direct instructions from the head of the judiciary, Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei, judges are urged to carry out sentences “swiftly and decisively.” The purpose of this urgency is to create a state of shock within society; executing a protester just weeks after arrest prevents the formation of strong international or domestic solidarity campaigns and renders death an immediate and inescapable reality.

Political Timing: Execution as a Safety Valve
Observers note that the Iranian regime intensifies executions during periods of major crises.

When external pressures mount such as military tensions with the United States and Israel or during complex nuclear negotiations the execution apparatus is deployed domestically to divert attention and secure the internal front through absolute repression.

It is an attempt to project the image of a “strong regime” that tolerates no internal dissent while confronting external challenges.

Targeting Specific Groups
While the Iranian machinery of repression does not discriminate between categories, it places particular focus on youth and teenagers to break the resolve of the new generation leading the protests, as well as activists, to prevent the convergence of human rights demands with national aspirations and to weaken elites capable of organizing the masses.

Eroding Legitimacy and Enduring Fear
The United Nations and its Special Rapporteurs have described this policy as a “systematic use of the death penalty as a tool of political killing.”

Although this approach may succeed in the short term in emptying the streets and creating a climate of fear, in the long run it deepens the rift between the regime and the population, turning each execution into new fuel for latent anger that could erupt at any moment.

The regime’s insistence on using the “gallows” instead of pursuing reform reflects a deep-seated conviction within Iran’s leadership that concession equates to collapse, and that intimidation is the only language capable of ensuring the continuity of power amid a legitimacy crisis unprecedented since the 1979 revolution.