Amnesty Report Details Systemic Impunity for Iran Security Forces
A new investigation finds that Iran's judicial structure intentionally shields state agents from accountability for violations committed during the 2022 protests.
Key points
- Amnesty International states that impunity for human rights violations in Iran is systemic and intentional.
- Constitutional ties between the judiciary and the Supreme Leader place security cases under military jurisdiction.
- Legal exemptions allow state agents to avoid criminal liability for lethal force used during protests.
Four years after the nationwide uprising in Iran, a major human rights investigation has concluded that the country’s security forces continue to operate with near-total immunity. According to the report released by Amnesty International, the evasion of justice for unlawful killings and torture is not a result of procedural failure, but a feature deliberately embedded within the constitutional and legal framework.
The findings, detailed in a document titled "Architects of Atrocities," examine the mechanisms that allow state actors to escape criminal liability. The organization asserts that the judicial system is neither willing nor able to deliver justice for crimes against humanity, describing the current state of affairs as systemic and intentional rather than accidental.
Judicial Structure Protects Security Branches
The investigation traces the root of this protection to the appointment powers held by the Supreme Leader. Under Iranian constitutional provisions, the head of the judiciary is appointed and can be dismissed by the Supreme Leader, who also serves as commander-in-chief of the armed forces. This concentration of power means that the judicial branch lacks independence from the security apparatus it is meant to oversee.
Furthermore, cases involving alleged crimes by security personnel are routed to military courts. According to the report, official directives require that a significant portion of judges and prosecutors in these bodies be members of the armed forces, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and police. This structural overlap effectively places the accused under the jurisdiction of their own colleagues.
Legal Provisions Shield State Agents
Beyond the judicial structure, specific laws provide additional layers of protection. The Law on the Use of Firearms permits the use of lethal force in situations that fall well below international standards. Crucially, Article 12 of this law exempts state agents from civil or criminal liability if the use of force is deemed lawful by the authorities.
The report highlights the case of Mehdi Babrnejad, who was killed in Ghouchan in 2022. A military court ruled that security forces were entitled to use firearms and assigned partial fault to the victim for participating in unrest. Consequently, the case was resolved through a reduced payment of blood money rather than a criminal conviction, demonstrating how the legal framework can neutralize individual responsibility for potentially unlawful killings.
Victims Face Systemic Dead Ends
The practical effect of this system is a climate of silence among victims' families. According to the investigation, most families refrain from filing complaints, citing the futility of seeking justice from a judiciary integrated into the security apparatus. Those who do pursue legal action frequently encounter immediate dismissal of their claims, with officials often attributing deaths to accidents or suicide within days of the incidents.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran, which published the material, emphasizes that these findings underscore a broader pattern of state-sponsored violence. The report suggests that the lack of accountability is not merely a gap in enforcement but a deliberate policy choice designed to maintain the power of the security state. As international attention remains focused on the region, the question of whether external pressure can alter this entrenched legal reality remains open.
