Urmia; The Judicial Review Request for Mehrab Abdollahzadeh Was Rejected by the Supreme Court; The Risk of Executing His Death Sentence Is Serious
February 18, 2026; The judicial review for Mehrab Abdollahzadeh, a Kurdish political prisoner sentenced to death and one of the detainees of the “Jin, Jiyan, Azadi” revolutionary uprising, was rejected by Branch 39 of the Supreme Court, and despite the registration of a renewed judicial review, Branch 39 of the Supreme Court refused to issue an order to stay the execution of the verdict.
December 30, 2025; The death sentence of Mehrab Abdollahzadeh was temporarily stayed and his case was referred back to the Supreme Court for re-examination. This sentence, which had previously been upheld by the Supreme Court on November 16, 2025, and after becoming final, had been referred to the Criminal Sentences Execution Unit of Urmia prison for execution, is being reviewed once again in the Supreme Court following the protest of the case lawyers and the submission of a new bill of objection.
December 20, 2025, Kurdpa published; Branch 9 of the Supreme Court has upheld the death sentence of Mehrab Abdollahzadeh, who is held in the Central Prison of Urmia, and this sentence has been notified to this political prisoner in recent days.
December 24, 2025; Following the confirmation of his death sentence in the Supreme Court and the serious danger of their son's execution, the family of Mehrab Abdollahzadeh requested urgent help from human rights organizations and global officials by publishing a video message and demanded a stay of the death sentence execution and a re-examination of the case in a fair and transparent judicial process; the father, mother, and brother of Mehrab, emphasizing his innocence while describing the difficult and critical conditions of the family, spoke about the oppression and injustices imposed on him during his detention and judicial proceedings and, pointing to physical and mental torture, the lack of valid evidence and documents against him, and judicial pressures that led to taking forced confessions, emphasized the need for immediate intervention by international organizations to prevent the execution of this unjust sentence; the family of Mehrab stated that their demand is not merely to stop the death sentence, but they want a fair re-trial of the case based on real evidence.
Kurdpa on December 25, 2025, in an exclusive report, citing a conversation with one of the relatives of Mehrab Abdollahzadeh, reliable field information, and a detailed examination of the judgment issued by Branch 9 of the Supreme Court as well as the documents of the court of first instance, addressed the details of this case and announced that Mehrab Abdollahzadeh is under a serious and imminent risk of the death sentence execution while a set of warning signs, including the sentence becoming final and enforceable in the Supreme Court, the referral of the case to the Criminal Sentences Execution Unit, and the blocking of his bank card, which usually occur on the eve of a death sentence execution according to Iranian judicial procedure, have severely increased concerns about the life of this political prisoner; this is while, according to these investigations, his death sentence was issued and upheld after a completely unfair process, a process that extended from arbitrary detention and torture to taking forced confessions, deprivation of the right to access a lawyer, ignoring the defendant's defense, indifference to requests for examining technical evidence, and finally issuing and consolidating the verdict based on “the judge’s knowledge,” which resulted in a judgment full of gross contradictions; contradictions that were not only left unresolved but instead of being interpreted in favor of the defendant's life, were used to consolidate the death sentence, turning this case into a clear example of the systematic use of torture and security scenario-building in the judicial process, in a way that confessions under torture replaced independent evidentiary proof, the personal opinion of the judge took the place of truth-finding, and a political prisoner, as the only available defendant, became the victim of a case in which dozens of its other defendants were never prosecuted or held accountable.
