Execution of Mehrdad Mohammadinia: Secret and Hasty in Less Than 5 Months from Arrest to Execution Under-the-Table Receipt of 2.6 Billion Tomans by the Public Defender for the Supreme Court Appeal
June 15, 2026; The secret and hasty execution of Mehrdad Mohammadinia, one of the protesters arrested in December 2025/January 2026, was carried out in a process lasting less than 5 months from arrest to the execution of the sentence, within a completely unfair judicial proceeding; a trial that heavily relied on forced confessions and the official state narrative.
In this process, issues such as barring chosen lawyers from entering the case, the absence of any evidence for the charge of "espionage", the refutation of the "arson" charge by CCTV footage, and the addition of new charges leading to the death sentence outside the framework of the indictment and interrogation results, were all pointed out in the Supreme Court appeal text of Mehrdad Mohammadinia. However, they were completely ignored during the judicial process and within the official narrative. Together, these factors present a picture of a completely biased and distorted process within the judicial and security apparatus which, according to this report, serves to issue death sentences against protesters and establish an atmosphere of intimidation and repression in society.
Furthermore, in this case, a public defender named "Younes Karimi" secretly received an amount of 2 billion and 600 million Tomans from his relatives for the Supreme Court appeal; a matter raised within the framework of this case as an example of concealment and the instrumental use of legal procedures.
This report has been prepared based on documents obtained by Kurdpa from Mehrdad Mohammadinia's Supreme Court appeal petition submitted by the public defender, as well as documents related to the lawyer's identity and the illegally received amount, alongside interviews with several informed sources. These documents and the identities of the sources remain confidential with Kurdpa.
Mehrdad Mohammadinia: A Simple Kurdish Worker in the Tehran Fruit and Vegetable Market
An informed source, in an interview with Kurdpa, begins their words as follows: Mehrdad was a simple Kurdish worker at the Tehran fruit and vegetable market who had come to Tehran from Qorveh for work and lived right there at his workplace. He was single and occasionally traveled back and forth to his hometown to visit his family.
Documents obtained by Kurdpa show that Mehrdad Mohammadinia, 27 years old and from Serishabad, Qorveh, belonged to the working and vulnerable class of society. The case documents explicitly state that he was "lacking political insight" and completely uninformed from a "scientific, political literacy, and social media" perspective. Furthermore, according to an inquiry from the Traffic Police, his sole asset was an installment-purchased Pride car, for which one installment was still remaining at the time of his arrest. His family also lived in the village of Faslan, Qorveh, under harsh livelihood conditions, getting by with only two cows.
Barring Chosen Lawyers from the Case and the State's Appointment of a Government-Affiliated Public Defender:
The exact date of Mehrdad Mohammadinia's arrest is not precisely mentioned in the existing documents and was not referenced in the appeal petition either; however, what is clear is that he was arrested in connection with the protests of January 9 in Tehran.
Kurdpa's informed source says; the security and judicial apparatuses did not specify at what stage of detention a government-affiliated public defender was appointed for Mehrdad Mohammadinia. At the beginning of the case, a female public defender was appointed, and she had even submitted several petitions during the interrogation phase. They believe that she defended Mehrdad adequately, but later the family was informed that this lawyer had been set aside from the case and another public defender had replaced her.
Concurrently, his relatives attempted to bring several chosen lawyers into the case, either individually or jointly, to work on the file alongside the public defender, but none of the chosen lawyers were permitted entry into the case.
This source adds; the public defender did not visit him in prison even once and never spoke with his client, not even for a few seconds. The Supreme Court appeal petition reflected only a part of the reality of the case and the statements raised in the preliminary court, while Mehrdad's own defenses and explanations were essentially not reflected in it.
This process demonstrates that even public defenders are being selected and replaced to work on these cases so that the government's narrative and the utilization of the execution cycle against protesters proceed in accordance with the security narratives within the structure of repression, intimidation, and the securitization of society.
"Younes Karimi", a First-Class Government-Affiliated Public Defender, and the Secret Receipt of 2.6 Billion Tomans:
"Younes Karimi", a first-class attorney-at-law with license number "23616", was the second government-affiliated public defender in this case following the removal and replacement of the first lawyer. He is from "Karaj" in Alborz province, and his law firm operates in Azimiyeh, Karaj. He is also among the figures appearing on the programs of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), and his Instagram page displays this media presence; the same media that has repeatedly been accused of broadcasting forced confessions of detainees and reproducing security narratives.
Based on documents obtained by Kurdpa, during the handling of Mehrdad Mohammadinia's security case, a private, secret, and illegal contract was concluded between the case attorney "Younes Karimi" and the relatives of this prisoner. This document reveals that contrary to the standard and claimed procedure of the judiciary stating that government-appointed public defenders have no right to receive any funds under titles such as attorney fees, tips, or legal expenses from the defendant or their family, this lawyer secretly forced Mehrdad's relatives behind the scenes to sign a private paper contract outside the electronic judicial system (SANA) in order to accept the representation and register the Supreme Court appeal petition.
The amount of this contract was 2 billion and 600 million Tomans and was not registered in the electronic system of the judiciary. Additionally, no tax stamps (the judiciary's share) were canceled for it. As a result, the judge or the judicial system could not become aware of the existence of such a payment through official and systemic documents. In this manner, by using this method, the lawyer bypassed the law prohibiting the receipt of funds in public defense representation, evaded paying legal taxes, and carried out a massive financial exploitation of the critical situation of a rural and working-class family whose son was on the verge of execution.
Kurdpa's informed source says legally, a public defender must be appointed free of charge by the government and has no right to receive any amount. Therefore, it is impossible that the court was aware of this hidden financial contract because no stamps were canceled for attorney fees.
Nonetheless, Mehrdad's relatives secured this amount through any hardship possible and placed it at the lawyer's disposal. Furthermore, during each visit or conversation with the lawyer, they were forced to prepare souvenirs and even Quarter Gold Coins for him. The family says the lawyer told them that if the money was not paid, he would not carry out the Supreme Court appeal for the case.
According to Article 348 of the Criminal Procedure Code, in crimes whose punishments involve the deprivation of life (such as execution), life imprisonment, or amputation, the defendant must have a lawyer, and if they do not introduce a lawyer themselves, the court is obliged to appoint a public defender.
In the normal and legal process, when a lawyer enters a case as a "public defender", they receive an official notification from the court stating that they are the public defender. In this scenario, since there is no financial contract between the lawyer and the defendant, no amount is registered as an attorney fee in the SANA system, and consequently, no tax stamp is canceled. Therefore, upon observing the absence of a contract and stamps, the judge and the judicial system assume the lawyer is operating free of charge (funded by the state budget) and that no payment has taken place between the family and the lawyer.
Issuance of the Death Sentence Based on Forced Confessions and a Minutes-Long Trial Lacking Even the Public Defender's Presence and Defense:
On February 21, 2026, and only 44 days after the arbitrary detention of "Mehrdad Mohammadinia", "Ashkan Maleki", and "Arman Marefati", the Mizan News Agency, the media outlet of the Islamic Republic of Iran's judiciary, published news, images, and a 1-minute-and-48-second video of the court session of these three political prisoners in Branch 15 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court. This session was introduced under the title of "the case of the defendants accused of burning and destroying the Jafari Mosque and Imam Hadi Seminary in Koy-e Nasr".
This was the first time that the news of these individuals' arrest was publicized in the media. In these images, all three political prisoners are seen in the court wearing prison uniforms. Mizan News Agency claimed that the court was held in the presence of the counselor, lawyers, the prosecutor's representative, and certain individuals related to the case.
In this news, Mehrdad was introduced as the second-tier defendant, and only two sentences were published regarding him: "Mehrdad Mohammadinia, son of Moharram, stood in the stand by the judge's order and was arraigned." "The defendant accepted his presence in the riots and at the mosque location during his defense."
The bulk of the news was dedicated to the statements of the prosecutor's representative, the Jafari Mosque, the mosque's background, and the accusations, while no explanation was provided regarding the defenses of the prisoners and the lawyers, and its narrative is highly ambiguous.
In the 1-minute-and-48-second video, about 25 seconds are dedicated to the remarks of the prosecutor's representative (with a blurred face) and another 25 seconds to another individual who is presumably the mosque custodian, who also has a blurred face and explains the entry of individuals into the mosque without mentioning names.
Following that, about 40 seconds of Ashkan Maleki's words are displayed, in which he notes that security forces did not touch him and expresses regret for setting motorcycles on fire. Furthermore, in the final 10 seconds, Mehrdad Mohammadinia addresses the judge, saying: "Mr. Judge, I took responsibility for the act I mentioned, and when I entered the atmosphere, I got carried away by the hype, and now I am truly regretful."
In the images published from this court, only individuals wearing black uniforms with covered faces are seen behind and around the prisoners, alongside the prosecutor's representative and presumably the mosque custodian. However, there is no trace of lawyers, families, or independent individuals, and even the judge's face is not shown.
This process, within the framework of the official government narrative and without providing other evidence or guaranteeing the prisoners' legal rights, and without displaying the right to defense, indicates on one hand the reliance of the judicial apparatus and security institutions in execution cases on forced confessions under pressure and torture; a matter that has been pointed out in numerous reports by prisoners and human rights sources, indicating an unfair and hasty process in issuing and executing death sentences.
Furthermore, none of the documentation and reasons mentioned in the Supreme Court appeal document, and even in the public defender's petition after the issuance of Mehrdad Mohammadinia's death sentence, are visible in this court, the published video, or the official news. Therefore, the forced confession video and the Mizan News Agency report are the only documents published by the Islamic Republic and the judicial system, effectively reflecting the official government narrative.
Issuance of Mehrdad Mohammadinia's Death Sentence Despite the Absence of Proving Evidence and the Existence of Refuting Proofs:
Mehrdad Mohammadinia was sentenced to death in the preliminary court on April 21, 2026, by Branch 15 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court of Tehran (whose current head is Judge Salavati). This sentence was notified to his lawyer on May 23, 2026.
The communicated charges that led to the death sentence against him in court, through a heavy extension of security laws and under the provisions of Article 1 of the Law on Intensifying the Punishment of Espionage, resulted in the maximum punishment, namely execution. The accusatory titles mentioned in the Supreme Court appeal document were:
"Participation in operational actions contrary to the country's security for the Zionist regime, the hostile government of America, hostile groups, and their affiliated agents, resulting in terror, intimidation, and making society insecure, and entering religious and sacred places with the intent to destroy and set fire to public and private properties, including a mosque and seminary, while being at war with the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran".
On April 29, 2026, "Younes Karimi" referred his Supreme Court appeal to the Supreme Court through the Electronic Judicial Services Office after secretly receiving 2 billion and 600 million Tomans. The grounds for the appeal regarding Mehrdad Mohammadinia's innocence and the rejection of the baseless accusations, via presenting material evidence, witness testimony, and formal defects, were stated as follows:
A) Legal and Formal Defect / Discrepancy of Court Charges with the Prosecutor's Office Indictment (Lack of Arraignment) The lawyer points out in paragraph 2 of the petition that the trial process suffers from a serious formal issue. Specifically, during the prosecutor's office stage and in the text of the indictment and the issued subpoena to trial, Mehrdad was merely accused of "destroying the mosque and a portion of property".
However, after the case entered the court, the Revolutionary Court suddenly added the heavy charge of "burning down the seminary" to the case and the judgment sheet during the verdict issuance stage. The lawyer writes: "An accusation for which the client was never investigated during the prosecutor's office stage and faced absolutely no arraignment was suddenly added to the client's accusatory counts in the judgment sheet."
B) Absence of Any Evidence for the Charge of "Espionage" (Rejection of Prior Intent and Organization) In the entire case file, there is no evidence, document, confession, or witness indicating that Mehrdad had connections with "hostile" countries, received orders from them, or acted to engage in "espionage". The text of the petition states:
"Mehrdad was completely unaware of the January 8 and 9 calls. Since his place of residence was very close to the gathering location and the street, he had come out to the top of the street for shopping and appeared in the gathering wearing casual home clothing. He suddenly found himself inside the surge of the crowd and went along with them."
The lawyer argues that this type of presence in casual clothing and near his home demonstrates that he appeared without intent, without prior purpose, without coordination, and without orders from specific individuals or "hostile states", and his actions stemmed merely from "momentary excitement in a tense atmosphere", "youthful fervor", "getting carried away by the hype", and protesting "economic conditions", rather than an intention to overthrow the regime. Furthermore, "there is no document or witness in the case indicating the client's connection with hostile countries, receiving orders from foreigners, or any action aligned with espionage." From another perspective, due to a lack of political literacy, he had absolutely no understanding of concepts such as confronting the sovereignty or overthrowing the regime.
C) Rejection of the Accusation of Burning Down the Mosque by Mehrdad Mohammadinia Contrary to the court's claim regarding the burning of the mosque by Mehrdad, the existing documentations in the case refute this accusation; Mehrdad only confessed that under the influence of the atmosphere he "broke a few windows of the mosque" and explicitly denied "burning the mosque, breaking the door, setting fire to the trash bin, or tearing down traffic signs".
D) Proving Innocence Regarding Burning Down the Seminary (Substantiated by Cameras and Custodian's Testimony) The most important reason showing that the accusation of burning down the seminary directed at Mehrdad is baseless is the conspicuous discrepancy in the visual documentation:
The custodian of the seminary (Imam Hadi) explicitly declared in his testimony that the individuals who entered the seminary to set it on fire wore black T-shirts. Meanwhile, by citing the footage of the CCTV cameras of the Fruit and Vegetable Organization (Mehrdad's workplace), the lawyer proved that Mehrdad wore a navy-blue or bow-tied hoodie on the day of the gatherings and upon exiting. This document shows that he was not present at the seminary location at all.
Mehrdad Mohammadinia:
Kurdpa's informed source says; Mehrdad was a simple Kurdish worker at the Tehran fruit and vegetable market who had come to Tehran from Qorveh for work, slept and lived right there at his workplace, and was a very simple person. He was single and occasionally went to his hometown to see his family.
Documents obtained by Kurdpa regarding the identity of Mehrdad Mohammadinia, son of Moharram, 27 years old with a Shia sect background, describe him as belonging to the working and vulnerable class of society. He was a Kurdish citizen from the district of "Serishabad", Qorveh, in Kurdistan province. He held a self-employed job in Tehran as a worker in the fruit and vegetable market.
The document explicitly states that he "possesses absolutely no political literacy and lacks formal education", "it is evident that the client was illiterate both from a scientific and political literacy standpoint, as well as regarding social media", and "lacked political insight" and the maturity required to comprehend the consequences of his actions on a macro-political and security level.
Based on an inquiry from the Traffic Police, his entire wealth "consists only of a Pride car that he bought in installments, and at the time of arrest, one installment was still remaining".
His father belongs to the respected families of veterans, and his family lives in the village without a job, "making a living solely through two cows". His place of residence is registered as the village of Faslan, Serishabad district of Qorveh county in Kurdistan province.
Mass Execution of Mehrdad Mohammadinia and Ashkan Maleki:
According to a report by the Mizan News Agency, affiliated with the judiciary, Ashkan Maleki and Mehrdad Mohammadinia, who were arrested in connection with the January 9 protests in Tehran, were executed on May 31, 2026. In the reports published in this regard, no reference was made to the location of the sentence execution; nonetheless, informed sources told Iran Human Rights that the death sentences of these two individuals were carried out in Qezel Hesar Prison in Karaj. The execution of Mehrdad Mohammadinia and Ashkan Maleki, Kurdish citizens, was carried out secretly and without prior notice to their families, and they were deprived of a final meeting with their families. Ashkan Maleki and Mehrdad Mohammadinia were Kurdish citizens from the city of Qorveh in Kurdistan province.
Mehrdad Mohammadinia's case reveals new dimensions of the Islamic Republic's use of execution for crimes against humanity and its instrumental use as the most violent tool of repression and public intimidation in society. A hasty and completely unfair process where new charges that lead to execution can be introduced into the file against defendants at any stage of the case handling.
On the other hand, chosen lawyers are barred from entering the cases of those sentenced to death, and information regarding the cases is blocked from being listed in the media and human rights organizations. Furthermore, selective choices even from among the public/government defenders chosen by the state, alongside the rapid removal of public defenders who attempt to review the case's aspects slightly more fairly, both provide a ground for corruption for public defenders and show that the repressive and judicial apparatus of the Islamic Republic rapidly concluded from the political event and protests of 2025 that a number of individuals must be executed.
In this process, through executing the sentences as quickly, secretly, and hastily as possible with the concealment of all شواهد (evidence) and marks, and even by barring the defense of prisoners, attempts have been made to prevent the registration and durability of documents for the future.
Compiled by: Awin Mostafazadeh
