dw.com
Record High Executions in Iran in 2024
A new report reveals at least 975 executions in Iran during 2024, the highest number in over two decades, including a record 31 women, many for drug offenses or self-defense; the UN's continued collaboration with Iran is raising concerns.
- What is the overall significance of the record-high number of executions in Iran during 2024?
- Iran executed at least 975 people in 2024, the highest number in over 20 years, according to a report by the Iran Human Rights (IHR) organization and Ensemble Contre la Peine de Mort (ECPM). This includes a record number of women (31), some of whom killed their husbands in self-defense against rape or forced marriage. Over half of the executions (503) were for drug-related offenses.
- How does the UN's continued cooperation with Iran on drug-related issues relate to the high number of executions for drug-related crimes?
- The surge in executions, particularly those for drug-related crimes, reflects a broader pattern of human rights abuses in Iran. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime's continued collaboration with Iranian authorities despite this alarming trend raises serious ethical concerns. The high number of executions in the final three months of 2024, coinciding with heightened tensions between Iran and Israel, suggests the death penalty is used as an instrument of repression.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of the Iranian regime's use of the death penalty as a means of political repression, and what are the prospects for future change?
- The ongoing executions in Iran, coupled with the lack of international attention, may embolden the Iranian regime to continue its use of capital punishment as a tool of repression. The significant social change marked by prisoners' weekly protests against the death penalty, though, offers a glimmer of hope. International pressure, including sanctions and diplomatic efforts, might be necessary to push Iran to reform its legal system and abolish capital punishment.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article overwhelmingly frames the issue as a severe human rights violation, using strong language such as "alarmant trend" and "instrument of repression." The headline (if there were one) would likely reinforce this negative framing. The inclusion of the protests from prisoners and human rights activists significantly emphasizes the negative aspects of the situation and downplays any counter-arguments. The introduction also heavily emphasizes the high number of executions, setting a negative tone for the article.
Language Bias
The article employs strong emotional language like "alarmant trend," "instrument of repression," and "severe human rights violation." Words like "zloglasnog" (notorious), when describing the Evin prison, contribute to a strongly negative portrayal. Neutral alternatives would include phrases like "high number of executions," "method of social control," and "violation of human rights." The overall tone is accusatory and lacks objectivity. The repeated use of phrases like 'repression' and 'osveta' (revenge) significantly skews the narrative.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the number of executions and the involvement of international organizations, but it could benefit from including diverse perspectives, such as the Iranian government's official stance on capital punishment and its justifications. Additionally, exploring the specific crimes for which these executions were carried out, beyond drug-related offenses, would provide a more comprehensive picture. While the article mentions political activists, it lacks specific examples or details. The article also omits information on potential legal reforms or discussions within Iran regarding capital punishment.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a clear dichotomy between human rights organizations' condemnation of Iran's actions and the UNODC's continued cooperation with Iranian authorities. While this contrast highlights the tension, it could benefit from exploring potential complexities and nuances in the UNODC's position, such as the potential benefits and limitations of continued engagement. The article also presents a simplified view of the Iranian government's actions, implying that the executions are solely an act of repression and ignoring potential internal political factors driving these actions.
Gender Bias
While the article highlights the increase in executions of women, it does not delve deeply into the underlying gender biases contributing to these cases. While it mentions some women were killed for defending themselves against rape or forced marriage, more analysis of the societal and legal context that leads to these specific instances would be beneficial. Comparing the treatment of men and women accused of similar crimes would offer a stronger analysis of gender bias. The article mentions women protestors, but doesn't explore if their gender played a role in their targeting or sentencing.
Sustainable Development Goals
The report highlights a significant increase in executions in Iran, exceeding 975 in 2024. This surge, including executions for drug-related offenses and those seemingly politically motivated, undermines the rule of law, justice, and human rights, thus negatively impacting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The use of the death penalty as a tool of repression further exacerbates this negative impact.