Execution of “Ayoub Mohammad Nabil” Carried Out in Silence

The death sentence of Ayoub Mohammad Nabil, a 28-year-old Iraqi citizen, was carried out in silence and without public announcement by the judicial authorities of the Islamic Republic, at Lakan Prison in Rasht. This case, alongside multiple reports of secret executions in Iran, raises serious questions once again about government concealment, the denial of timely information to families, and the lack of transparency regarding the fate of prisoners sentenced to death.

The execution of a human being behind prison walls, without public notification and in the absence of transparency about the process of carrying out the sentence, is not merely the end of one prisoner’s life; it can plunge a family into grief and uncertainty and deprive society of the right to know the truth. A recent report by the human rights organization Hengaw regarding the secret execution of Ayoub Mohammad Nabil at Lakan Prison in Rasht has once again highlighted the concern that executions in Iran may be carried out before the public becomes aware of the fate of the condemned.

According to the report, Ayoub Mohammad Nabil, a 28-year-old Arab citizen from the city of Haditha in Iraq, was executed in the morning on Sunday, October 19, 1405 (Mehr 19) in the Islamic calendar, corresponding to October 11, 2026, at Rasht Central Prison. The organization states that his sentence was carried out following his conviction on the charge of “waging war through espionage for proxy groups supported by Saudi Arabia”; a charge that Nabil had, according to previous reports, rejected.

Nabil was arrested on September 4, 1404 (Shahrivar 4) in Fouman and was held for approximately five months at the Rasht Information Agency detention facility. He was transferred to solitary confinement the Thursday before his execution, a period that involved physical and psychological torture.

Hengaw claims that Nabil’s security file was related to his religious identity as a Sunni Muslim, his appearance, and his teaching of the Quran to local children. These claims have not been independently verified publicly, but they underscore the importance of transparent investigation of the case and publication of judicial documents; particularly when the outcome of that investigation is the deprivation of a human being’s right to life.

It should be noted that the judicial authorities and government media had not publicly announced Nabil’s execution until the publication of this report. This very silence raises a fundamental question: why should news of a prisoner’s execution first be published through a human rights organization rather than through transparent and official channels of communication?

Secret executions, particularly when the family and lawyer are not informed of the time of execution, limit the possibility of pursuing the prisoner’s final requests, a final visit, and independent review of the conditions under which the sentence was carried out. This method can also subject families to shock, uncertainty, and distress, and deprive them of the possibility of seeking accountability regarding the judicial process.

This concern is not limited to Nabil’s case. Human Rights Watch stated in a September 2026 report on executions of protesters in Iran that authorities in some cases carried out death sentences without prior notice to families or lawyers of the condemned. This organization, citing several specific cases, warned of prisoners being deprived of final visits and the severe psychological consequences of this practice for families.

The Guardian’s report in May 2026 also addressed the increase in reports of secret executions in Iran, stating that human rights organizations have reported executions being carried out without notifying families. These reports show that Nabil’s case did not emerge in a vacuum and that concerns about the secret execution of death sentences have a broader history.

Charges of espionage or cooperation with foreign groups are among the most serious charges that may be brought in a judicial system; however, the severity of the charge does not substitute for the necessity of proving it in an independent and fair court. In cases where death sentences are handed down, effective access to a lawyer, the ability to examine evidence, the right to appeal, and transparent notification are of vital importance.

When a prisoner rejects the charges brought against him and human rights organizations raise questions about the conditions of his detention and the investigation of his case, the proper response is not silence and concealment, but the publication of documents, explanation of the judicial process, and provision of means for independent review.

The judicial authorities of the Islamic Republic must clarify when Nabil’s family and lawyer were informed of the execution of the sentence, whether there was an opportunity for a final visit, and on what evidence the investigation of his case was based. Until such information is made public, serious questions about transparency and respect for the rights of the condemned remain.

A government that holds the power to take human lives must be accountable to public opinion. The execution of a death sentence in silence from the news, if accompanied by denying families prior notice and the absence of independent oversight, not only weakens judicial transparency but also makes it more difficult to examine violations of fundamental rights.

Under such circumstances, human rights organizations and independent media become one of the few channels for disseminating information about prisoners whose executions may not be reported through official channels. However, the responsibility for documentation should not rest solely on the shoulders of grieving families and civil organizations; the government is obligated to make information about death sentences and their execution transparent, verifiable, and accessible to the public.

The case of Ayoub Mohammad Nabil once again underscores the necessity of ending secret executions, ensuring prior notice to families and lawyers, guaranteeing access to fair trial, and independent oversight of the execution of death sentences.

A human life cannot be taken in silence and then escape accountability through silence. Every secret execution raises a fresh question about justice, transparency, and the right of families to know the truth; a question that the authorities of the Islamic Republic cannot escape forever.