Execution of Aghil Keshavarz Highlights Post-War Escalation of Espionage Prosecutions in Iran
Iranian authorities announced the execution of Aghil Keshavarz, a 27-year-old architecture student, on Saturday morning, December 20.
Iranian authorities announced the execution of Aghil Keshavarz, a 27-year-old architecture student, on Saturday morning, 20 December, on charges of “espionage for Israel” and “imaging military and security sites.” The case is politically significant, reflecting Iran’s broader post-war security strategy following its recent confrontation with Israel and an intensified focus on alleged internal threats.
According to the Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mr. Keshavarz was arrested in May 2025 in the city of Urmia, after an army protection patrol allegedly caught him photographing the headquarters of an infantry division. Authorities further claimed that he had conducted “missions” in Tehran, Isfahan, Urmia, and Shahroud, framing the case not as an isolated incident but as part of a coordinated intelligence network operating across multiple strategic locations. No publicly verifiable evidence or court documentation has been released to substantiate these allegations.
Mr. Keshavarz was sentenced to death in late summer by Branch One of the Revolutionary Court of Urmia, presided over by Judge Sajad Dousti. The handling of the case follows a familiar pattern in Iran’s national security prosecutions, where espionage cases are processed swiftly, largely out of public view, and presented as matters of existential threat to the state. The absence of detailed judicial disclosures appears structural rather than incidental, reinforcing the judiciary’s function as a component of Iran’s security architecture, particularly during periods of heightened regional tension.
State-affiliated media coverage further underscores the political framing of the case. According to Mizan, the judiciary’s official news agency, Mr. Keshavarz initially studied mining engineering before continuing his education in architecture. Notably, Mizan emphasized his family’s political background, stating that some relatives held monarchist sympathies and that his uncle had a history of membership or support for the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK). The inclusion of these details—despite their indirect relevance to the specific charges—aligns with a longstanding state narrative that conflates espionage, opposition movements, and exile-based groups into a single externalized threat.
This framing serves multiple objectives. Domestically, it reinforces the perception that foreign intelligence operations are deeply embedded within Iranian society, providing justification for heightened surveillance and internal security measures. Externally, it signals resolve to adversaries by demonstrating that alleged collaboration with Israel carries the maximum possible penalty, particularly in the aftermath of direct military confrontation.
According to the Kurdistan Human Rights Network, Mr. Keshavarz was initially detained by the Intelligence Organization of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, before being transferred to Evin Prison in Tehran and later to Urmia Central Prison, where his sentence was ultimately carried out. The prominent role of the IRGC’s intelligence arm highlights how espionage cases are primarily managed by security institutions rather than civilian judicial mechanisms.
The execution comes in the aftermath of the 12-day war between Iran and Israel, a conflict Iranian officials have repeatedly described as revealing the depth of Israeli intelligence penetration inside Iran. Since the end of the conflict, authorities have announced the arrest, prosecution, and execution of multiple individuals accused of espionage, suggesting a deliberate effort to reassert deterrence, project internal stability, and suppress dissent or perceived collaboration during a volatile regional moment.
In this context, executions function not only as judicial outcomes but also as political signals—directed at domestic audiences, regional rivals, and opposition groups abroad. The emphasis on espionage charges, family political history, and national security narratives reflects a broader state strategy aimed at consolidating power and shaping the post-war narrative around vigilance, resistance, and control.
Iran is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which restricts the use of the death penalty to the “most serious crimes” and requires adherence to basic fair-trial guarantees. Critics argue that Iran’s handling of espionage cases—particularly in Revolutionary Courts characterized by closed proceedings and limited transparency—raises persistent questions about the politicization of justice in national security cases.