On 22 April 2026, I had the honour of being present at the conference held at the European parliament in Brussels under the title Iran: Take Action to Stop Executions — Where Does the EU Stand?
At that conference, the president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, members of the European parliament, former Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt and many international figures made one point unmistakably clear: executions in Iran are not judicial punishments: they are political weapons.
Hunger strike protests by Iranian prisoners
One of the most powerful examples of courage inside Iran is the “No to Executions Tuesdays” campaign. For more than 118 consecutive weeks, prisoners across 56 prisons have carried out coordinated hunger strikes to protest against executions, torture and political repression. These prisoners have made clear that executions are not isolated legal punishments, but instruments of dictatorship. They describe a regime on a “war footing” against its own society. They speak of sham trials, enforced disappearances, denial of legal rights, and even the refusal to return the bodies of executed prisoners to their families.
But their demands go beyond stopping executions; a system built on executions cannot be reformed, they say, and must instead be confronted. They reject both foreign military intervention and political appeasement. They call instead for solidarity with the Iranian people and support for democratic change from within.
Change must come through the Iranian people
On 28 April 2026, a high-level conference titled Iran: Towards Peace and Freedom was convened at the Palace of Westminster, where British MPs, Lords, legal experts, and human rights advocates called for urgent action against Iran’s escalating numbers of executions and stronger support for democratic transition through the NCRI. The central concern was the Iranian judiciary’s adoption of a “wartime position,” which speakers said has led to a sharp rise in political executions, particularly against protesters, MEK/PMOI members, and dissidents.
In a keynote address, Maryam Rajavi said that the Iranian people are “paying the price of silence”. She argued that the regime’s executions are driven by fear of future uprisings and are intended to terrorise young people from joining organised resistance. She emphasised that change must come through the Iranian people and their organised resistance, not through foreign military intervention and not through a return to monarchy.
Bob Blackman MP and Lord Carlile emphasised that Iran will not be changed by airstrikes or foreign military intervention. They argued that democratic change must come through civil uprising and resistance units inside Iran, while Western governments should provide diplomatic backing and political legitimacy to that movement.
Lord Norton criticised successive UK governments for allowing Iranian diplomatic missions to function while allegedly supporting terrorism under diplomatic cover. He called for expelling Iranian diplomats and ending the protection of what he described as regime-led operations inside Britain. Several MPs also rejected the idea of restoring monarchy under Reza Pahlavi, arguing that Iran needs democratic republican transition, not a return to past dictatorship.
Return to monarchy is not a solution
In Brussels, Maryam Rajavi stated clearly that the regime is executing because it is afraid. But she warned that while the regime fears genuine organised resistance, it does not fear those who serve as distractions from real democratic change:
“The clerical regime has never regarded the remnants of the Shah’s regime as a threat to its own survival; indeed, its theorists argue that these remnants actually help sustain the regime.”
She described the project to restore the monarchy, promoted by “certain circles in the West”, as a dangerous political deception:
“This project is based on distortion, falsehoods, media and digital engineering, and the fabrication of astronomical figures. These theatrical displays will not bring a monarchical dictatorship back to Iran, but they will prolong the life of the current regime and create obstacles to its overthrow.”
This warning is critically important for western policymakers. A return to monarchy is not a solution; it is part of the problem.
As Rajavi emphasised: “The actions of the remnants of the Shah during the 2022 and 2026 uprisings resulted in division within the ranks of the people and paved the way for the large-scale killings that took place last January.”
She also rejected the idea that the son of the former Shah represents democratic change: “The Shah’s son takes pride in his father’s record, and his so-called Emergency Phase plan is in fact a reconstruction of his father’s fascist dictatorship.”
And she reminded Europe that: “… the people of Iran have not forgotten the crimes of the Shah’s regime, particularly the torture and execution of political prisoners. Just two days ago, we marked the anniversary of the execution of the PMOI’s Central Committee members on April 19, 1972, by the Shah’s regime”.
This is why the Iranian people reject both dictatorship of the mullahs and dictatorship of the Shah. The real demand is neither monarchy nor theocracy but a democratic republic.
An uprising of Iran’s collective national voice
The mass protests in Iran in December and January were the result of years of accumulated anger, economic collapse, deep corruption, political repression, and the complete loss of hope for reform. Millions of Iranians face unbearable inflation, poverty, unemployment, and daily humiliation. People see national wealth being spent on regional wars, proxy conflicts, and security structures while their own lives become harder every year. There is now a widespread understanding among many Iranians that meaningful change cannot come from within the current system. Gradual reform has failed. Structural change has become the demand.
This is why protests spread so rapidly across the country. What made this uprising different was its national and social depth. Entire families participated. Young people stood beside parents and grandparents. Protest was no longer limited to one class, one generation, or one political group, it became a collective national voice. Even after the streets were silenced by bullets, the resistance continued. Families gathered at the graves of those killed, transforming mourning into political memory. The uprising became part of the nation’s identity.
The regime responded with extraordinary violence. International human rights organisations documented the use of lethal force against protesters, including teenagers, women, elderly citizens, and even children. Reports described torture, denial of medical treatment, pressure on families, and the withholding of bodies from relatives.
This level of repression is not a sign of power. A government that must rely on executions, torture, and fear to survive has already lost legitimacy. Real strength comes from public trust. A regime that governs through prisons governs from weakness, with executions being employed as a last-ditch survival strategy.
The resistance units inside Iran
One of the most important realities often ignored in western policy discussions is the existence of organised resistance inside Iran. Resistance units, linked to the democratic opposition and the broader movement for change, continue their activities despite enormous danger. They represent the “third option” repeatedly discussed in Brussels: neither foreign war nor appeasement, but democratic change led by the Iranian people themselves. These units challenge the regime’s narrative that no alternative exists.
Their actions, despite arrests, torture, and death sentences demonstrate that the demand for freedom is alive inside Iran. This is precisely why the regime fears them.
Executions of political prisoners, especially those accused of links to the MEK/PMOI and democratic resistance movements, are designed to destroy this organised hope. The regime understands something Europe must also understand: the greatest threat to dictatorship is not foreign pressure alone, but internal organised resistance.
Political prisoners: the front line of Iran’s struggle
Today, political prisoners are paying the highest price. Many prisoners face execution not because of violent crimes, but because of political belief, protest activity, or alleged support for opposition movements. Executions are being used deliberately to create deterrence, to increase the cost of protest and terrorise society into silence. Even during war, bombardments, and regional crises, executions continue. This reveals the regime’s true priority: preventing domestic uprising.
At the conference in Brussels, many speakers warned that Europe risks repeating the silence of 1988, when thousands of political prisoners were massacred while the world looked away. That warning is now urgent. Silence today means complicity tomorrow.
European appeasement has strengthened repression in Iran
Europe can no longer pretend neutrality is possible. The UK and EU governments have both a moral responsibility and a strategic obligation to act. At the Brussels conference, Guy Verhofstad delivered one of the clearest warnings to European leaders, lamenting “the lack of a serious alternative strategy from the European Union on Iran”. A policy of appeasement, he said: “… has led to nothing at all. It has led to enormous proxy wars, to a further nuclearization of the mullah regime and especially to further oppression. Look to the executions of the Iranian people. That is the consequence and the result of the appeasement policy that we have seen especially from the European countries and from the West for the last, not years, but even decades”.
His words reflect a painful truth: Europe’s policy of appeasement has not brought peace; rather, it has strengthened repression.
Providing European support for democratic change in Iran
First, UK and EU must end the policy of appeasement. For too many years, Iran has been treated mainly as a diplomatic or nuclear issue while human rights crimes were pushed aside. This has failed. Appeasement has produced more executions, more repression, more terrorism, and greater regional instability.
Second, executions must become a red line. Diplomatic and economic relations with Tehran must be conditional on measurable human rights improvements, beginning with an immediate halt to executions and full access for independent UN investigators to Iranian prisons.
Third, the IRGC must be fully proscribed in UK. This should include terrorist designation, asset seizures, sanctions, and criminal penalties for support networks operating through diplomatic cover.
Fourth, Europe must support the Iranian people’s right to resist dictatorship. The choice is not a binary one of war or appeasement. There is a third option: democratic change led by the Iranian people and organised resistance. Recognition of the NCRI and support for Maryam Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan for a secular, democratic, non-nuclear republic should be taken seriously as part of this alternative.
Fifth, the UK should lead on international legal accountability. Iran’s human rights record must be referred to the UN Security Council, and officials responsible for executions, torture, and crimes against humanity must face prosecution.
The Iranian people want peace and freedom – a message to Europe
One truth must be repeated clearly: the people of Iran do not want war. They have already lived through war, loss, destruction, and decades of suffering. They want peace, dignity, freedom and a normal life.
They do not want dictatorship in the name of religion nor a return to dictatorship in the name of monarchy. They want a democratic republic. This is why the message heard in the UK and European parliaments matters.
The choice for the UK and Europe is no longer between diplomacy and confrontation. The real choice is between silence and responsibility. Between standing with the oppressor or standing with the people.
History will remember that choice.
Friends of Bylines Network
There has never been a greater need for grassroots journalism that investigates the stories that really matter, holds power to account and champions the voices of everyday citizens. We are proudly powered by volunteers but what we do isn’t free.
STAND WITH US for independent, citizen-led journalism that makes democracy stronger, and you will even get some exclusive benefits.
