Opinion; Subjects: IRAN (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF), ARBITRARY DETENTION; [WGAD: UNO-Arbeitsgruppe über willkürliche Inhaftierung, willkürliche Haft; Groupe de travail sur la détention arbitraire; Gruppo di lavoro sulla detenzione arbitraria]
Volltext (verifizierbarer Originaltext)
GE.25-08743 (E) 010725 010725
Human Rights Council
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention at its 102nd session, 1–10 April 2025
Opinion No. 15/2025 concerning Jina Modares Gorji (Islamic Republic
of Iran)
1.
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was established in resolution 1991/42 of
the Commission on Human Rights. In its resolution 1997/50, the Commission extended and
clarified the mandate of the Working Group. Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 60/251
and Human Rights Council decision 1/102, the Council assumed the mandate of the
Commission. The Council most recently extended the mandate of the Working Group for a
three-year period in its resolution 51/8.
2.
In accordance with its methods of work,1 on 27 November 2024 the Working Group
transmitted to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran a communication concerning
Jina Modares Gorji. The Government has not replied to the communication. The State is a
party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
3.
The Working Group regards deprivation of liberty as arbitrary in the following cases:
(a)
When it is clearly impossible to invoke any legal basis justifying the
deprivation of liberty (as when a person is kept in detention after the completion of his or her
sentence or despite an amnesty law applicable to him or her) (category I);
(b)
When the deprivation of liberty results from the exercise of the rights or
freedoms guaranteed by articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and, insofar as States Parties are concerned, by articles 12, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25,
26 and 27 of the Covenant (category II);
(c)
When the total or partial non-observance of the international norms relating to
the right to a fair trial, established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the
relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned, is of such gravity as to
give the deprivation of liberty an arbitrary character (category III);
(d)
When asylum-seekers, immigrants or refugees are subjected to prolonged
administrative custody without the possibility of administrative or judicial review or remedy
(category IV);
(e)
When the deprivation of liberty constitutes a violation of international law on
the grounds of discrimination based on birth, national, ethnic or social origin, language,
religion, economic condition, political or other opinion, gender, sexual orientation, disability,
or any other status, that aims towards or can result in ignoring the equality of human beings
(category V).
1 A/HRC/36/38.
United Nations
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
General Assembly
Distr.: General
2 July 2025
Original: English
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
2
GE.25-08743
1.
Submissions
(a)
Communication from the source
4.
Jina Modares Gorji is a citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran belonging to the
Kurdish ethnic community from the Sanandaj region. Ms. Gorji is a journalist and human
rights defender. She is an advocate for the rights of Kurdish women and girls, as well as the
broader Kurdish community’s sociocultural rights.
5.
The source submits that Ms. Gorji is a committed observer of discrimination, injustice
and human rights abuses, and is actively engaged in documenting and exposing acts of
violence. She is also a writer and translator. As a result, she has faced punishment and
obstacles to her work and education on multiple occasions.
(i)
Context
6.
The source expresses concern about the situation of human rights in the Islamic
Republic of Iran and submits that minorities, especially the Kurdish population, are subject
to, inter alia, repression, discrimination, unequal access to education and major violations of
their freedom of association and assembly. There has reportedly been an increase in
repression, executions and arbitrary arrests in the Islamic Republic of Iran and, in particular,
in regions with a higher Kurdish population.
7.
The source notes that the death in custody of Jina Mahsa Amini in September 2022
resulted in a series of protests among the Kurdish community and in the country as a whole,
in which protestors demanded respect for the rights of women, as well as other rights that the
Government had allegedly been suppressing. In response, there has been a further increase
in the suppression of the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly
by the authorities.
8.
Within this context, the source submits that Ms. Gorji’s arrest is part of a wider trend
of arrests and detentions of perceived political opponents, in particular from the Kurdish
community. The source further notes that several Iranian-Kurdish teachers, journalists and
human rights activists have been arrested on arbitrary charges and given disproportionately
heavy sentences.
(ii)
Arrest, detention and sentencing of Ms. Gorji
9.
The source submits that, already at the start of the “Woman, Life, Freedom”
movement following the death of Jina Masha Amini, Ms. Gorji had been arrested by the
Iranian intelligence services on 21 September 2022. She was charged with threatening
national security by gathering and colluding, and with spreading propaganda against the
State. On 30 October 2022, she was released on a bail of 10 billion Iranian rials, after having
been on hunger strike for three days to protest against the physical assault and detention she
had endured at the Sanandaj Correctional and Rehabilitation Centre.
10.
After her release, Ms. Gorji continued to face constant pressure and surveillance by
the Iranian security forces and the judiciary. Furthermore, it is reported that her human rights
and cultural work has been obstructed on several occasions, as the authorities withheld
permits and issued orders to cease her activities.
11.
On 12 February 2023, Ms. Gorji was taken with her lawyer to Branch One of the
Islamic Revolutionary Court in Sanandaj, and asked to sign the pardon scheme that had been
announced in February 2023 on the occasion of the forty-fourth anniversary of the Islamic
revolution. Ms. Gorji refused to do so, as that would constitute an acknowledgement that the
charges against her for undertaking her human rights work had been legitimate.
12.
In that same month, Ms. Gorji was informed that “spreading misinformation” had
been added to the previous charges against her of “forming groups and association with the
intention of disturbing the national security” and “propaganda activities against the State”.
13.
The source submits that, on 10 April 2023, Ms. Gorji was arrested again by the
authorities from the Ministry of Intelligence while she was returning home. An arrest warrant
was not presented to her at the time of the arrest.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
GE.25-08743
3
14.
Ms. Gorji was detained for almost three months in the women’s ward of Sanandaj
Correctional and Rehabilitation Centre, the first month of which was in solitary confinement
under harsh conditions. She was also denied access to a lawyer. She was eventually released
on 3 July 2023, on a bail of 1 billion Iranian rials.
15.
The second and third court sessions pertaining to Ms. Gorji were held on 13
September 2023 and 9 April 2024, respectively. On 23 May 2024, Branch One sentenced
Ms. Gorji to 21 years’ imprisonment. The source submits that Ms. Gorji was sentenced to 10
years’ imprisonment for “forming groups and association with the intention of disturbing the
national security”; an additional 10 years for “collaborating with a hostile Government”; and
a further 1 year for carrying out “propaganda activities against the State”. Ms. Gorji was to
be sent to Hamadan Central Prison to serve her sentence.
16.
The source notes that the ruling did not include a decision on the additional charges
of “spreading misinformation” and “inciting violence”, which were referred to Branch Two
of the Court for a decision. Should additional sentences be passed on those charges, then the
most severe single sentence – that of 10 years’ imprisonment – would be executable under
article 134 of Islamic Penal Code. According to that provision, in cases of multiple charges
of different types, the maximum punishment will be issued for all of them, but only the most
severe punishment will be carried out.
17.
According to the source, the Court’s ruling was largely made on the basis of the
reports provided by the Ministry of Intelligence that Ms. Gorji’s work and activism
constituted “security threats” to the Government. However, the source submits that the
aforementioned charges are a punishment for Ms. Gorji’s peaceful human rights activities,
which include speaking to the media about the situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
participating in international conferences and organizing activities to promote women’s
rights in Iranian provinces with a Kurdish population.
18.
The source submits that Ms. Gorji’s prosecution is part of a wider trend of suppression
against human rights defenders in the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially those belonging to
ethnic minorities, whereby persons who represent perceived “political threats” to the State
and public advocates for human rights or minority rights are arrested or threatened with arrest
on the grounds of terrorism or of threatening national security. The charges such individuals
targeted by the State face commonly include “forming groups and associations aiming to
disturb the national security” and “spreading propaganda”.
19.
The source notes that, on 7 October 2024, the Sanandej Court of Appeal reduced Ms.
Gorji’s prison sentence to 28 months. The Court dropped the charge of “collaborating with
hostile groups and States” and reduced the sentences for “propaganda against the State” to
one year and for “forming an illegal group with the aim of overthrowing the State” to 16
months. Ms. Gorji was imprisoned on 2 November 2024 to serve her sentence. She is
currently detained at Sanandaj Central Prison.
(iii)
Legal analysis
20.
The source submits that Ms. Gorji’s arrest and detention are arbitrary and fall under
categories II, III and V of the Working Group. The source further submits that Ms. Gorji’s
arrest and detention violate articles 18 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
as well as articles 18, 19, 21, 22, 26 and 27 of the Covenant.
21.
In relation to category II, the source argues that Ms. Gorji’s arrest was a direct result
of her work to preserve Kurdish culture and promote women’s rights in the country. It
submits that her detention and the initial lengthy sentence aimed to isolate Ms. Gorji and
hamper her human rights work. The source thus submits that the above represent a clear
reprisal based on her work and an attempt to intimidate her and deter her from taking an
active role in the public affairs of her country and community. Arresting Ms. Gorji for
attending protests related to the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement also violate her right to
peaceful protest and assembly.
22.
The source notes that the case falls within category III of the Working Group as trials
of prominent activists and journalists are reportedly “show trials” with little observance and
respect for international fair trial standards. In the present case, the source recalls that the
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
4
GE.25-08743
arrest and detention of Ms. Gorji preceded any court decision, while the sentencing itself was
not only arbitrary but also unreasonably harsh.
23.
Moreover, the source notes that the court’s ruling was largely made on the basis of
Ministry of Intelligence reports claiming that Ms. Gorji’s work and activism had constituted
“security threats” to the country. The source reiterates that, in reality, the aforementioned
charges were a punishment for her peaceful human rights activities, which included speaking
to the media, participating in international conferences and organizing activities to promote
women’s rights in Iranian provinces with a Kurdish population.
24.
With regard to category V, the source submits that the arrest, detention and sentencing
of Ms. Gorji constitutes part of a larger trend of intimidation and suppression of the Kurdish
community in the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially when it comes to the claiming and
promotion of their cultural and linguistic rights. The source also claims that there is a pattern
of persecution in regions with a higher Kurdish population, which clearly demonstrates the
discriminatory treatment of ethnic minorities because of their ethnic affiliation.
25.
In this context, the source submits that, from 1 January to 5 November 2024, over 718
prisoners, including 20 women, were executed in the Islamic Republic of Iran, of whom at
least 165, including 1 woman, belonged to the Kurdish minority, which is a disproportionate
percentage of that overall number. The source also submits that nearly half of all the those
detained for their political affiliations and opinions are from the Kurdish minority. The source
notes that, from January 2024 to November 2024, at least 600 Kurdish citizens, including 35
women and 10 Kurdish religious figures, known as mamosta, were detained, while two
Kurdish women are awaiting imminent execution.
26.
The source submits that, since the beginning of the “Woman, Life, Freedom”
movement in regions with a high Kurdish population, at least 350 Kurdish women have been
detained arbitrarily, and many have reportedly experienced torture, unfair trials, lengthy
sentencing and harsh prison conditions.
(b)
Response from the Government
27.
On 27 November 2024, the Working Group transmitted the allegations from the
source to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran under its regular communication
procedure. The Working Group requested the Government to provide detailed information
by 27 January 2025 about the current situation of Ms. Gorji. The Working Group also
requested the Government to clarify the legal provisions justifying her continued detention,
as well as its compatibility with the obligations of the Islamic Republic of Iran under
international human rights law and in particular with regard to the treaties ratified by the
State. Moreover, the Working Group called upon the Government to ensure the physical and
mental integrity of Ms. Gorji.
28.
The Working Group regrets that it did not receive a response from the Government to
that communication. The Government did not request an extension of the time limit for its
reply, as provided for in the Working Group’s methods of work.
2.
Discussion
29.
In the absence of a response from the Government, the Working Group has decided
to render the present opinion, in conformity with paragraph 15 of its methods of work.
30.
In determining whether the detention of Ms. Gorji is arbitrary, the Working Group has
regard to the principles established in its jurisprudence to deal with evidentiary issues. If the
source has presented a prima facie case of a breach of international law constituting arbitrary
detention, the burden of proof should be understood to rest upon the Government if it wishes
to refute the allegations.2 In the present case, the Government has chosen not to challenge the
prima facie credible allegations made by the source.
2 A/HRC/19/57, para. 68.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
GE.25-08743
5
(a)
Category I
31.
Although the source does not specify category I as a basis for its claims, the Working
Group considers proprio motu that this is applicable and so addresses arguments under this
ground in accordance with its discretion to do so.
32.
The source submits that Ms. Gorji was arrested twice by the Iranian intelligence
services: first on 21 September 2022; then on 10 April 2023, while she was returning home.
An arrest warrant was not presented to her at the time of the arrest.
33.
Pursuant to article 9 (1) of the Covenant, no one is to be deprived of his or her liberty
except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established by law.
As the Working Group has previously stated, for deprivation of liberty to have a legal basis,
it is not sufficient that there is a law that may authorize the arrest. The authorities must invoke
that legal basis and apply it to the circumstances of the case.3 This is typically done through
an arrest warrant or arrest order (or equivalent document).4
34.
In the absence of a response from the Government, the Working Group finds the
source’s credible prima facie allegation that no arrest warrant was presented at the time of
Ms. Gorji’s arrest to be established and to demonstrate a violation of article 9 (1) of the
Covenant. For those reasons, the Working Group finds that her arrest violates article 9 of the
Covenant, articles 3 and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and principles 2
and 4 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention
or Imprisonment.
35.
On the basis of the foregoing, the Working Group considers that the deprivation of
liberty of Ms Gorji lacks legal basis and is thus arbitrary, falling under category I.
(b)
Category II
36.
The source argues that Ms. Gorji’s arrest was a direct result of her work to preserve
Kurdish culture and promote women’s rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is submitted
that her detention and the initial lengthy sentence aim to isolate Ms. Gorji and hamper her
human rights work. The source thus sustains that it is a clear reprisal against her work and an
attempt to intimidate her and deter her from taking an active role in the public affairs of her
country and community. Arresting Ms. Gorji for attending protests related to the “Woman,
Life, Freedom” movement also violates her right to peaceful protest and assembly.
37.
The Working Group recalls that freedom of opinion and freedom of expression as
expressed in article 19 of the Covenant are indispensable conditions for the full development
of the person; they are essential for any society and constitute the foundation stone for every
free and democratic society. 5 Article 19 (2) of the Covenant protects the holding and
expression of opinions, including those which are not in line with government policy.6 The
Human Rights Committee has specifically recognized that article 19 (2) of the Covenant
includes the right of individuals to criticize or openly and publicly evaluate their Government
without fear of interference or punishment.7 As stipulated by the Human Rights Council,
certain types of expression, such as discussion of government policies and political activities,
including for peace or democracy, should never be subject to restrictions.8 The Council has
called upon States to refrain from imposing restrictions under article 19 (3) of the Covenant
that are not consistent with international human rights law.9
38.
While freedom of expression is not an absolute right, the Human Rights Committee
has stated in its general comment No. 34 (2011) on the freedoms of opinion and expression
that, when a State Party imposes restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression, these
3 Opinions No. 9/2019, para. 29; No. 46/2019, para. 51; and No. 59/2019, para. 46.
4 Opinions No. 88/2017, para. 27; No. 3/2018, para. 43; and No. 30/2018, para. 39. In cases of arrests
made in flagrante delicto, the opportunity to obtain a warrant will typically not be available.
5 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34 (2011), para. 2.
6 Opinions No. 79/2017, para. 55; and No. 8/2019, para. 55.
7 Marques de Morais v. Angola (CCPR/C/83/D/1128/2002), para. 6.7.
8 A/HRC/14/23, para. 81 (i).
9 Human Rights Council resolution 12/16, para. 5 (p).
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
6
GE.25-08743
may not put in jeopardy the right itself. Moreover, it stipulates that article 19 (3) of the
Covenant may never be invoked as a justification for the suppressing of any advocacy of
multiparty democracy, democratic tenets and human rights. The permitted restrictions on the
right may relate either to respect of the rights or reputations of others or to the protection of
national security or of public order (ordre public) or of public health or morals. Similarly,
articles 21 and 22 (2) of the Covenant also set out restrictions on the exercise of the right to
freedom of assembly and association respectively.
39.
The Government has not presented any arguments to the Working Group to invoke
any of these limitations, nor did it demonstrate why bringing charges against Ms. Gorji was
a legitimate, necessary and proportionate response to her peaceful activities and the exercise
of her fundamental freedoms. The source, on the other hand, has explained that her arrest and
detention were made on the basis of her activities in promoting Kurdish culture and women’s
rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. There is no information that her activities – which
include speaking to the media about the situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, participating
in international conferences and organizing activities to promote women’s rights in Iranian
provinces with a Kurdish population – have been anything but peaceful, nor is there any
indication of those activities inciting others to violence. It is therefore clear to the Working
Group that the basis for the arrest and detention of Ms. Gorji was the exercise of her right to
freedom of opinion, expression, assembly and association.
40.
The Working Group wishes to express its concern over the types of crimes that Ms.
Gorji was charged with and which appear to have ultimately formed the basis of her
sentencing. They are vaguely formulated and overly broad national security offences. Vague
and overly broad laws fall outside of principles of legality and unduly limit universal
freedoms. The Working Group observes that vague and overly broad laws are consistently
used in the Islamic Republic of Iran to criminalize the exercise of the rights to freedom of
expression, association and peaceful assembly.10
41.
The Working Group recalls that the principle of legality requires the substance of
penal law to be due and appropriate in a democratic society that respects human dignity and
rights (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege apta).11 This principle requires that laws be
formulated with sufficient precision so that individuals may have access to and understand
the law and regulate their conduct accordingly.12 Moreover, vague laws may have a deterrent
effect on the exercise of fundamental freedoms as they have the potential for abuse, including
the arbitrary deprivation of liberty.13 It has raised the issue of prosecution under vague and
overly broad penal laws with the Government on several occasions.14
42.
The Working Group recalls that, in his 2022 report, the former holder of the mandate
of Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran
highlighted vague national security laws and their criminalization of free expression and free
association.15 In 2012, the first holder of that mandate had also concluded that such laws
allowed for arbitrary application and abuse of power.16 In his 2022 report, the former holder
of the mandate of Special Rapporteur stated that, between January and October 2021, close
to 500 individuals belonging to the Kurdish community, including teachers, border couriers,
artists, human rights and environmental rights defenders, journalists, artists and lawyers, had
been arrested or detained, of whom at least 140 had been charged with national
security-related crimes.17 The Working Group finds that the present case demonstrates that
this practice continues, as vaguely formulated offences relating to national security were used
to restrict freedoms legitimately exercised by Ms. Gorji. In her 2025 report, the current
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran refers to
10 For example, opinions No. 19/2018, para. 33; and No. 85/2021, para. 41.
11 Opinion No. 10/2018, para. 53.
12 For example, opinions No. 41/2017, paras. 98–101; and No. 62/2018, paras. 57–59.
13 Opinions No. 10/2018, para. 55; and No. 15/2021, para. 65.
14 For example, opinions No. 55/2013, para. 14; No. 19/2018, para. 33; No. 52/2018, para. 78;
No. 83/2018, para. 58; No. 9/2017, para. 23; No. 29/2021, para. 52; and No. 82/2022, para. 45.
15 A/HRC/49/75, para. 22; and also A/HRC/19/66, para. 13.
16 A/HRC/19/66, para. 14.
17 A/HRC/49/75, para. 46.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
GE.25-08743
7
the case of Ms Gorji, “a human rights defender, podcaster and blogger in Kurdistan Province
who was sentenced in May 2024 to 21 years in prison on various charges, including ‘forming
groups and associations with the intention of disturbing national security’, ‘collaboration
with hostile groups and States’ and ‘propaganda activities against the State’”.18
43.
In relation to the source’s submissions that Ms. Gorji’s arrest was a direct result of her
work to preserve Kurdish culture, the Working Group recalls that article 27 of the Covenant
provides that in those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons
belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other
members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion,
or to use their own language. The right contained in article 27 is an individual right, although
one that also exists in common with a community and that belongs to those who are members
of a common cultural, religious or linguistic group.19
44.
While article 27 of the Covenant does not contain a limitation clause, some balancing
of the interests of the minority against the interests of a Government may nonetheless be
permissible. The Human Rights Committee has distinguished between measures that deny a
person their right to enjoy their culture and those that “have a certain limited impact on the
way of life of persons belonging to a minority” and do not necessarily violate article 27.20
Article 27 must also be exercised in a manner that is consistent with other fundamental human
rights.21 In considering the freedom to exercise cultural rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,
the Working Group notes that, in her 2025 report, the Special Rapporteur reported that State
authorities had also targeted cultural and human rights activists. This included an
organization that raises awareness about the legal and cultural rights of the Kurdish
population and other ethnic groups in the Islamic Republic of Iran.22
45.
The Working Group consequently finds that the detention of Ms. Goji resulted from
the legitimate exercise of her freedom of opinion, expression, assembly, association and
rights as an ethnic and linguistic minority, as protected by articles 19, 21, 22 and 27 of the
Covenant and articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and was
therefore arbitrary, falling under category II. The Working Group refers the case to the
Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and
expression and the Special Rapporteur on minority issues.
(c)
Category III
46.
Given its finding that the deprivation of liberty of Ms. Gorji is arbitrary under category
II, the Working Group wishes to emphasize that no trial should have taken place. However,
Ms. Gorji was tried on 23 May 2024 and sentenced to 21 years’ imprisonment, comprising
10 years for “forming groups and association with the intention of disturbing the national
security”; an additional 10 years for “collaborating with a hostile Government”; and a further
1 year for carrying out “propaganda activities against the State”.
47.
The source further submits that the case falls within category III of the Working
Group, as trials of prominent activists and journalists are reportedly “show trials” with little
observance and respect for international fair trial standards, while the court sentencing is also
unreasonably harsh. Furthermore, the source submits that the court’s ruling was largely made
on the basis of Ministry of Intelligence reports claiming that Ms. Gorji’s work and activism
constituted “security threats” to the country. The source reiterates that, in reality, the charges
were punishment for her peaceful human rights activities.
48.
Noting these unrebutted submissions, the Working Group refers to the finding of the
Independent International Fact-finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran that
minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran “have been disproportionally impacted in ongoing
crackdown to repress the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ movement” and that ethnic and religious
minorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran, in particular Kurd and Baluch minorities, “have
18 A/HRC/58/62, para. 43.
19 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 23 (1994), para. 1.
20 CCPR/C/83/D/1023/2001, para, 7.3.
21 General comment No. 23 (1994), para. 8. See also opinion No. 9/2017, para. 27.
22 A/HRC/58/62, para. 42.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
8
GE.25-08743
been disproportionally impacted by the Government’s crackdown on protesters since
2022,”23 with minority rights activists and women human rights defenders, inter alia, being
particularly targeted. The Fact-finding Mission also reported that the trials that followed were
marred by fair trial and due process violations, and that detained minorities were often
erroneously accused of security-related offences as part of a long-standing State narrative
portraying activism by minorities as a threat to national security. Within this context, the
source submits that Ms. Gorji’s arrest is part of a wider trend of arrests and detentions of
perceived political opponents, particularly from the Kurdish community.
49.
The source further submits that several Iranian-Kurdish teachers, journalists and
human rights activists have been arrested on arbitrary charges and given disproportionately
heavy sentences. The Working Group previously found that a disproportionate criminal
sentence had been handed down for vague and broadly formulated offences, such as
damaging the State’s reputation, scheming with a foreign country or weakening national
morale.24 The charges in that case were comparable to those for which Ms. Gorji was
convicted. The Working Group also considered “the broad lack of proportionality between
the power and impact of the work and activities carried out by a single individual … and the
power and impact of an entire State machinery, with its Executive, Legislative and Judicial
organs and its armed forces, police and security agents”.25 Similarly in the case of Ms. Gorji,
the Working Group is of the view that the onerous sentence of 21 years – although reduced
on appeal to 28 months – was imposed for pretextual charges relating to national security and
appears to be intended to punish Ms. Gorji for her peaceful human rights activities and to
silence her.
50.
The Working Group notes various reports of the long-standing State narrative of
portraying activism by minorities as a threat to national security, the reported disregard for
international fair trial standards during the trials of prominent activists and journalists and
the disproportionate sentences that followed those proceedings. In 2015, the Special
Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran reported that the
judiciary had imposed heavy prison sentences on individuals who peacefully exercised their
right to freedom of expression for crimes such as “propaganda against the State” and harming
“national security”.26 The case of Ms. Gorji demonstrates that this remains an ongoing
concern. 27 The source submits that, since the beginning of “Woman, Life, Freedom”
movement in regions with a high Kurdish population, at least 350 Kurdish women have been
detained arbitrarily and many have reportedly experienced torture and unfair trials and have
been sentenced to lengthy and harsh imprisonments.
51.
The source further submits that Ms. Gorji was detained for almost three months in the
women’s ward of Sanandaj Correctional and Rehabilitation Centre and spent the first month
of her detention in solitary confinement under harsh conditions. She was also denied access
to a lawyer. The Working Group notes that, pursuant to rule 45 of the United Nations
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules), the
imposition of solitary confinement must be accompanied by certain safeguards. Solitary
confinement must be used only in exceptional cases as a last resort, for as short a time as
possible, subject to independent review and authorized by a competent authority. Prolonged
solitary confinement in excess of 15 consecutive days is prohibited under rules 43 (1) (b), 44
and 45 of the Nelson Mandela Rules. The Working Group recalls that the Special Rapporteur
on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment previously deemed
that prolonged solitary confinement in excess of 15 days, at which point some of the harmful
psychological effects of isolation can become irreversible, may amount to torture as
23 See www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/08/minorities-iran-have-been-disproportionally-impacted-
ongoing-crackdown.
24 Opinion No. 24/2008, para. 21.
25 Ibid., para. 22; and 76/2023, paras. 97 and 98.
26 A/70/411, para. 23.
27 Also, opinion No. 21/2023, para. 83.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
GE.25-08743
9
described in article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment.28
52.
Noting the source’s unrebutted submissions that Ms. Gorji was denied access to a
lawyer, at the very least during her first month in solitary confinement, the Working Group
recalls that all persons deprived of their liberty have the right to legal assistance by a counsel
of their choice at any time during their detention, including immediately after their
apprehension, and such access is to be provided without delay in the absence of exceptional
reasons justifying a restriction on such access.29 The Working Group thus finds that Mr.
Gorji’s prolonged solitary confinement at the outset of her detention, during which she was
denied a lawyer, jeopardized the principle of equality of arms under article 14 (1) and her
right to counsel under 14 (3) (b) of the Covenant.30
53.
Considering the violations set out above, the Working Group concludes that the
breaches of fair trial and due process rights of Ms. Gorji are of such gravity as to give her
deprivation of liberty an arbitrary character, falling within category III.
(d)
Category V
54.
In relation to category V, the source submits that the arrest, detention and sentencing
of Ms. Gorji constitute part of a larger trend of intimidation and suppression of the Kurdish
community in the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially when it comes to the claiming and
promotion of their cultural and linguistic rights. The source also claims that there is a pattern
of persecution in regions with a higher Kurdish population that clearly demonstrates the
discriminatory treatment of ethnic minorities because of their ethnic affiliation.
55.
The Working Group has consistently found discrimination when it is apparent that
persons have been deprived of their liberty specifically on the basis of protected
characteristics. 31 In the present case, Ms. Gorji belongs to the Kurdish ethnic minority
community. In his 2020 report, the holder of the mandate of Special Rapporteur on the
situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran referred to worrying reports of
violations of the economic, social and cultural rights of minorities, including the Kurdish
communities.32 The Working Group observes that this pattern of harassment against the
Kurdish ethnic minority community in the Islamic Republic of Iran is consistent with the
source’s submissions. Moreover, the source argues that Ms. Gorji’s persecution and
prosecution are part of a wider crackdown against human rights defenders in the Islamic
Republic of Iran.
56.
In the present case, the source submits that Ms. Gorji is an advocate for the rights of
Kurdish women and girls and highlights the repression against women’s rights defenders.
The source submits that, since the start of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in
September 2022, sparked by the death of Jina Masha Amini in police custody, Ms. Gorji was
arrested twice by the Iranian intelligence services. The source further submits that Ms. Gorji
herself has been subjected to constant pressure and surveillance by the security forces and
the judiciary.
57.
The Working Group has previously considered cases involving women who have
expressed their opposition to the compulsory wearing of the hijab in the Islamic Republic of
Iran.33 In his 2021 report, the holder of the mandate of Special Rapporteur on the situation of
human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran stated that the authorities continued to arrest and
imprison women’s rights advocates who had challenged compulsory veiling, on national
28 A/63/175, para. 56; A/66/268, para. 61; General Assembly resolution 68/156; A/56/156, paras. 14 and
39 (f); and Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 35 (2014), para. 35.
29 United Nations Basic Principles and Guidelines on Remedies and Procedures on the Right of Anyone
Deprived of Their Liberty to Bring Proceedings Before a Court, principle 9 and guideline 8; Human
Rights Committee, general comment No. 35 (2014), para. 35; A/HRC/45/16, paras. 50–55; and
A/HRC/48/55, para. 56. See also A/HRC/27/47, para. 13.
30 Opinion No. 32/2019, para. 42. See also opinions No. 47/2017, para. 28; and No. 52/2018,
para. 79 (j); and E/CN.4/2004/3/Add.3, para. 33.
31 A/HRC/36/37, para. 48.
32 A/HRC/43/61, para. 44.
33 See opinions No. 15/2021; No. 54/2022; and No. 21/2023.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
10
GE.25-08743
security- and morality-based charges. 34 In 2022, the Acting United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights called upon the Iranian authorities to stop targeting,
harassing and detaining women who did not abide by the hijab rules.35 In its update in
September 2024, the Independent International Fact-finding Mission on the Islamic Republic
of Iran warned that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran had “intensified its efforts
to suppress the fundamental rights of women and girls and crush remaining initiatives of
women’s activism”.36 The arrest and detention of Ms. Gorji was also addressed in its update.37
In her 2025 report, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic
Republic of Iran noted that she continued to receive information concerning the arrest and
detention of women’s rights advocates. In that context, the Working Group finds that Ms.
Gorji was also detained because of her gender, as the detention was a consequence of her
activities as a women’s rights activist.38 The Working Group echoes the call of the above-
mentioned United Nations experts that Governments refrain from arbitrarily detaining
protestors who are seeking to uphold women’s rights.39
58.
For these reasons, the Working Group finds that Ms. Gorji was deprived of her liberty
on discriminatory grounds, on the basis of her political or other opinion, ethnicity and
language, status as a human rights defender as well as her gender. Her deprivation of liberty
violates her right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law under articles 2
and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2 (1) and 26 of the Covenant
and was arbitrary under category V.40 The Working Group refers the case to the Special
Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur on violence
against women and girls, its causes and consequences, and the Working Group on
discrimination against women and girls for appropriate action.
(e)
Concluding remarks
59.
As indicated above, the Working Group considers that Ms. Gorji was deprived of her
liberty in violation of international human rights law and should not have been subjected to
any form of criminal punishment for her peaceful activities. As such, the Working Group
emphasizes that the reduction of the sentences on appeal does not change the arbitrary nature
of the deprivation of liberty in the present case. Furthermore, the imposition of lengthy
sentences at trial is likely to have a significant chilling effect upon the peaceful exercise of
rights and freedoms in the Islamic Republic of Iran.41
60.
The present case is one of several brought before the Working Group in recent years
concerning arbitrary detention in the Islamic Republic of Iran.42 The Working Group is
concerned that this might indicate a widespread or systemic practice of arbitrary detention in
the country. The Working Group underlines that States have the obligation not to engage in
acts that could constitute crimes against humanity and to prevent and punish them if they are
committed. The Working Group refers the present case to the Special Rapporteur on the
situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran for appropriate action.
34 A/HRC/46/50, para. 54.
35 See www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/09/mahsa-amini-acting-un-human-rights-chief-urges-
impartial-probe-death-iran20.
36 See www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/09/iran-intensifying-efforts-repress-women-and-girls-
second-anniversary-nation.
37 See www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/ffmi-iran/FFM-Iran-Update-13-
September-2024.pdf.
38 See, e.g., opinion No. 15/2021.
39 See http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/09/iran-un-experts-demand-accountability-death-
mahsa-amini-call-end-violence. See also opinion No. 21/2023, para. 103.
40 See opinions No. 75/2017, No. 79/2017, No. 35/2018, No. 36/2018, No. 45/2018, No. 46/2018,
No. 9/2019, No. 44/2019 and No. 45/2019.
41 For example, opinions No. 9/2017, para. 33; and No. 82/2022, para. 56.
42 See, e.g., opinions No. 18/2013, No. 28/2013, No. 52/2013, No. 55/2013, No. 16/2015, No. 44/2015,
No. 1/2016, No. 2/2016, No. 25/2016, No. 28/2016, No. 50/2016, No. 7/2017, No. 9/2017,
No. 48/2017, No. 49/2017, No. 92/2017, No. 19/2018, No. 52/2018, No. 83/2018, No. 32/2019,
No. 33/2019, No. 20/2022, No. 46/2022, No. 54/2022, No. 82/2022, No. 21/2023, No. 37/2023 and
No. 53/2024.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
GE.25-08743
11
61.
The Working Group would welcome the opportunity to work constructively with the
Government to address arbitrary deprivation of liberty in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Given
that a significant period of time has passed since its most recent country visit to the Islamic
Republic of Iran, in February 2003, the Working Group considers that it is now an appropriate
time to conduct another visit. The Working Group made a request to the Government on 19
July 2019 to conduct a country visit. The Working Group recalls that the Government issued
a standing invitation on 24 July 2002 to all thematic special procedure mandate holders and
awaits a positive response to its request to visit.
3.
Disposition
62.
In the light of the foregoing, the Working Group renders the following opinion:
The deprivation of liberty of Jina Modares Gorji, being in contravention of articles 2,
3, 7, 9, 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 2, 9, 14,
19, 21, 22, 26 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is
arbitrary and falls within categories I, II, III and V.
63.
The Working Group requests the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to take
the steps necessary to remedy the situation of Ms. Gorji without delay and bring it into
conformity with the relevant international norms, including those set out in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
64.
The Working Group considers that, taking into account all the circumstances of the
case, the appropriate remedy would be to release Ms. Gorji immediately and accord her an
enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international
law.
65.
The Working Group urges the Government to ensure a full and independent
investigation of the circumstances surrounding the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of Ms.
Gorji, and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of her
rights.
66.
In accordance with paragraph 33 (a) of its methods of work, the Working Group refers
the present case to the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic
Republic of Iran, the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and
consequences, and the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls for
appropriate action.
67.
The Working Group requests the Government to disseminate the present opinion
through all available means and as widely as possible.
4.
Follow-up procedure
68.
In accordance with paragraph 20 of its methods of work, the Working Group requests
the source and the Government to provide it with information on action taken in follow-up
to the recommendations made in the present opinion, including:
(a)
Whether Ms. Gorji has been released and, if so, on what date;
(b)
Whether compensation or other reparations have been made to Ms. Gorji;
(c)
Whether an investigation has been conducted into the violation of the rights of
Ms. Gorji, and, if so, the outcome of the investigation;
(d)
Whether any legislative amendments or changes in practice have been made to
harmonize the laws and practices of the Islamic Republic of Iran with its international
obligations in line with the present opinion;
(e)
Whether any other action has been taken to implement the present opinion.
69.
The Government is invited to inform the Working Group of any difficulties it may
have encountered in implementing the recommendations made in the present opinion and
whether further technical assistance is required, for example through a visit by the Working
Group.
A/HRC/WGAD/2025/15
12
GE.25-08743
70.
The Working Group requests the source and the Government to provide the
above-mentioned information within six months of the date of transmission of the present
opinion. However, the Working Group reserves the right to take its own action in follow-up
to the opinion if new concerns in relation to the case are brought to its attention. Such action
would enable the Working Group to inform the Human Rights Council of progress made in
implementing its recommendations, as well as any failure to take action.
71.
The Working Group recalls that the Human Rights Council has encouraged all States
to cooperate with the Working Group and has requested them to take account of its views
and, where necessary, to take appropriate steps to remedy the situation of persons arbitrarily
deprived of their liberty, and to inform the Working Group of the steps they have taken.43
[Adopted on 3 April 2025]
43 Human Rights Council resolution 51/8, paras. 6 and 9.