Israel's strike on Iran's Evin prison sparks fear for political prisoners
BEIRUT (AP) — Sayeh Seydal, a jailed Iranian dissident, narrowly escaped death when Israeli missiles struck Tehran's Evin Prison, where she was imprisoned. She had just stepped out of the prison's clinic, moments before it was destroyed in the blasts.
The June 23 strikes on Iran's most notorious prison for political dissidents killed at least 71 people, including staff, soldiers, visiting family members and people living nearby, Iranian judiciary spokesman Asghar Jahangir said Sunday. In the ensuing chaos, authorities transferred Seydal and others to prisons outside of Tehran — overcrowded facilities, known for their harsh conditions.
When she was able to call her family several days ago, Seydal pleaded for help.
'It's literally a slow death,' she said of the conditions, according to a recording of the call provided by her relatives, in accordance with Seydal's wishes.
'The bombing by the U.S. and Israel didn't kill us. Then the Islamic Republic brought us to a place that will practically kill us,' she said.
Activists fear Israel's attacks will lead to crackdown
Iran's pro-democracy and rights activists fear they will pay the price for Israel's 12-day air campaign aiming to cripple the country's nuclear program. Many now say the state, reeling from the breach in its security, has already intensified its crackdown on opponents.
Israel's strike on Evin — targeting, it said, "repressive authorities' — spread panic among families of the political prisoners, who were left scrambling to determine their loved ones' fates. A week later, families of those who were in solitary confinement or under interrogation still haven't heard from them.
Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi, a veteran activist who has been imprisoned multiple times in Evin, said that Iranian society, "to get to democracy, needs powerful tools to reinforce civil society and the women's movement.'
'Unfortunately, war weakens these tools,' she said in a video message to The Associated Press from Tehran. Political space is already shrinking with security forces increasing their presence in the streets of the capital, she said.
Fears of looming executions
Many now fear a potential wave of executions targeting activists and political prisoners. They see a terrifying precedent: After Iran's war with Iraq ended in 1988, authorities executed at least 5,000 political prisoners after perfunctory trials, then buried them in mass graves that have never been accessed.
Already during Israel's campaign, Iran executed six prisoners who were sentenced to death before the war.
The Washington-based Human Rights Activists in Iran documented nearly 1,300 people arrested, most on charges of espionage, including 300 for sharing content on social media in just 12 days.
Parliament is fast-tracking a bill allowing greater use of the death penalty for charges of collaboration with foreign adversaries. The judiciary chief called for expedited proceedings against those who 'disrupt the peace' or "collaborate' with Israel.
'We know what that means. That means show trials and executions,' said Bahar Ghandehari, director of advocacy and media at the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran.
Prisoners scattered after the strike
Evin Prison, located in an upscale neighborhood on Tehran's northern edge, housed an estimated 120 men and women in its general wards, as well as hundreds of others believed to be in its secretive security units under interrogation or in solitary confinement, according to HRA.
The prisoners include protesters, lawyers and activists who have campaigned for years against Iran's authoritarian rule, corruption and religious laws including enforcement of Islamic attire on women. Authorities have crushed repeated waves of nationwide protests since 2009 in crackdowns that have killed hundreds and jailed thousands.
The strikes hit Evin during visiting hours, causing shock and panic.
Seydal, an international law scholar who joined protest movements over the past two decades and has been in and out of jail since 2023, recounted to her family her near brush with death in the prison clinic. The blast knocked her to the ground, a relative who spoke to Seydal said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.
Visiting halls, the prosecutor's office and several prisoner wards were also heavily damaged, according to rights groups and relatives of prisoners. One missile hit the prison entrance, where prisoners often are sitting waiting to be taken to hospitals or court.
'Attacking a prison, when the inmates are standing behind closed doors and they are unable to do the slightest thing to save themselves, can never be a legitimate target,' Mohammadi said. Mohammadi was just released in December when her latest sentence was briefly suspended for medical reasons.
During the night, buses began transferring prisoners to other facilities, according to Mohammadi and families of prisoners. At least 65 women were sent to Qarchak Prison, according to Mohammadi, who is in touch with them. Men were sent to the Grand Tehran Penitentiary, housing criminals and high-security prisoners. Both are located south of Tehran.
Mohammadi told AP that her immediate fear was a lack of medical facilities and poor hygiene. Among the women are several with conditions needing treatment, including 73-year-old civil rights activist Raheleh Rahemi, who has a brain tumor.
In her call home, Seydal called Qarchak a 'hellhole.' She said the women were packed together in isolation, with no hygiene care, and limited food or drinkable water.
'It stinks. Just pure filth,' she said.
'She sounded confused, scared and very sad,' her relative said. 'She knows speaking out is very dangerous for her. But also being silent can be dangerous for her.' On Sunday, Sayeh made another call to her family, saying she was briefly taken back to Evin to bring her belongings. The stench of 'death' filled the air, her relative quoted her as saying.
The 47-year-old Seydal was first sentenced in 2023. In early 2025, her furlough was canceled, and she was assaulted by security and faced new charges after she refused to wear a chador at the prosecutor's office.
A brother disappears
Reza Younesi's father and younger brother, Ali, have both been imprisoned at Evin for years. Now the family is terrified because Ali has disappeared.
Ali, a 25-year-old graduate of a prestigious technical university, was serving a 16-year sentence for "colluding to commit crimes against national security.' The sentence, widely criticized by rights groups, was reduced but then the Intelligence Ministry launched a new case against him on unknown charges.
Days before the strike on Evin, Ali was dragged out of his ward and taken to an unknown location, according to his brother.
After the strike, their father, Mir-Yousef Younesi, saw no sign of Ali as he and other prisoners were transferred to the Great Tehran Penitentiary. The father managed to get a call out to his family, in a panic.
Disappearances in Evin are not uncommon. Guards sometimes remove political prisoners from wards for interrogation. In some cases, they are sentenced in secret trials and executed. After the strikes, Swedish-Iranian academic Ahmadreza Djalali, sentenced to death in 2017, was transferred from the Tehran prison to an undisclosed location, according to Amnesty International, which expressed fear he could be executed.
Reza Younesi said the family lawyer was unable to find out any information about his brother or the new charges.
'We are all worried,' he said, speaking from Sweden where he is an associate professor at Uppsala University. 'When there is no information from a prisoner, this almost in all cases means that the person is under interrogation and torture.'
'All hope is gone'
Mehraveh Khandan grew up in a family of political activists. She spent much of her childhood and teen years going to Evin to visit her mother, rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, who was imprisoned there multiple times.
Her father, Reza Khandan, was thrown into Evin in December for distributing buttons opposing the mandatory headscarf for women.
Now living in Amsterdam, the 25-year-old Mehraveh Khandan frantically tried to find information about her father after the strike. The internet was cut off, and her mother had evacuated from Tehran. 'I was just thinking who might die there,' she said. It took 24 hours before she got word her father was OK.
In a family call later, her father told how he was sleeping on the floor in a crowded cell rife with insects at the Grand Tehran Penitentiary.
At first, she thought the Evin strike might prompt the government to release prisoners. But after seeing reports of mass detentions and executions, 'all this hope is gone,' she said.
The war 'just destroyed all the things the activists have started to build,' she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
China Vows to Rein In Intense Competition, Build Unified Market
China's top leadership has pledged to curb aggressive price competition among businesses, aiming to accelerate efforts toward a unified national market to help boost domestic demand. Officials at a high-level economic meeting chaired by President Xi Jinping said they would crack down on 'disorderly' low-price competition and phase out outdated industrial capacity, Xinhua News Agency reported on Tuesday.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Question for the Experts: If the Iranians Can't Make a Nuke, Can They Buy One?
I am no expert on nuclear weaponry or the actual state of Iran's nuclear development program, but like many others I have been fully absorbed with the newscasts featuring various military and diplomatic experts discussing what we know, and what we don't know, about the U.S. military's strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. What we do seem to know is that the strikes were well executed. We don't know just what the strikes achieved. All kinds of questions remain, such as: Were the Iranians able to remove nuclear material from the Fordow site? How many years have the Israeli and U.S. attacks set back the Iranian nuclear program? Even if highly enriched uranium did survive the attacks, how far away would Iran be from being able to create a nuclear bomb from that material? In other words, even if Iran possesses weapons-grade enriched uranium, is it in a position to develop the necessary facilities and personnel to actually produce nuclear bombs? The myriad of expert commentary widely seems to accept that if Iran had had nuclear bomb capability, the U.S. and Israeli attacks probably would not have occurred. A very substantial element of the expert community also suggests that, if the Khamenei regime survives but does not enter into a negotiated settlement, its incentive to develop a nuclear bomb going forward is far greater now that it knows the consequences of not having nuclear weapons. The question that I have not heard raised at all, though—not a peep—is "wouldn't it be a lot faster for Iran to buy a few nuclear weapons rather than develop them on its own?" Maybe there is such a basic answer to that question that the experts don't believe it's worth raising, but as a layman I am perplexed by the issue of why Iran would not seek to buy nuclear weapons from, say, North Korea—which presumably has an arsenal of them? Granted, Iran is party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which prohibits such purchases. But if the regime's existence is truly on the line, wouldn't Tehran be more than motivated to ignore those obligations? Iran's parliament is already reportedly considering a formal withdrawal from the treaty, which the regime would have violated anyway, were it to actually pursue building a nuclear weapon. A big banner depicting Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is placed next to a ballistic missile in Baharestan Square in Tehran, Iran, on September 26, 2024 on the sideline of an exhibition which marks... A big banner depicting Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is placed next to a ballistic missile in Baharestan Square in Tehran, Iran, on September 26, 2024 on the sideline of an exhibition which marks the 44th anniversary of the start of Iran-Iraq war. More Hossein Beris / Middle East Images / Middle East ImagesOf the nations that hold nuclear weapons, including Russia, China, and Pakistan, I can easily understand why, despite having far better relationships with Iran than the United States, none would want to see nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran's Islamist government. It does not seem one can say the same thing about North Korea. North Korea has a well-developed relationship with Iran. It reportedly provided ballistic missile technology to Iran, as well as nuclear weapons know how. North Korea is also known to be a major international arms dealer, and I can imagine Iran at this point would be prepared to pay almost any price to acquire a few nuclear weapons. Moreover, North Korea has no nuclear non-proliferation treaty constraints it is party to. There are some very meaningful constraints on North Korea's ability to sell nuclear weaponry to Iran—Western countries must have highly developed sights on the country's nuclear arsenal, such that there is a very good chance any movement of nuclear weapons out of North Korea would be detected. Nuclear weapons always emit some level of radiation. As they are moved, say by ship, that radiation could in theory be detected if ships neared certain ports, and other nations might interdict North Korean vessels that are suspected of transporting nuclear weaponry. However, I have to wonder whether it really is so impossible for North Korea to totally hide and transport a fully lead-encased nuclear weapon without detection. I sure bet the Israelis could do it. There must be a good answer to this question. Purchasing a nuclear weapon would certainly be a much faster path for Iran to recover from this devastating blow than trying to resurrect its own nuclear program. But I can't understand why it has been left out of the conversation altogether as a fast and possible, if extremely difficult, route to Iran regaining the leverage that is has lost. So, I am calling on all experts to answer, if they can't make it, why can't Iran buy it? Tom Rogers is executive chairman of Claigrid, Inc. (the cloud AI grid company), an editor-at-large for Newsweek, the founder of CNBC and a CNBC contributor. He also established MSNBC, is the former CEO of TiVo, a member of Keep Our Republic (an organization dedicated to preserving the nation's democracy). He is also a member of the American Bar Association Task Force on Democracy. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
How universal rental subsidies could help the housing crisis
Subsidies that ensure renters in the U.S. pay no more than 30% of their income on housing costs need to be much more widely available. [Source Image: Andrew_Rybalko/iStock/Getty Images Plus] BY Listen to this Article More info 0:00 / 9:04 If there's one thing that U.S. politicians and activists from across the political spectrum can agree on, it's that rents are far too high. Many experts believe that this crisis is fueled by a shortage of housing, caused principally by restrictive regulations. Rents and home prices would fall, the argument goes, if rules such as minimum lot- and house-size requirements and prohibitions against apartment complexes were relaxed. This, in turn, would make it easier to build more housing. As experts on housing policy, we're concerned about housing affordability. But our research shows little connection between a shortfall of housing and rental affordability problems. Even a massive infusion of new housing would not shrink housing costs enough to solve the crisis, as rents would likely remain out of reach for many households. Subscribe to the Daily Company's trending stories delivered to you every day SIGN UP However, there are already subsidies in place that ensure that some renters in the U.S. pay no more than 30% of their income on housing costs. The most effective solution, in our view, is to make these subsidies much more widely available. A financial sinkhole Just how expensive are rents in the U.S.? According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, a household that spends more than 30% of its income on housing is deemed to be cost-burdened. If it spends more than 50%, it's considered severely burdened. In 2023, 54% of all renters spent more than 30% of their pretax income on housing. That's up from 43% of renters in 1999. And 28% of all renters spent more than half their income on housing in 2023. Renters with low incomes are especially unlikely to afford their housing: 81% of renters making less than $30,000 spent more than 30% of their income on housing, and 60% spent more than 50%. Estimates of the nation's housing shortage vary widely, reaching up to 20 million units, depending on the analytic approach and the time period covered. Yet our research, which compares growth in the housing stock from 2000 to the present, finds no evidence of an overall shortage of housing units. Rather, we see a gap between the number of low-income households and the number of affordable housing units available to them; more affluent renters face no such shortage. This is true in the nation as a whole and in nearly all large and small metropolitan areas. Would lower rents help? Certainly. But they wouldn't fix everything. We ran a simulation to test an admittedly unlikely scenario: What if rents dropped 25% across the board? We found it would reduce the number of cost-burdened renters—but not by as much as you might think. Even with the reduction, nearly one-third of all renters would still spend more than 30% of their income on housing. Moreover, reducing rents would help affluent renters much more than those with lower incomes—the households that face the most severe affordability challenges. The proportion of cost-burdened renters earning more than $75,000 would fall from 16% to 4%, while the share of similarly burdened renters earning less than $15,000 would drop from 89% to just 80%. Even with a rent rollback of 25%, the majority of renters earning less than $30,000 would remain cost-burdened. Vouchers offer more breathing room Meanwhile, there's a proven way of making housing more affordable: rental subsidies. In 2024, the U.S. provided what are known as 'deep' housing subsidies to about 5 million households, meaning that rent payments are capped at 30% of their income. These subsidies take three forms: Housing Choice Vouchers that enable people to rent homes in the private market; public housing; and project-based rental assistance, in which the federal government subsidizes the rents for all or some of the units in properties under private and nonprofit ownership. The number of households participating in these three programs has increased by less than 2% since 2014, and they constitute only 25% of all eligible households. Households earning less than 50% of their area's median family income are eligible for rental assistance. But unlike Social Security, Medicare, or food stamps, rental assistance is not an entitlement available to all who qualify. The number of recipients is limited by the amount of funding appropriated each year by Congress, and this funding has never been sufficient to meet the need. By expanding rental assistance to all eligible low-income households, the government could make huge headway in solving the rental affordability crisis. The most obvious option would be to expand the existing Housing Choice Voucher program, also known as Section 8. The program helps pay the rent up to a specified 'payment standard' determined by each local public housing authority, which can set this standard at between 80% and 120% of the HUD-designated fair market rent. To be eligible for the program, units must also satisfy HUD's physical quality standards. Unfortunately, about 43% of voucher recipients are unable to use it. They are either unable to find an apartment that rents for less than the payment standard, meets the physical quality standard, or has a landlord willing to accept vouchers. Renters are more likely to find housing using vouchers in cities and states where it's illegal for landlords to discriminate against voucher holders. Programs that provide housing counseling and landlord outreach and support have also improved outcomes for voucher recipients. However, it might be more effective to forgo the voucher program altogether and simply give eligible households cash to cover their housing costs. The Philadelphia Housing Authority is currently testing out this approach. The idea is that landlords would be less likely to reject applicants receiving government support if the bureaucratic hurdles were eliminated. The downside of this approach is that it would not prevent landlords from renting out deficient units that the voucher program would normally reject. Homeowners get subsidies—why not renters? Expanding rental assistance to all eligible low-income households would be costly. The Urban Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, estimates it would cost about $118 billion a year. However, Congress has spent similar sums on housing subsidies before. But they involve tax breaks for homeowners, not low-income renters. Congress forgoes billions of dollars annually in tax revenue it would otherwise collect were it not for tax deductions, credits, exclusions and exemptions. These are known as tax expenditures. A tax not collected is equivalent to a subsidy payment. For example, from 1998 through 2017—prior to the tax changes enacted by the first Trump administration in 2017—the federal government annually sacrificed $187 billion on average, after inflation, in revenue due to mortgage interest deductions, deductions for state and local taxes, and for the exemption of proceeds from the sale of one's home from capital gains taxes. In fiscal year 2025, these tax expenditures totaled $95.4 billion. Moreover, tax expenditures on behalf of homeowners flow mostly to higher-income households. In 2024, for example, more than 70% of all mortgage-interest tax deductions went to homeowners earning at least $200,000. Broadening the availability of rental subsidies would have other benefits. It would save federal, state, and local governments billions of dollars in homeless services. Moreover, automatic provision of rental subsidies would reduce the need for additional subsidies to finance new affordable housing. Universal rental assistance, by guaranteeing sufficient rental income, would allow builders to more easily obtain loans to cover development costs. Of course, sharply raising federal expenditures for low-income rental assistance flies in the face of the Trump administration's priorities. Its budget proposal for the next fiscal year calls for a 44% cut of more than $27 billion in rental assistance and public housing. On the other hand, if the government supported rental assistance in amounts commensurate with the tax benefits given to homeowners, it would go a long way toward resolving the rental housing affordability crisis. This article is part of a series centered on envisioning ways to deal with the housing crisis. Alex Schwartz is a professor of urban policy at the New School. Kirk McClure is a professor of urban planning at the University of Kansas. The extended deadline for Fast Company's Next Big Things in Tech Awards is this Friday, June 27, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply today.
