Abdorrahman Boroumand Center

for Human Rights in Iran

Omid, a memorial in defense of human rights in Iran
One Person’s Story

Mas'ud Parvizi Omran


Nationality: Iran
Religion: Presumed Muslim
Civil Status: Single


Date of Killing: October 30, 2002
Location of Killing: Amol, Mazandaran Province, Iran
Mode of Killing: Hanging

About this Case

News of the execution of Mr. Mas’ud Parvizi Omran (without the last name) was published in the Iran newspaper on October 31, 2002. Additional information was also published in the Iran newspaper on June 19, 21, 22, 24, 27, 30, July 6, 7, and 15, 2002, and on the website of Jamejam on June 26, 2002.

Mr. Parvizi Omran was single, from Amol, a resident of Tehran, and a medical student at the Army University in Tehran. His case was related to the kidnapping and murder of a nine-year-old boy on May 5, 2002, and the murder of a 24-year-old man on December 24, 2000.

Agents of Branch 10 of the Criminal Investigator in Tehran had arrested Mr. Parvizi Omran in January of 2001 in connection with recovery of the body of his close friend. He was detained for 48 hours but released due to lack of evidence against him. However, during his trial for the murder of a nine-year-old boy, the family of the first victim read the news and went to the Criminal Investigator in Tehran claiming that Mr. Parvizi Omran had murdered their 24-year-old son too. (Iran newspaper on June 24, 2002)        

Arrest and Detention

Mr. Parvizi Omran was arrested for the second time by a special team of the Criminal Investigator in Amol in cooperation with the Farjam Police Station 136 at the eastern Tehran on June 16, 2002 (Iran newspaper on June 19, 2002). According to the existing information, the father of the nine-year-old victim contacted the Emergency Police 110 after disappearance of his son and receiving a call from someone with a Kurdish accent demanding $100k and 4 million Tumans to release his son. Based on this report, a special base was established headed by the judge of Branch 10 of Amol Courthouse, including the Commander of Police in Mazandaran and the Criminal Investigator’s Office in Amol. On the morning of April 20, 2002, the requested money was given to the kidnapper and police were unable to arrest him. However, police agents were able to arrest Mr. Parvizi Omran, who had purchased an expensive car about the same time, by cellphone tracing. He was transferred to the Amol Prison. He was interrogated twice. His first interrogation was related to the kidnapping and murder of a nine-year-old child. His second interrogation concerned the murder of a young man on January 24, 2001. By the order of the Head of Branch 1601 of the Criminal Court of Tehran, a group of criminal police agents travelled to Amol to interrogate Mr. Parvizi Omran twice. He was detained at the Amol Prison for about six months.


Branch Ten of Amol Courthouse tried Mr. Parvizi Omran. The Mazandaran Courthouse requested the location of this trial (Iran newspaper June 30, 2002). He was tried for two cases out of turn and under extraordinary circumstances (Iran newspaper June 27, 2002). The first court session took place at the office of Deputy Judiciary in Amol on July 4, 2002. During this session, at the request by the judge, the confession video of Mr. Parvizi Omran was played for those present. The Public Prosecutor demanded the maximum penalty of death in public against the defendant. This session took four hours (Iran newspaper July 6, 2002). The second court session took place at Branch Ten of Amol Courthouse on July 6, 2002 (Iran newspaper July 7, 2002). 


The charges against Mr. Parvizi Omran were announced as "kidnapping and murdering a nine-year-old boy and murdering a 24-year-old man." (Iran newspaper July 15, 2002)       

The validity of the criminal charges brought against this defendant cannot be ascertained in the absence of the basic guarantees of a fair trial.

Evidence of Guilt

The evidence presented against Mr. Parvizi Omran was “finding bodies belonging to a nine-year-old boy and a 24-year-old man, receiving money from the father of the nine-year-old boy, recovery of some of the extorted money in the defendant’s home, his confession, testimonies of parents of the 24-year-old man, complaints by the victims’ families, contradictory statements by the defendant during the trial, and a movie that reconstructed the murder at the defendant’s house.”

Mr. Parvizi Omran confessed that because he knew his father’s cousin was rich, he had kidnapped his child. On the day of the incident, he had asked the child to get into his car and he did so without any resistance because they were acquaintances. He drove to a rented villa in Mahmudabad. Later he transferred the child to his own house in Tehran. He told the child that he was making a movie in which he had to play the main role. He then contacted the family several times to get the money for releasing the child. Finally, he was able to receive the money. But, since the child knew him, he was forced to kill him. Regarding the 24-year-old man, money was the motive. The young man had access to his father’s company account and they could get some money by forging the father’s signature.

International human rights organizations have repeatedly condemned the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for its systematic use of severe torture and solitary confinement to obtain confessions from detainees and have questioned the authenticity of confessions obtained under duress.


Mr. Parvizi Omran defended himself during the trial and rejected all charges. He claimed that all his confessions had been taken under pressure and in an insecure environment (Iran newspaper July 7, 2002). He did not accept the child’s murder but accepted his kidnapping. He planned to become a different person with the money. He accused someone else as the perpetrator of the murder and stated: “Why should I be hanged while the main defendant and the perpetrator of the crime walks free?” He had an attorney who also defended him. The attorney objected to the location of the trial in Amol because the crime took place in a different city. He also objected to the forensics’ report. However, no information is available on the results of these objections.    


The Amol Courthouse condemned Mr. Mas’ud Parvizi Omran to death, two counts, and the Supreme Court confirmed the ruling. He was hanged in public and in the presence of authorities at the Shahid Chamran Stadium, in Amol, on October 30, 2002 at 10 a.m.    


Correct/ Complete This Entry