Overview
The Islamic Republic of Iran (جمهوری اسلامی ایران, Jomhuri-ye Eslāmi-ye Irān) has no bilateral extradition treaty with the Federal Republic of Germany. Iran is neither a party to the European Convention on Extradition (ECE) nor an EU member; the European Arrest Warrant does not apply. Extradition relations are therefore assessed exclusively on a treaty-free basis under Sections 1 ff. IRG and require a formal assurance of reciprocity from Iran (Section 5 IRG).
Formal Iranian extradition requests to Germany are numerically rare. In practice, however, Iran is highly relevant through its systematic use of Interpol alerts (Red Notices and diffusions) against regime critics, exiled opposition figures and dual nationals abroad — as well as through the risk of arrest when traveling to third or transit states. Added to this are ordinary criminal allegations (economic, drug and narcotics offenses), in which, however, the same fundamental human-rights questions are always at the forefront.
The defense in Iran constellations is shaped by three structural features that regularly make an extradition appear inadmissible from the outset: the excessive Iranian death-penalty practice (Section 8 IRG), the documented torture and dismal detention conditions (Section 73 sentence 1 IRG in conjunction with Article 3 ECHR), and persecution on political, religious or ideological grounds via the Revolutionary Courts (Section 6(2) IRG).
Legal basis
In the absence of an international agreement, the Act on International Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (IRG) of 23 Dec 1982 applies directly on the German side. Treaty-free extradition requires an assurance of reciprocity under Section 5 IRG; under Section 3 IRG, dual criminality is required (the offense must carry a maximum custodial sentence of more than one year, and in enforcement cases at least four months of sentence remaining).
For German citizens, extradition to Iran is excluded under Article 16(2) of the Basic Law in conjunction with Section 80 IRG; the relaxation in Section 80 IRG applies only to extraditions to EU member states. Iran does not recognize dual nationality and treats German-Iranian dual nationals domestically as exclusively Iranian citizens — this is irrelevant to the blocking effect of Article 16(2) of the Basic Law, but of considerable practical significance for consular protection.
On the Iranian side, the substantive criminal law is based on the Islamic Penal Code (Qānun-e Mojāzāt-e Eslāmi); politically and security-charged proceedings are conducted before the Revolutionary Courts (Dādgāh-e Enqelāb). On the Iranian side, the central authority in extradition relations is the Ministry of Justice in coordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. On the German side, the Higher Regional Courts decide on admissibility (Sections 13 ff. IRG); the granting decision is made by the General Public Prosecutor's Offices, and in cases of fundamental or foreign-policy significance by the Federal Office of Justice in agreement with the Federal Foreign Office.
Country-specific issues in Iran
Death penalty — the second-highest number of executions worldwide after China: For years Iran has been among the states with the highest number of executions worldwide; human-rights organizations (Amnesty International, Iran Human Rights) document several hundred executions per year, with a sharply rising trend in the years 2023–2025. The death penalty is imposed not only for murder but also for drug offenses, "waging war against God" (mohārebe), "corruption on earth" (efsād-e fel-arz), espionage, certain sexual and morality offenses, and apostasy. Public executions are documented. Where the alleged offense is of this kind, extradition is admissible under Section 8 IRG only with an effective, verifiable assurance — given Iranian enforcement practice and the absence of any monitoring mechanism, a reliable assurance is practically unobtainable, so extradition is regularly inadmissible.
Revolutionary Courts and political persecution: Security and political proceedings are conducted before Revolutionary Courts without minimum rule-of-law guarantees; documented features include coerced "confessions", lack of access to defense counsel, and proceedings held behind closed doors. Allegations such as "propaganda against the state", "assembly and collusion against national security" or mohārebe regularly serve to suppress opposition, women's-rights, minority and protest movements (in particular in the course of the nationwide "Woman, Life, Freedom" protests from September 2022). Such proceedings are a bar under Section 6(1) IRG (political offense) and Section 6(2) IRG (threatened persecution on grounds of political conviction, religion or membership of a social group).
Instrumentalization of dual nationals ("hostage diplomacy"): International reporting and human-rights organizations document that Iranian authorities detain foreign and dual-national persons as a political bargaining chip. The most prominent example with a German connection is the German-Iranian citizen Jamshid Sharmahd, who was sentenced to death after being abducted to Iran and whose execution was announced by the Iranian side in October 2024. This practice underscores that diplomatic assurances from Iran cannot form a viable basis for an extradition.
Abuse of Interpol: Iran repeatedly uses Red Notices and diffusions against exiled opposition figures. Under Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution, any activity of a political, military, religious or racial character is prohibited; politically motivated alerts can be challenged before the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files (CCF). Where there is an Iran connection, an arrest in Germany or in a transit country abroad must be averted early through a CCF application, a protective brief with the BKA and the Federal Office of Justice, and consular precautions.
Detention conditions and the human-rights review
Detention conditions in the Iranian prison system are documented by numerous independent sources (the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the human-rights reporting of the Federal Foreign Office) as seriously contrary to human rights. The focus is on Tehran's Evin Prison and the Gohardasht (Rajai Shahr) facility in Karaj. Reported features include torture and ill-treatment to extract confessions, prolonged solitary confinement, denial of medical care, deaths in custody, and the use of detention conditions as a means of political pressure.
It follows from German case law that, in the case of an extradition to Iran, the standard of review developed in relation to Article 3 ECHR / Article 4 of the EU Charter (Aranyosi/Căldăraru, ECJ C-404/15 and C-659/15 PPU — to be applied as the standard even outside the European Arrest Warrant) regularly weighs decisively against admissibility. A mere diplomatic assurance ("humane treatment") is insufficient for want of any monitoring mechanism; given the documented situation, a reliable, facility-specific and monitorable assurance is practically unattainable.
A further aggravating factor is that Iran denies consular access to German-Iranian dual nationals because it does not recognize German nationality. Effective oversight of treatment after a surrender — as provided for by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR) — would thus not be guaranteed precisely in the most endangered constellations.
Lines of defense
The defense in Iran extradition proceedings is regularly promising where it is structured by counsel at an early stage. Review grid:
- Section 8 IRG (death penalty): Where the alleged offenses carry a threat of the Iranian death penalty (murder, drug offenses, mohārebe, espionage, morality offenses), extradition is possible only with an effective, monitorable assurance — practically unobtainable in light of enforcement practice, and therefore regularly inadmissible.
- Section 6(2) IRG (threatened political/religious persecution): To be examined without fail where there is a connection to the opposition, a protest movement, or religious or ethnic minorities — regularly a bar. It also covers an ostensibly "criminal" request behind which a persecution purpose lies.
- Section 6(1) IRG (political offense): Applicable in proceedings before Revolutionary Courts and for security-related offense definitions.
- Section 73 sentence 1 IRG in conjunction with Article 3 ECHR (torture/detention conditions): Regularly the decisive argument. Systematically introduce reports on Evin and Gohardasht into the admissibility proceedings; the denial of consular access to dual nationals as an additional ground for refusal.
- Article 16(2) of the Basic Law in conjunction with Section 80 IRG: Where there is German nationality — including in the case of German-Iranian dual nationals — extradition is excluded.
- Section 3 IRG (dual criminality): Iranian offenses such as apostasy, "propaganda against the state", or morality or veiling offenses have no German counterpart — extradition is inadmissible to that extent.
- Section 5 IRG (reciprocity): No treaty — a formal, reliable assurance of reciprocity is required.
- Section 11 IRG (rule of specialty): To be secured separately in treaty-free extradition; a concrete enumeration of the offenses granted, with supplementary requests only upon renewed consent.
- Interpol/CCF: Challenge a politically motivated Red Notice or diffusion under Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution; an early CCF deletion application and a protective brief with the BKA and the Federal Office of Justice.
- Constitutional complaint with an urgent application (Section 32 BVerfGG): The standard remedy following a declaration of admissibility by the OLG where fundamental rights are violated (Article 1(1), Article 2(2), Article 25 of the Basic Law in conjunction with Article 3 ECHR); where the detention-conditions and persecution complaint is carefully prepared, the prospects of success are not slight.
Legal representation in Iranian extradition proceedings
An extradition case is a specialized mutual-legal-assistance procedure that goes beyond classic criminal defense. Engaging a defense lawyer specialized in extradition law at an early stage is regularly decisive — not only after the formal extradition arrest warrant has been issued, but already from the moment of an arrest based on an Interpol notice, an SIS alert or a European Arrest Warrant.
As a Certified Specialist in Criminal Law with a focus on extradition law, I advise and represent affected persons nationwide before the competent Higher Regional Courts and in constitutional complaint proceedings before the Federal Constitutional Court.