By Staff Writer

A controversial draft law aimed at expanding Iran’s national security and espionage legislation has been returned to parliament for revision after the Guardian Council raised concerns over vague definitions, disproportionate penalties, and potential violations of Islamic and constitutional law.

The pushback is notable within Iran’s hardliner-dominated establishment, even as authorities intensify a crackdown following the recent war with Israel.

Passed in late June after the 12-day war, the bill — formally titled “Intensification of Punishment for Espionage and Cooperation with the Zionist Regime and Hostile States Against National Security and Interests” — proposes sweeping measures, including the death penalty, for a wide range of activities deemed to aid Israel, the United States, or other “hostile” actors.

But the Guardian Council, which vets laws for Sharia and constitutional compliance, rejected the draft in its current form.

Guardian Council’s objections

Spokesperson Hadi Tahan Nazif outlined several objections to the proposed law, saying: “The necessity of precision in legal definitions is critical. There is ambiguity in identifying who determines ‘hostile states and groups.’ It must be clarified which official institution makes that designation.”

He warned that vague language in Article 4 — such as “creating division” and “undermining national security” — could violate constitutional rights: “Such qualitative language may, in practice, restrict legitimate freedom of expression. These ambiguities must be resolved.”

On Article 2, which equates “any direct or indirect assistance” to Israel with efsad fel-arz — the capital offence of “spreading corruption on earth” — he cautioned: “In Islamic jurisprudence, the conditions for establishing the crime of corruption on earth are specific and strict. Broadening its scope without meeting these conditions is contrary to Sharia.”

The council also criticised what it viewed as lenient treatment of certain offences, such as the organised distribution of banned communications equipment, suggesting these could merit harsher penalties.

Another point of contention was the bill’s retroactive application, which contradicts Article 169 of the constitution that prohibits criminalising acts after the fact: “No act or omission may be considered a crime under a law enacted after the fact,” Tahan Nazif said.

Rising arrests and intensifying rhetoric

While rejecting the draft, the Guardian Council nonetheless emphasised the need for effective legal tools to defend national security following the war with Israel.

“Our intent is not to obstruct legislation but to ensure laws are both enforceable and aligned with the constitution and Sharia, while also safeguarding citizens’ rights,” Tahan Nazif said.

The Expediency Council has also signalled support for the bill’s general aims while noting ambiguities that need addressing.

Meanwhile, the legislative debate unfolds against a backdrop of escalating internal security operations. Over 700 people have been detained in recent weeks for alleged collaboration with Israel.

Tehran’s prosecutor Ali Salehi confirmed ongoing investigations into espionage, sabotage, and smuggling cases: “These cases involve individuals accused of sending maps and GPS coordinates to the Zionist regime, as well as transferring explosive materials,” he said. “With full support from the judiciary and security forces, investigations are proceeding swiftly.”

Iranian state media have called for harsh punishment of detainees. This week, the IRGC-linked Fars News Agency published an editorial urging mass executions of those accused of aiding Israel and Western intelligence, invoking the 1988 executions of political prisoners, which were widely condemned internationally for their secret trials and mass killings.

What the draft law proposes

The draft legislation seeks to codify a broad crackdown on perceived threats to Iran’s security. Key provisions include:

• Death penalty for espionage or collaboration with Israel, the United States, or their affiliates.
• Death penalty for producing, transferring, or importing drones with “malicious intent” for military or surveillance use.
• Prison sentences of 10–15 years for spreading material — including news, images, or videos — deemed to harm national security or foment division.
• Prison terms of six months to 10 years for using or distributing unauthorised communication devices, including satellite internet systems such as Starlink.
• Retroactive application of the law to offences committed before its enactment.

Impact on press freedom and speech

While Iran already restricts journalism and public expression through existing laws on “propaganda against the state” and “false news,” the draft law would escalate these restrictions by codifying harsher penalties and explicitly framing independent reporting or dissent as collaboration with hostile states.

Critics warn that vague provisions — such as punishing content that “creates division” or “undermines national security” — would enable broader censorship and criminalisation of journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens who share critical information.

The bill now returns to parliament for amendments before undergoing another review by the Guardian Council.

Although its final form remains uncertain, the legislation underscores Tehran’s determination to strengthen internal controls in the aftermath of the war — and the legal and political debates over how far such measures can go under Iran’s own laws.