The recent sentencing of 29-year-old Iranian folk singer Parastoo Ahmadi and eight members of her production crew to 74 lashes each, plus a two-year travel ban and a two-year ban on artistic activities, has drawn international attention. The Qom criminal court handed down the punishment after Ahmadi livestreamed a performance of a patriotic song without wearing a hijab. The charges included "offending public decency" through the production and online publication of "vulgar and immoral content." While the sentence shocked many observers, it follows a predictable pattern rooted in Iran's post-1979 Islamic legal system.
Iran's legal framework is explicitly based on Shia Islamic jurisprudence, specifically the Ja'fari school of thought. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the new constitution declared that all laws must conform to Islamic principles, and Sharia became the foundation of criminal justice. Unlike secular legal systems that separate religion from law, Iran's system integrates religious rules directly into statutes through the Islamic Penal Code.
The Penal Code divides crimes and punishments into three main categories:
Hudud (fixed, mandatory punishments derived directly from the Quran and Hadith). These include amputation for theft, flogging or stoning for certain sexual offences, and execution for apostasy or "corruption on earth" in extreme cases. Hudud sentences are largely non-discretionary once guilt is established according to strict evidentiary rules.
Qisas (retaliation or "eye for an eye"). This applies mainly to murder and bodily injury, where the victim's family can demand equivalent punishment, blood money (diya), or forgiveness.
Ta'zir (discretionary punishment). This is by far the broadest and most commonly used category. Judges have wide latitude to impose fines, imprisonment, deprivation of rights, or flogging for offences not covered by hudud or qisas. Most "moral," political, and public-order crimes, including hijab violations, protests, and online expression, fall under ta'zir.
The 74 lashes given to Parastoo Ahmadi and her crew is a classic ta'zir punishment. Article 638 of the Islamic Penal Code criminalises appearing in public without proper Islamic dress (including failure to wear the hijab) and authorises ta'zir penalties. Article 743 of the Computer Crimes Law targets the online publication of "obscene" or "immoral" content. For these and similar offences, Iranian courts routinely impose flogging in the range of 31 to 74 lashes (the standard range for sixth-degree ta'zir under the Penal Code). The number 74 is not arbitrary; it appears repeatedly in the Code as the upper limit for many moral and decency-related ta'zir sentences.
This is not an isolated or exceptional ruling. Since the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" protests triggered by the death of Mahsa Amini in morality police custody, Iranian courts have handed down dozens of 74-lash sentences to women for hijab violations or related acts of defiance. Human rights organisations have documented multiple cases of women receiving exactly 74 lashes for appearing without a hijab in public or on social media. The penalty has become a standard tool for enforcing compulsory veiling and suppressing cultural or political expression that challenges the regime's interpretation of Islamic norms.
In practice, ta'zir allows judges considerable flexibility. While the Penal Code provides the framework and the 31–74 lash range, individual judges can combine lashes with other penalties, such as the travel and artistic bans imposed on Ahmadi and her crew, to create a broader deterrent effect. The system is designed to be both punitive and symbolic: physical punishment combined with restrictions on movement and livelihood sends a clear message to artists, activists, and ordinary citizens.
Critics, including human rights lawyers inside and outside Iran, argue that these sentences lack proper legal basis in some cases and are applied inconsistently to target dissent rather than genuine criminal behaviour. They note that female singing and performance are heavily restricted but not outright criminalised under the core Penal Code, yet authorities stretch "public decency" and "immoral content" provisions to justify harsh ta'zir penalties. Human rights groups also highlight that flogging constitutes cruel and degrading treatment under international law.
In short, Iran's Sharia-based system blends fixed religious punishments (hudud) with broad judicial discretion (ta'zir). The 74-lash sentence handed to Parastoo Ahmadi is not an outlier but a textbook application of ta'zir for alleged moral and online offences, a penalty with clear precedent in both the Islamic Penal Code and recent enforcement against women defying hijab rules.
The case illustrates how the Iranian legal system functions in practice: religious principles codified into statute, enforced through discretionary judicial power, and used to police both personal conduct and public expression. Whether viewed as the application of divine law or as a mechanism of social control, the 74 lashes reflect a well-established pattern rather than an exceptional decision.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/18/iran-parastoo-ahmadi-74-lashes-singing-without-hijab