Italian lawmakers and human rights advocates gathered at the Italian Parliament on May 21 for a conference with Maryam Rajavi, the president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), where speakers condemned the Iranian regime’s use of executions and called for stronger international support for democratic change in Iran.
The event in Rome brought together members of parliament, former officials, and rights activists who framed the situation in Iran as both a domestic political crisis and an international security concern. Throughout the conference, participants repeatedly criticized what they described as years of Western appeasement toward Tehran while voicing support for the NCRI and Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan for a future democratic republic.
Opening the session, moderators pointed to the scale of executions carried out in Iran, describing the issue as one that receives only intermittent international attention despite its persistence. Speakers argued that executions, torture, and repression remain central tools used by the Iranian regime to maintain control.
Maryam Rajavi used her keynote address to emphasize what she called the “fundamental conflict” between the Iranian regime and the Iranian people. Referring to ongoing protests and underground opposition activity inside Iran, she said the struggle had continued for more than four decades and was now being carried forward through “popular uprisings and the activities of the Resistance Units,” a reference to networks affiliated with the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK).
Rajavi argued that the increase in executions reflected fear within the ruling establishment. “These daily executions are driven by the regime’s sheer fear of the Iranian people and their uprisings,” she said.
She also sought to position the NCRI as an organized political alternative capable of replacing the current system. In doing so, she rejected both the ruling clerical establishment and attempts to revive the former monarchy. Rajavi criticized what she described as efforts to construct “a pseudo-alternative out of the remnants of the monarchical dictatorship,” referencing demonstrations by monarchist supporters in Europe carrying symbols associated with SAVAK, the Shah’s former secret police.
Addressing European governments directly, Rajavi called on the European Union to formally recognize “the right of the Iranian people and their resistance to overthrow this regime.”
Naike Gruppioni, a member of the Italian Chamber of Deputies and organizer of the event, focused her remarks on the importance of defending political freedoms and human rights. She argued that democratic societies often take liberty for granted until it is threatened or removed.
Gruppioni highlighted the case of Vahid Bani-Amerian, described during the conference as a Resistance Units commander who was executed following what speakers characterized as a sham trial. She quoted his final reported words: “Even if you kill us, we multiply.”
She described Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan as “a concrete political project for a future of a free Iran, a democratic, non-nuclear Republic,” and said the Iranian people had already rejected both religious authoritarianism and a return to monarchy.
“The Iranian people have already rejected every form of authoritarianism,” Gruppioni said, adding that opposition to the current system did not translate into support for restoring the monarchy.
Former Italian Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi di Sant’Agata, who currently chairs the Senate’s European Affairs Committee, delivered one of the conference’s sharpest criticisms of Western policy toward Tehran. Drawing on his diplomatic background, Terzi argued that international engagement with the Iranian regime had enabled repression and regional destabilization.
He credited the PMOI with exposing Iran’s nuclear activities years earlier and contrasted the sacrifices of activists operating inside Iran with opposition figures living abroad whom he described as disconnected from events inside the country.
Terzi specifically criticized Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s last Shah, accusing him of promoting a political transition that would preserve parts of the current security apparatus, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Ministry of Intelligence, and the Basij paramilitary force.
According to Terzi, the NCRI represented the only organized alternative with a defined political framework for democratic transition.
Calls to blacklist the IRGC were repeated throughout the event. Several speakers urged the European Union to formally designate the IRGC as a terrorist organization and to adopt a firmer stance toward Tehran.
Antonio Stango, president of the Italian Federation for Human Rights, argued that the policy commonly described as “appeasement” amounted to political “condescension” toward a government responsible for systematic abuses.
Stango also linked Iran’s domestic repression to regional conflicts, describing the Iranian regime as an “aggressor regime.” He accused Tehran of directing or supporting militant groups across the Middle East, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
Referring to the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, Stango claimed the operation had been directed by Tehran, while attacks carried out by Hezbollah and Houthi forces were “coordinated, armed, financed” by the Iranian regime.
He argued that regional stability required a policy of “ayatollah regime zero,” rejecting the possibility of long-term compromise with Tehran.
Another contribution came from Senator Marco Scurria, who was unable to attend in person due to official commitments in Belgrade but submitted a written statement that was read during the conference.
Scurria described the repression in Iran as a moral challenge for the international community and argued that economic or geopolitical considerations should not outweigh human rights concerns.
“One cannot witness in silence the repressions and killings that strike men and women, and even children,” he wrote.
The conference concluded with repeated calls for greater international recognition of Iranian opposition movements and stronger action against Tehran’s security institutions. Speakers presented the debate not simply as a foreign policy issue, but as part of a broader discussion over democratic accountability, political repression, and the direction of international engagement with Iran.
