The reports did not immediately provide further details on the identities of those executed, the charges brought against them, or the legal proceedings leading to the sentences.The executions follow unrest earlier this year that saw demonstrations across multiple Iranian cities, prompting a security response from authorities.

Iran’s judiciary has not issued a detailed public statement on the latest executions, and independent verification of the reports was not immediately available.

The judiciary’s official Mizan Online website said Mehrab Abdollahzadeh was hanged after legal procedures were completed, following his conviction under the capital offense of “corruption on earth,” one of the most serious charges under Iran’s penal code.

“Mehrab Abdollahzadeh’s death sentence was carried out this morning after completing the legal formalities,” Mizan said.According to the judiciary, Abdollahzadeh and several others were arrested during street protests in Urmia, where a farmer described by authorities as a volunteer assisting security forces was allegedly attacked and fatally beaten.

The victim had attended the demonstrations “as a volunteer force to ensure the security of the people,” Mizan said, referring to him as having been “martyred.” The report did not specify the exact date of the incident.Mizan also published what it said was part of Abdollahzadeh’s confession, in which he admitted to striking the victim several times in the face.

Two other defendants in the same case, both under the age of 18, were sentenced to prison terms of unspecified length, the judiciary said.Iran has in recent weeks carried out multiple executions of individuals accused of involvement in the wave of protests that erupted before the conflict with the United States and Israel.

The demonstrations began in late December over rising living costs and economic hardship before spreading nationwide and evolving into broader anti-government protests, reaching their peak on January 8 and 9.Iranian authorities said the protests initially began peacefully but later turned into what they described as “foreign-instigated riots” involving violence, killings and damage to public property.

Rights groups have repeatedly criticized Iran’s use of capital punishment in protest-related cases, raising concerns over due process, forced confessions and the speed of judicial proceedings.

The executions come as Tehran faces growing domestic economic pressure and heightened international scrutiny over both its internal security measures and regional military tensions.

The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said at least nine of those executed were linked to protests that shook Iran in January 2026, while 10 others were put to death for alleged membership in opposition groups and two were executed on spying charges.

The agency said many of those detained had been subjected to enforced disappearances, torture and what it described as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, including forced confessions, some of which were later broadcast publicly, as well as mock executions.

“I am appalled that on top of the already severe impacts of the conflict the rights of the Iranian people continue to be stripped from them by the authorities, in harsh and brutal ways,” U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk said in a statement.

“In times of war, threats to human rights increase exponentially. Yet even where national security is invoked, human rights can only be limited where strictly necessary and proportionate,” he said.Turk called on Iranian authorities to halt further executions, establish a moratorium on the death penalty, ensure due process and fair trial guarantees, and immediately release those arbitrarily detained.

OHCHR said many people, including minors, remain at risk of capital punishment because of Iran’s broad interpretation of national security offenses. It said judicial proceedings were often accelerated and some death sentences, including those of at least nine executed protesters, were reportedly based on coerced confessions.

The agency also raised concerns over the transfer of dozens of prisoners, including prominent human rights lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh, to undisclosed locations.Iran remains one of the world’s leading users of capital punishment and executes more people annually than any country except China, according to rights groups including Amnesty International.

Turk also criticized prison conditions across Iran, describing them as dire, with overcrowding and severe shortages of food, water, hygiene supplies, medicine and access to medical care.In Chabahar prison on March 18, detainees protesting the prolonged suspension of food distribution were reportedly met with lethal force.

OHCHR said security forces killed at least five prisoners and injured 21 others after confronting demonstrators inside the prison.The agency further said internet access in Iran had been almost completely shut down for 61 consecutive days, describing it as one of the longest nationwide shutdowns ever recorded.

“This is denying people across the country access to vital information, silencing independent voices, and inflicting enormous social and economic harm,” Turk said.He said the restrictions were worsening an already fragile humanitarian and economic situation and urged authorities to restore access immediately.

The judiciary’s Mizan Online website said Erfan Kiani was hanged after the country’s Supreme Court upheld his death sentence, describing him as one of the “main operatives” involved in an operation allegedly directed by Mossad during unrest in the central province of Isfahan in January.

Authorities accused Kiani of participating in sabotage and violent attacks during the protests, which officials say were orchestrated by foreign-backed groups seeking to destabilize the country.

According to the judiciary, he was charged with “destruction of public and private property, arson, possession and use of Molotov cocktails, carrying a bladed weapon, blocking vehicle routes, attacking officers, and creating fear and panic among citizens.”Iranian officials said the activities formed part of a “mission assigned by Mossad,” Israel’s foreign intelligence agency, although no independent evidence was publicly presented.

The execution follows the hanging on Thursday of another man convicted of membership in a banned opposition organization, continuing a broader wave of capital punishment linked to unrest and national security charges.Iran has sharply increased executions since the outbreak of war with Israel and the United States on Feb. 28, when U.S.-Israeli strikes triggered a wider regional conflict and heightened internal security measures across the country.

Authorities have linked January’s protests to what they describe as coordinated interference by Israel, the United States, and exiled opposition groups, including the banned People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran.Since March 19, Iranian authorities have executed at least nine men on charges connected to those protests, according to official statements.

Human rights organizations have repeatedly criticized Iran’s use of the death penalty, particularly in cases involving political dissent, espionage accusations, and national security prosecutions.According to groups including Amnesty International, Iran is the world’s second most prolific user of capital punishment after China.

Tehran maintains that such executions are necessary to preserve national security and deter what it calls foreign-sponsored subversion during wartime conditions.

The latest case is likely to draw renewed international scrutiny over Iran’s judicial process and its handling of security-related prosecutions amid escalating regional tensions.

Checkpoints staffed by security personnel and volunteers have proliferated across the capital since the conflict began, initially marked by military vehicles and road barriers. While some visible fortifications have been scaled back following recent airstrikes, residents say patrols remain widespread, with teenagers now playing an increasingly prominent role.

Witness accounts describe adolescents aged 13 to 14 manning checkpoints, stopping vehicles and conducting searches. A 28-year-old resident told AFP that she was stopped at two checkpoints in northern Tehran, where teenage boys carrying weapons inspected her phone and personal belongings without consent, calling the encounter intrusive.

Another resident said that beyond formal military checkpoints, groups of youths in private vehicles were independently stopping cars, opening doors and checking dashboards and mobile devices.Authorities have acknowledged lowering the minimum age for Basij recruitment to 12, citing high levels of interest among younger volunteers.

Rahim Nadali, an official with the Revolutionary Guards in Tehran, said on state television that the decision reflected demand from children seeking to participate in defense efforts.The Basij, an auxiliary force under the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has historically played a central role in internal security operations.

It was also reported to have been involved in suppressing anti-government protests in January, during which thousands were killed.The expanded use of minors has drawn concern from rights groups and analysts. Some observers interpret the move as an indication of manpower shortages, while others see it as a sign of a more hardline approach by authorities seeking to consolidate control amid external and internal pressures.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliamentary speaker, urged supporters to maintain a presence on the streets, framing domestic mobilization as part of a broader strategic effort alongside military and maritime pressures, including tensions around the Strait of Hormuz.

Analysts say the intensified street presence is aimed at deterring potential unrest, particularly after calls from U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu encouraging opposition activity at the outset of the war.

In addition to checkpoint duties, pro-government groups have organized nighttime patrols, using vehicles equipped with loudspeakers to broadcast slogans and display flags in residential areas.

Hamidreza Azizi, a visiting fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, said the government was increasingly reliant on a core base of ideologically committed supporters to maintain order. He noted that this strategy reflects deeper challenges to the state’s legitimacy but has proven effective in sustaining control during wartime conditions.

Human Rights Watch said the recruitment of children under 15 for military roles could constitute a war crime under international law and warned that their deployment exposes them to heightened risks, including potential targeting in military strikes.

Bill Van Esveld, the group’s associate director for children’s rights, said the policy suggested authorities were willing to endanger minors to bolster security capacity.

Time and again, emotional appeals for street protests have been presented as the only recourse—akin to a one-size-fits-all remedy.

Last week, India’s Parliament passed the Waqf Amendment Bill, a piece of legislation aimed at reforming the management of Islamic charitable endowments known as Waqf properties. This move has sparked significant unease among Muslim organizations, civil society groups, and opposition political parties in the country. Despite appeals to India’s President, Droupadi Murmu, to withhold her approval, the bill has now been enacted into law.

Prominent political figures, including Muslim parliamentarians such as Asaduddin Owaisi of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad Muslimeen, Mohammed Jawed of the Indian National Congress, and Amanatullah Khan, a Delhi legislator and chairman of the local Waqf Board from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), have filed legal challenges in India’s Supreme Court, questioning the bill’s alignment with the nation’s constitution.

In contrast, Sanjay Raut, a member of parliament from Shiv Sena (UBT)—a regional political party—has indicated his party’s decision not to oppose the legislation, suggesting a divergence of views even among the government’s critics.

India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led central government defends the bill, asserting it is in the nation’s best interest. Key officials, including Kiren Rijiju, the Minister of Minority Affairs, and Amit Shah, the Minister of Home Affairs, have repeatedly emphasized that the law does not infringe on Muslim rights. Instead, they argue it seeks to improve the efficiency of Waqf Boards—bodies responsible for overseeing these endowments. The government has dismissed opposition claims that the bill undermines constitutional protections as baseless.

Nevertheless, a coalition of Muslim organizations, individuals, and opposition parties continues to argue that the legislation threatens the sanctity of mosques and graveyards managed under Waqf. Labeling it unconstitutional, these groups are mobilizing for nationwide protests, including large-scale sit-ins and street demonstrations, to demand the law’s repeal.

The Historical Context of Waqf Management

Before jumping to support calls for protests, it’s worth exploring the historical management of Waqf properties—endowments established under Islamic law for charitable purposes—since India’s independence in 1947. This moment of controversy offers a chance to reflect on how these assets, meant to serve religious and social welfare, have been handled over decades.

A 2011 report by the Sachar Committee, a government-appointed panel studying the socio-economic conditions of Indian Muslims, alongside data from the Central Waqf Council, revealed that over 50% of Waqf land in India is either encroached upon or tangled in legal disputes—a striking indicator of systemic mismanagement across regions and political regimes.

In Telangana, a southern Indian state never governed by the BJP, approximately 75% of Waqf land is reportedly encroached upon, with the figure rising to 82% in its capital, Hyderabad. This underscores that the problem transcends any single political party or central policy. These statistics challenge the narrative that the current uproar is solely a result of the national government’s actions and prompt scrutiny of the role local Waqf Boards and regional leaders played in allowing such widespread losses to occur.

The Gap Between Rhetoric and Results

For decades, the administration of Waqf properties—intended to fund education, healthcare, and welfare initiatives—has failed to deliver on its charitable promise. Despite controlling vast assets, the benefits to India’s Muslim community remain limited. This raises pressing questions about who has truly profited from Waqf properties since India’s independence, who bears responsibility for the encroachments, mismanagement, and misuse of these lands, and how many schools, hospitals, or welfare centers have been established using Waqf resources.

Furthermore, what actions were taken against those who exploited these endowments, and in what measurable ways has Waqf contributed to the economic advancement of Muslims? Calls for accountability and reform in Waqf management should have surfaced long ago. Instead, the same organizations now rallying for protests—many of which oversaw this decline—are accused of stirring emotions for political leverage.

Critics argue these self-proclaimed “guardians” of the Muslim community have historically mismanaged Waqf resources, often prioritizing personal or political gain over communal welfare.

The Myth of Wake-Up Calls

Much has been said about “wake-up calls” to galvanize India’s Muslim community. Yet, the reality suggests that community leaders and Waqf custodians were never dormant—they were simply focused elsewhere.

Many Waqf properties have been illegally occupied, with rents kept artificially low, allowing beneficiaries to exploit them for decades without oversight or adjustment. This pattern of neglect raises doubts about the sincerity of those now decrying the new law.

The Pattern of Response to Legislation

A recurring trend emerges in how certain groups react to laws perceived to affect Muslim interests in India. When the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) were introduced—policies aimed at streamlining citizenship processes—similar fears were ignited, with claims that Muslims would be stripped of citizenship. Years after the CAA’s implementation, no widespread evidence of such disenfranchisement has emerged.

This history prompts questions about the opposition to the Waqf Amendment Bill: Are objections rooted in genuine threats to religious rights, or do they reflect an automatic resistance that ultimately serves political agendas rather than community well-being?

The Human Cost of Protest Without Protection

Time and again, emotional appeals for street protests have been presented as the only recourse—akin to a one-size-fits-all remedy.

During the CAA-NRC protests, fears of mass citizenship loss fueled widespread unrest. Yet, as Minister Kiren Rijiju noted during the Waqf bill debates, no Muslims have lost citizenship under CAA. Still, the fallout from such movements lingers: young Muslims arrested during protests against CAA, NRC, and earlier laws like the Triple Talaq ban often remain in jail, lacking legal or financial support from the groups that spurred them into action.

In Muzaffarnagar, a city in northern India, 24 Muslim youths faced legal notices simply for wearing black armbands as a symbolic dissent—not even a full protest—each required to post a ₹2 lakh (approximately $2,400 USD) bond. In Ahmedabad, a western Indian city, around 40 people were detained during demonstrations.

These cases highlight the risks to ordinary citizens when protests lack strategic planning, legal backing, or institutional support.

Before heeding new calls to protest, communities deserve to know whether organizers have secured proper permissions from authorities, are prepared to provide legal aid to those arrested, have a legal team in place, will accept responsibility for the outcomes, and will support the families of detainees financially and emotionally.

The Path Forward: Reform and Accountability

The current Waqf management system demands overhaul. Transparency, accountability, and effectiveness must take precedence over political maneuvering. Rather than blanket opposition, India’s Muslim community could benefit from demanding targeted amendments to problematic clauses in the bill instead of outright rejection, proposing governance models that balance religious autonomy with accountability, establishing independent oversight to track how Waqf resources serve the community, creating forums for community input into Waqf decisions, and developing long-term plans to leverage Waqf assets for education, healthcare, and economic growth.

From Reaction to Responsible Engagement

India’s Muslim community faces a pivotal choice. The current approach lacks strategy, unified leadership, negotiation, or internal reform—just a repetitive cycle of politicization until issues reach the courts. Continuing this pattern of protest and division is an option, but so is redirecting energy toward ensuring Waqf properties fulfill their charitable mission. The community must resist further manipulation.

For decades, Waqf assets have been plundered while leaders stood by. Now, as the government pushes for accountability, some of these same figures are accused of misleading the public once more.

True leadership goes beyond rallying crowds—it requires vision, strategy, and responsibility. By advocating for reforms that bring transparency and efficiency to Waqf management, the community can ensure these resources uplift its most vulnerable members and build enduring institutions for future generations.

The challenge is not merely whether to oppose a law, but how to ensure the sacred trust of Waqf serves its intended purpose: benefiting the community it was created to support.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

World leaders, including former U.S. President Donald Trump, perceive Erdoğan’s crumbling strongman image

Nearly two million Turks have gathered in Istanbul to protest President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s decision to arrest his main political rival, Ekrem İmamoğlu, on what critics call fabricated corruption and terrorism charges. The move has ignited widespread outrage across Turkey, with demonstrators denouncing Erdoğan’s authoritarian grip on power and calling for his immediate resignation.

The arrest of İmamoğlu, who served as Istanbul’s mayor and was seen as Erdoğan’s strongest challenger in upcoming elections, has fueled speculation that the Turkish president is attempting to eliminate political competition ahead of a crucial vote. Protesters have taken to the streets chanting, “Enough is enough!” and “Turkey will not be silenced!” as security forces struggle to contain the surging crowds.

Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a Middle East expert, has been vocal about the situation. “Turks are not stupid; they see through Erdoğan’s cynicism and comment on its ironies,” Rubin stated. “Erdoğan accuses İmamoğlu of corruption, but Erdoğan not only has pending corruption cases dating to his own tenure as mayor, but he has since accumulated billions of dollars in unexplained wealth. He accuses İmamoğlu of supporting terror, but Turkish journalists photographed Erdoğan’s intelligence service transporting weaponry to an Al Qaeda affiliate in Turkey.”

The controversy deepened when Erdoğan’s government reportedly annulled İmamoğlu’s university degree, a requirement for presidential candidates. Rubin pointed out the hypocrisy in this move, noting, “Not only was Erdoğan’s own degree fraudulent, but the grounds for dismissing İmamoğlu’s degree were the illegitimacy of the university he attended in occupied northern Cyprus. As with its universities, so too is it with its entire regime.”

The international community is closely watching the unfolding crisis, with speculation growing about how world leaders, including former U.S. President Donald Trump, perceive Erdoğan’s crumbling strongman image. “Trump sees himself as a winner and despises losers,” Rubin said. “Whereas he may once have seen Erdoğan as a strongman, it is now clear that the would-be sultan wears no clothes. Trump and his team are correct: Turkey is important, but Turkey and Erdoğan are not synonymous. Simply put, Trump should dump Erdoğan.”

The massive protests, among the largest in Turkey’s modern history, highlight a growing sense of urgency among citizens determined to reclaim their democracy. The Turkish military and law enforcement agencies now face a crucial test of allegiance. “Turkey’s elite soldiers swear allegiance to the state and the people of Turkey, not one man who holds the constitution and rule of law with disdain,” Rubin emphasized.

With tensions reaching a boiling point, many analysts fear that Turkey is approaching a breaking point. Some protesters argue that peaceful demonstrations may not be enough to bring about real change in a system they see as rigged in Erdoğan’s favor.

Rubin did not mince words when outlining what may be necessary for political transformation: “The Turkish protestors now fight for the soul of their nation. Every protestor on the streets of Istanbul is as consequential for the future of modern Turkey as was Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Protests might matter in democracies; however, Turkey is not a democracy. To succeed, they must march on Turkey’s palaces and prisons. If Erdoğan does not helicopter to the airport and flee the country, they should detain him, pending trial, even if passions are such that those who reach him first might simply hang him and release political prisoners, ranging from İmamoğlu to detained Kurdish politician Selahattin Demirtaş and philanthropist Osman Kavala.”

Rubin also hinted at the possibility of internal betrayal within Erdoğan’s own ranks. “Erdoğan, like Bashar al-Assad in Syria, may be tempted to hang on. While the United States will never say directly, the White House likely would not look askance at regional states that would offer reward to any Erdoğan bodyguard who turns their guns on the would-be despot to arrest him or, if he resists, to kill him.”

The coming days will be critical for Turkey’s political future. Will the protests succeed in toppling Erdoğan’s rule, or will the regime resort to even harsher crackdowns to suppress dissent? What is clear, however, is that Turkey is at an inflection point. As Rubin put it, “The age of Erdoğan must end. Turks can either take the next step, or they will have no one but themselves to blame for Turkey’s descent into dictatorship, state failure, and eventual civil war.”

The protests in Gaza are more than just a reaction to immediate hardships; they are a plea for recognition.

The recent public demonstrations in Gaza have surprised many observers worldwide. For over 16 months, Gazans have endured relentless Israeli airstrikes, devastation, and an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe. Throughout this period, they have been lauded for their resilience and sacrifice. However, this week’s protests reveal a different side of Gaza’s reality—one that underscores the human need for dignity, justice, and relief from suffering.

The people of Gaza have become synonymous with resistance. Their ability to endure unspeakable hardship has turned them into symbols of perseverance. But as Daoud Kuttab, the award-winning Palestinian journalist, rightly points out, they are human, not superhuman. They feel pain, grieve for their loved ones, and grow frustrated when faced with endless injustice and global indifference. The latest protests are an expression of that frustration—a desperate call for attention to their plight.

The Breaking Point: Renewed Violence and Desperation

The situation in Gaza had seen a glimmer of hope in January when a long-overdue ceasefire was finally implemented. Displaced families began making their way back north, only to find their homes in ruins. With limited resources, they started clearing debris, hoping for the arrival of heavy machinery to remove the rubble and recover the bodies still trapped beneath. But just as they were attempting to rebuild their shattered lives, the ceasefire was abruptly shattered by an Israeli airstrike that killed 400 Palestinians, many of them women and children.

Israel justified the attack by claiming it targeted mid-level Hamas leaders. However, this massive escalation did more than eliminate specific individuals—it reignited a war that had already left Gaza on the brink of collapse. Many Palestinians had placed their faith in the U.S.-brokered ceasefire, expecting some degree of enforcement from the American administration. Instead, Washington chose silence, failing to hold Israel accountable for violating the agreement.

The attack was followed by an intensified blockade on humanitarian aid, leaving Gaza’s already-starving population in an even more dire situation. The Jordanian airdrops of food and medical supplies—though symbolic—failed to provide meaningful relief. As hunger and despair deepened, Gazans found themselves facing a cruel reality: neither the ceasefire nor the promises of humanitarian intervention could protect them.

A Response to Betrayal and Neglect

The frustration that erupted in the form of protests was not merely directed at Israel but also at Hamas. The people of Gaza expect their leaders to navigate crises with strategy and pragmatism, not just ideological steadfastness. In Beit Lahia, when Hamas fired a single symbolic rocket in response to Israeli violations, the Israeli military responded with overwhelming force, once again forcing civilians to evacuate their homes.

This cycle of suffering has tested the patience of even the most steadfast supporters of the resistance. For many Palestinians, the inability of Hamas to negotiate effectively or anticipate Israeli retaliations has become a source of anger. The protesters in Gaza were not only condemning Israeli aggression but also demanding that their leadership show better judgment in a conflict where the balance of power remains overwhelmingly against them.

Attempts to dismiss the protests as externally orchestrated—whether by Mohammed Dahlan’s faction or the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority—were quickly refuted by community leaders in Beit Lahia. These demonstrations were an organic expression of the people’s anger, not the result of political manipulation.

A Call for Immediate Action

Despite growing discontent with Hamas, the protests should not be misinterpreted as a rejection of Palestinian resistance. Rather, they reflect the urgency of a more strategic approach—one that recognizes the evolving geopolitical landscape. The recent shifts in Washington, Beirut, and beyond necessitate careful recalibration. While Palestinian resilience remains unshaken, the need for diplomatic maneuvering is becoming ever more apparent.

The ceasefire must be reinstated immediately. This is not just a demand for temporary relief but a necessity for survival. The ongoing blockade of food and medical supplies is a blatant war crime, and its continuation only serves to deepen Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. International law explicitly prohibits the use of starvation as a weapon of war, yet the global community has failed to enforce these laws when it comes to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

A comprehensive political process must follow the ceasefire. The reconstruction of Gaza is essential, but it cannot happen in a vacuum. Any meaningful rebuilding effort must be accompanied by a serious peace initiative—one that includes the release of prisoners, restoration of basic human rights, and an end to the indiscriminate targeting of civilians.

Will the World Listen?

The protests in Gaza are more than just a reaction to immediate hardships; they are a plea for recognition. Palestinians are not just statistics in an ongoing conflict—they are human beings with emotions, aspirations, and the right to live in dignity. Their suffering has been met with indifference for far too long. It is time for the world to listen.

Arab nations must take a stronger stand. While public outrage in the region remains high, political action has been lacking. Diplomatic pressure on Israel must be increased, and unconditional support for its war policies must be challenged. The international community, too, must move beyond empty statements and push for tangible accountability.

The cries from Gaza should not be ignored. They serve as a stark reminder that this war is not just about military strategies or political power plays—it is about real lives being lost, real families being destroyed, and real suffering that must end. The time for action is now, before more innocent lives are lost to a conflict that has already claimed too many.

He regards demonstrations as the work of the enemy, suggesting that they have not and will not bring any real good.

Saudi scholar, Mohammad bin Abdullah Al-Maliki, has recently made a significant statement regarding protests in support of Palestine. He emphasized that participating in demonstrations is counterproductive and urged the Muslims to offer supplications instead.

Citing Quranic verses and the actions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), he underlines the efficacy of prayer as a means of support.

In his statement, Al-Maliki said, “It is astonishing that Muslims demonstrate in support of their causes, including the Palestinian case, even though this has not and will not benefit the Palestinians in any way. What benefits them is supplication”.

He draws attention to the Quranic verse in Surah Al-Anfal (8:9), which reads, “Remember when you asked help of your Lord, and He answered you, ‘Indeed, I will reinforce you with a thousand from the angels, following one another.'”

To further illustrate his point, Al-Maliki refers to the history of the Battle of Badr. He quotes Ibn Abbas, who described the Prophet Muhammad’s (peace be upon him) response when faced with a daunting situation. On the day of Badr, the Prophet, peace be upon him, faced a numerically superior enemy, with only 319 of his companions against a force of a thousand pagans.

In this moment of uncertainty, he turned to God in supplication. “O Allah, fulfill for me what you promised me,” he implored. And as Ibn Abbas narrates, “Allah provided him with Angels”.

Al-Maliki draws a clear distinction between the efficacy of supplication and the consequences of demonstrations. He regards demonstrations as the work of the enemy, suggesting that they have not and will not bring any real good.

The Ulema’s guidance to prioritize supplication over protests is rooted in a belief in the power of prayer, a cornerstone of Islamic faith. Muslims are encouraged to seek divine intervention through prayer, believing that their appeals to Allah can lead to positive outcomes.

While the debate over the efficacy of protests and supplication continues, the Ulema’s perspective underscores the importance of faith and trust in divine guidance. Their message serves as a reminder that in the face of challenging situations, Muslims are encouraged to turn to prayer as a means of seeking positive change and support for the Palestinian cause.

Jerusalem (Reuters) – Hundreds of Israeli reservists marched in Tel Aviv on Wednesday threatening to refuse their volunteer service if the government presses ahead with its controversial plan to curb the power of the Supreme Court.

The drive by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nationalist-religious coalition to strip the court of some of its review powers has triggered mass protests across Israel and stirred deep concern among allies, including the United States.

Protests have intensified as ratification nears, while one cabinet minister said the government could rethink its polarising drive to overhaul the judiciary if protests escalate.

Protesting reservists from some of the military’s most elite formations including combat pilots and Special Forces units have attracted particular attention, stirring alarm from defence chiefs worried that the protests risk compromising national security.

The Israeli military declined to comment.

The government and its supporters say the proposed changes are needed to rein in what they see as activist judges encroaching into the political sphere.

But for those opposed, the proposals undermine Israel’s democratic values and break the “unwritten contract” it has with its armed forces, said Ron Scherf, 51, a lieutenant colonel in the General Staff Reconnaissance Unit who has been in the reserves for 23 years and was among those protesting.

“Every soldier who endangers his life and goes on missions does that for a state that is defined as Jewish and democratic,” he told Reuters. “But if you take one of those out, if the country stops being Jewish or democratic, it’s not longer a country that can be protected,” he said.

Protest organizers shared with Reuters 300 letters from military doctors who have said they would not serve and shared a letter signed by 750 reservists in special operations saying they won’t report for duty if the legislation passes.

While Reuters could not independently verify the signatures, the organizers say they have verified each name signed.

One 30-year-old captain in the reserves, who declined to give his name ahead of the protest, said he had a list of more than 1,000 signatures of reservists who pledged to suspend their volunteer service.

The conscript military draws on reserves in wartime and requires that they undergo regular training.

Soldiers who refuse to report for volunteer service are not in violation of military or civil law and thus cannot be punished. Some reservists have made clear that if Israel entered a state of emergency, they would report for emergency call-ups.

Israeli Military Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, during an air force base visit on Wednesday, called the volunteer system critical, adding: “The calls for non-reporting hurt.”