In the latest development in the lawsuit brought by three survivors of torture in Iran against Parviz Sabeti, a former senior SAVAK official, a federal court in Florida has allowed the case to move forward, even though nearly half a century has passed since the events at issue. The release of the full text of the ruling has brought new details to light, including the plaintiffs’ security concerns and possible links between certain SAVAK figures and the Islamic Republic’s intelligence apparatus.
In one section of the ruling, the court draws on the documents and testimony presented to it to address the Islamic Republic’s intelligence apparatus and its use of certain former SAVAK personnel and structures. The plaintiffs have also submitted evidence of Sabeti’s possible contacts with certain intelligence circles, which the court weighed in examining why the suit was filed so late.
Another significant matter is the reported threats against the plaintiffs and their lawyers. In light of those threats and the fear of retaliation, the court adopted special protective measures and kept the plaintiffs’ identities confidential, even from Sabeti himself.
On October 6, 2026, the court rejected Sabeti’s request to dismiss the case on statute of limitations grounds. In that decision, a well founded fear of retaliation and the difficulty of determining where Sabeti lived were recognized as exceptional circumstances justifying the suspension of the statutory deadline. The full public version of the ruling was released on October 27.
This decision does not yet establish Sabeti’s responsibility for torture, nor does it conclusively confirm any link between him and the Islamic Republic’s intelligence institutions. It keeps open the path to judicial examination of the plaintiffs’ claims.
Stressing the importance of this judicial development, the Hana Human Rights Organization recalls that the passage of time must not become a barrier for torture victims seeking justice. The significance of the case lies in the fact that, even after nearly fifty years, it remains possible to examine claims of torture and demand accountability, whatever political or security structure the alleged perpetrators belonged to.