Executive summary
Amnesty International’s 2025 annual report documents the largest number of recorded executions since 1981: 2,707 people executed in 17 countries. The surge—driven overwhelmingly by Iran and with a notable increase in the United States—arrives against a longer-term global trend toward abolition. For investors, corporate boards and policymakers, the development is more than a human-rights emergency: it is a geopolitical, regulatory and reputational risk that can affect market access, supply chains, capital flows and the standards that govern sustainable business.
This briefing translates the Amnesty findings into strategic implications for Nordic and international business leaders. It explains where the rise is concentrated, why the statistics likely understate the global picture, what this means for regulation and capital, and concrete steps companies and investors should take to manage exposure and uphold human-rights standards.
A sharp reversal amid a longer arc toward abolition
Amnesty’s 2025 snapshot reports a 78 percent increase in recorded executions versus 2024. The increase is concentrated: at least 2,159 executions were recorded in Iran alone, while executions in the United States nearly doubled (from 25 to 47). Amnesty also recorded roughly 2,300 new death sentences globally and estimates at least 25,000 people currently face capital sentences worldwide.
Important caveat: the global toll is almost certainly higher. China—widely believed to execute more people annually than any other country—treats execution statistics as state secrets and is not included in Amnesty’s public tally. Amnesty counts executions in 17 countries; a relative handful of states are therefore driving the reported rise. At the same time, the number of countries that have abolished the death penalty has expanded markedly over decades: roughly two-thirds of countries today are abolitionist in law or practice, a reminder that the reversal is geographically concentrated rather than universal.
Why this matters now — geopolitics, repression and market risk
1. Political repression and instability. Amnesty and other observers link the spike in Iran to the state’s use of capital punishment as a political instrument: death sentences tied to protest activity and dissident activity increase the probability of continued domestic instability and sudden shifts in policy or enforcement that can affect foreign firms’ operating environments.
2. Sanctions, secondary risk and financial exposure. Jurisdictions using capital punishment for political ends are also commonly subject to sanctions regimes. For companies and investors with exposure to these markets—direct investments, joint ventures, supply chains, or financial intermediaries—there is heightened risk of sanctions, secondary sanctions, asset freezes and restricted access to international banking.
tional and legal risks under rising compliance standards. European and Nordic investors and firms face growing legal and investor expectations to perform human-rights due diligence. Evolving frameworks—from the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines to EU-level measures (including mandatory due diligence initiatives and enhanced sustainability reporting requirements)—make links between corporate conduct and human-rights harms more consequential for valuation and licensing.
4. Competitive and workforce implications. Consumer-facing brands, talent pools and institutional investors increasingly factor human-rights considerations into procurement, employment and investment decisions. Association with states or practices widely condemned by civil society can erode customer trust, employee morale and investor appetite.
Country-level dynamics: what the data reveal
Iran: The Amnesty figures suggest Iran accounted for the majority of recorded executions in 2025 and that many death sentences were imposed in politically charged cases. For investors, this signals higher political risk, exposure to sanctions and heightened scrutiny by human-rights activists and regulators.
United States: The increase in carried-out executions reflects decisions at the state level where capital punishment remains law. For multinational corporations, the U.S. trend has limited direct trade implications but can influence global perceptions and stakeholder conversations about legal inequality and human-rights standards.
China: Omitted from the tally for reasons of state secrecy, China remains a critical unknown. For global business, opaque practices around capital punishment are part of a wider governance and rule-of-law consideration that informs risk assessments and strategic choices about market presence and partnerships.
Business implications — practical risks and strategic choices
For senior executives and boards:
Reassess market exposure. Map operations, suppliers and financing relationships that connect to countries with elevated use of the death penalty, especially where capital punishment is used for political repression.
Strengthen human-rights due diligence. Integrate risk indicators tied to judicial arbitrariness, political persecution and state violence into enterprise risk management and supplier assessment frameworks.
Factor legal and reputational contingencies into investment decisions. Run scenario analyses for sanctions, supply-chain disruption and stakeholder activism.
For investors and asset managers:
Hardwire human-rights metrics into valuation models. Quantify political-legal risk premiums for assets tied to jurisdictions where legal repression is rising.
Engage and escalate. Use stewardship tools to demand transparency from portfolio companies about exposure and controls; consider divestment where engagement fails and risk is material.
Prepare for disclosure expectations. Anticipate that sustainability reporting standards and investor due-diligence expectations will increasingly require disclosure of human-rights exposures and mitigation measures.
For policymakers and regulators:
– Calibrate trade and regulatory policy with human-rights leverage. Coordinate sanctions and targeted measures to deter political use of capital punishment without unduly harming civilians.
– Support multilateral standards and enforcement. Reinforce norms on judicial independence and due process through diplomatic channels and development assistance tied to governance reforms.
– Clarify corporate obligations. Provide guidance for companies on human-rights due diligence, including expectations for disclosure and redress mechanisms.
Action checklist for corporate leaders
– Conduct a rapid human-rights exposure audit focusing on jurisdictions flagged in the Amnesty report and on opaque markets (notably where data is unreliable).
– Update supplier and partner contracts to require human-rights compliance and rapid reporting of incidents.
– Build scenario plans for sanctions, forced divestment and reputational crises; test contingency liquidity and legal strategies.
– Engage investors and lenders proactively, providing transparency on mitigation measures to preserve access to capital.
Long-term trends and what to expect
– Continued polarisation. While more countries have abolished capital punishment over decades, the 2025 surge demonstrates that authoritarian and semi-authoritarian regimes can reverse humanitarian progress quickly. Expect episodic regressions tied to domestic political crises.
– Stricter expectations for corporate conduct. Legal and investor pressure for human-rights risk management will continue to intensify across Nordic and EU jurisdictions. Boards that ignore these signals increase legal, financial and reputational exposure.
– Increased role for private-sector stewardship. Institutional investors and multinational firms will play growing roles in shaping human-rights outcomes through capital allocation, engagement and public advocacy.
Conclusion — a strategic human-rights imperative for business
The Amnesty International report is a human-rights alarm bell with direct business consequences. For Nordic companies, investors and policymakers—actors who operate from economies that emphasize rule of law and sustainability—the rise in executions underscores the need to translate values into operational risk management. That means mapping exposures, integrating rigorous human-rights due diligence into governance, and aligning investment decisions with the evolving regulatory and stakeholder environment.
Addressing these risks is not just a moral duty: it is a strategic necessity. Firms that proactively manage human-rights exposure will be better positioned to preserve access to capital, protect reputational capital, and navigate an increasingly complex intersection of geopolitics, regulation and market expectations.
Source
Amnesty International, Annual Report on the Death Penalty, 2025 (as reported). Figures exclude China; Amnesty warns that global totals are likely undercounts due to opacity in some jurisdictions. Quotes and analysis draw on statements from Amnesty Sweden’s Secretary-General Anna Johansson.