The spies were arrested in late 2018 and early 2019 by Iranian intelligence forces, while they were working in sensitive centres, Gholam-Hossein Esmaeili told a press conference in Tehran on Tuesday.

IRAN NEWS NATIONAL DESK

He said two of the spies who were not working in military centers were tried in the Revolution Court and received long-term prison terms.

Some others who worked at military centers were tried in the military court, and the prosecutor has demanded death penalty for them, he said, adding that their cases are awaiting final verdict.

“Members of the (spy) team were identified last year with strenuous efforts of the Iranian security forces and its agents were identified in Iran’s sensitive centers, including the nuclear and defense centers and the country’s public infrastructures and most of them were arrested,” Esmayeeli told reporters in a press conference in Tehran on Tuesday.

He added that two of the spies have received long-term jail sentences, noting that military courts have wrapped up investigations into the cases of other spies, and the prosecutor has asked for death penalty for the spies.

The spokesman did not mention any further detail about the case or identity of the spies. He also did not say if the case is related to the two spies captured at the Aerospace Industries Organization earlier this year.

Back in April, Intelligence Minister Mahmoud Alavi announced Iran has identified 290 CIA agents across different countries, forcing the US to form a special committee to reassess its cloak-and-dagger operations.

In his Tuesday remarks, the Iranian Judiciary spokesman referred to the Intelligence Ministry’s operation and said Iran shared with friendly countries including China the information it had about those spies.

He also announced that there are some changes in the management of State Prisons, Security and Corrective Measures Organization after recent incidents in some prisons.

On former Tehran Mayor Mohammad Ali Najafh’s case, the spokesman said that Najafi will soon stand trial.

He refuted some allegations that the Judiciary does not take action based on eavesdropping,  adding that eavesdropping is not considered as a valid document during the trial and urged officials to stop talking about something that they are not well aware of it.