The danger of the false claim that Iran's parliament has called for the execution of 14,000 protestors is that it desensitizes people to the true horror: thousands of people will be unfairly punished for exercising their constitutionally-protected right to protest.
Let's begin with the facts. Given that the judiciary has charged some of the protestors with "moharebeh" (war against God) and "efsad fel-arz" (corruption on earth), it is almost certain to pass down death sentences, and some of these sentences may lead to executions.
So far, we know of one death sentence, which the accused can appeal. There will almost certainly be more. But it is highly unlikely that the courts will accuse every arrested protestor of capital crimes, or that their charges will carry the death penalty.
It is unclear if the 14,000 number bandied about includes protestors who were later released, or those freed on bail. While it is difficult to predict how those who will go on trial will be punished, recent trials for protestors in 2009, 2018, and 2019 can give us some idea.
If I were to guess I would say that a few protestors will be sentenced to death. A much greater number will be imprisoned for short or long periods. Others will be slapped with financial penalties or other disabilities (fired from jobs, expelled from university, etc).
And a fair number will likely be acquitted or charges will be dropped against them. So what is the meaning and significance of the parliamentary call on the judiciary about the protestors?
What the MPs did was not sentence protestors to death (they don't have that power), or even call for the death penalty for all protestors. They called on the judiciary to act swiftly and harshly with those who "who waged war and attacked people’s life and property"
(see here:
Iranian lawmakers ask Judiciary to severely punish agents, inciters of riots ). This is a highly ambiguous statement. It is not clear who precisely the MPs mean. All the thousands of protestors who have been arrested? Only a subset that they consider violent?
Moreover, it is not clear what they mean by firm punishment. The death penalty is certainly the firmest possible punishment, but it's not the only "firm" punishment available to the judiciary.
The important point is this: While parliament certainly cannot sentence people to death, the result of a call like this is that it creates an atmosphere in which judges will feel they have a more open hand in issuing harsh sentences, including death, but also imprisonment.
This is what should worry people. Not that thousands of people will be executed, but that the judiciary will act harshly with protestors who have a constitutionally-protected right to protest and free assembly, a right that has been denied to them.
Again, there is no doubt in my mind that there will be some death sentences, and that some sentences will eventually lead to executions. But we should be worried about the broader problem that can get lost when people focus on false, sensational claims:
Protestors are being unfairly tried and many will be punished for protesting, a right that has been denied to them for decades. We should be alarmed when anyone is sentenced to death. But we should also worry about the many more people who will be punished in other ways.