Iran will pursue all legal avenues to seek redress from its attackers
The attack by the United States and Israel on Iran, including the targeted killings of scientists and intellectuals, bombing of IAEA-approved nuclear facilities, and strikes against residential, medical, media, and public infrastructure, is a prime example of illegal, unilateral action that must not remain unaddressed. It is a wrongful act and a clear violation of fundamental norms of international law.
In this context, the principle of state responsibility, which dictates that states are held accountable for wrongful acts, must be applied. This principle was codified by the International Law Commission ILC in its 2001 Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, which have since been widely recognised and cited by international courts and tribunals.
Per their provisions, the commission of a wrongful act – such as the unlawful use of force – constitutes a violation of an international obligation and imposes a binding duty on the responsible state to provide full and effective reparation for the harm caused.
In the case of the illegal acts committed by the United States and Israel, the scope of legal responsibility goes far beyond ordinary violations. These acts not only contravened customary international law, but also breached peremptory norms, the highest-ranking norms within the international legal hierarchy. Among these, the principle of the prohibition of aggression is a core and universally binding rule. No state is permitted to derogate from this norm, and violations trigger obligations, requiring all members of the international community to respond collectively to uphold the law.
There are at least two relevant legal precedents that can guide the application of the principle of state responsibility and the obligation for reparations in the case of Iran.
In 1981, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 487 in response to Israel's attack on Iraq's nuclear facilities. It unequivocally characterised this act of aggression as a 'serious threat to the entire safeguard regime of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA]', which is the foundation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The resolution also fully recognised the inalienable sovereign right of all states to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes.
Article 6 stipulates that 'Iraq is entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction it has suffered, responsibility for which has been acknowledged by Israel'. By mandating that the aggressor compensate the victim for the resulting damages, the resolution provides a clear legal precedent for pursuing redress in similar cases.
Thus, given the fact that the attacks by the US and Israel were carried out with public declarations confirming the operations and are well-documented, the application of the principles and provisions of Resolution 487 to the Iranian case is not only appropriate and necessary but also firmly grounded in international law.
Another relevant document is UN Security Council Resolution 692, which was adopted in 1991 and established the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The commission was tasked with processing claims for compensation of losses and damages incurred as a result of the invasion.
The creation of UNCC demonstrated the capacity of international mechanisms to identify victims, evaluate damage, and implement practical compensation – setting a clear model for state responsibility in cases of unlawful aggression.
This precedent provides a strong legal and institutional basis for asserting the rights of the Iranian people. It is therefore both appropriate and necessary for the UN to establish a rule-based mechanism, such as an international commission on compensation, to redress Iran.
Such a commission, initiated and endorsed by the UN General Assembly or other competent UN bodies, should undertake a comprehensive assessment of the damages inflicted by the unlawful and aggressive acts of the US and the Zionist regime against Iran.
The establishment of reparative mechanisms – whether through independent commissions, fact-finding bodies, or compensation funds operating under international oversight – would contribute meaningfully to restoring trust in the global legal system and provide a principled response to the ongoing normalisation of impunity.
Iran also has another avenue for pursuing justice for the illegal attacks it was subjected to. In the lead-up to them, the IAEA published biased and politically motivated reports about the Iranian nuclear programme, which facilitated the commission of aggression by the US and Israel and breached the principle of neutrality.
This places Iran in a position to seek redress and claim damages from the agency under Article 17 of the IAEA Safeguards Agreement. As a state harmed by the agency's manifest negligence, Iran is entitled to full reparation for all material and moral damages inflicted upon its peaceful nuclear facilities and scientific personnel.
In this context, pursuing accountability for the IAEA, alongside the aggressor states, is a vital element of Iran's broader strategy to uphold accountability within the international legal order. By relying on recognised, legitimate, and binding international mechanisms, Iran will steadfastly defend the rights of its people at every forum.
Ultimately, responsibility for the recent crimes of this war of aggression does not lie solely with the direct perpetrators, the US and Israel, and those who aided them, the IAEA. All states and international organisations bear an undeniable obligation to implement effective legal measures to prevent such crimes.
The international community as a whole must respond decisively. Silence, delay, or any form of complicity in the face of aggression and atrocities would reduce the principle of state accountability under international law to an empty slogan.
In its pursuit of accountability, Iran will exhaust all available resources and will not relent until the rights of its people are fully recognised and they receive adequate redress. It will continue to seek the prosecution and accountability of those responsible for these crimes, both domestically and internationally, until justice is fully achieved.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Why does Israel want to prolong the war on Gaza?
Israeli columnist Gideon Levy says Israel has 'no clue' about dealing with Gaza, besides ongoing death and destruction. Israeli columnist Gideon Levy tells host Steve Clemons that almost all Israelis believe their country 'has the right to do whatever it wants'. This includes war crimes and plans to create concentration camps for Palestinians in Gaza, in preparation for expulsion. Levy argues that it makes no difference if a Republican or Democratic administration were in power in the United States or if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or a different politician were in power in Israel. 'The same war might have taken place, and the same crimes of war would have been committed,' he said.
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Iranian president lightly wounded while escaping Israeli attack
Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian suffered minor injuries in an Israeli air strike on a meeting of the Supreme National Security Council in Tehran on June 15, a senior Iranian official said. The assassination attempt targeted the heads of the three branches of government in an effort to overthrow it, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity. 'This attempt will not pass without Israel paying a price,' he told Al Jazeera. The strike was carried out shortly before noon during a meeting attended by the heads of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government along with other senior officials. The semiofficial Fars news agency also reported new details on the assassination attempt during Israel's 12-day war with Iran, which was first announced by the Iranian president in an interview released on Monday. The session was taking place in the lower level of a government facility in western Tehran when the attack started, Fars reported. The building's entrances and exits were hit by six missiles to block escape routes and cut off air flow. Electricity was severed following the explosions, but Iranian officials managed to escape through a pre-designated emergency hatch, including the president, who is said to have sustained minor leg injuries while evacuating. The news agency said authorities launched an investigation into the possible presence of Israeli spies given the accuracy of the intelligence the 'enemy' possessed. 'They did try' Last week, Pezeshkian said in an interview with US media figure Tucker Carlson that Israel attempted to assassinate him. 'They did try, yes … but they failed,' he said. 'It was not the United States that was behind the attempt on my life. It was Israel. I was in a meeting… They tried to bombard the area in which we were holding that meeting.' The comments come less than a month after Israel launched its unprecedented June 13 bombing campaign against Iran, killing top military commanders and nuclear scientists. The Israeli attacks took place two days before Tehran and Washington were set to meet for a new round of nuclear talks, stalling negotiations aimed at reaching a deal over Iran's atomic programme. At least 1,060 people were killed in Iran during the conflict, according to Iran's Foundation of Martyrs and Veterans Affairs. The Israeli attacks drew waves of retaliatory drone and missile fire, killing 28 people in Israel, according to authorities. Iran targeted Israeli military and intelligence headquarters with ballistic missiles and drones before the US brokered a ceasefire.
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Canadian universities too should be in Francesca Albanese's report
'Universities worldwide, under the guise of research neutrality, continue to profit from an [Israeli] economy now operating in genocidal mode. Indeed, they are structurally dependent on settler-colonial collaborations and funding.' This is what United Nations Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese wrote in her latest report 'From economy of occupation to economy of genocide', which documents the financial tentacles of Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza and beyond. Its release prompted the United States' governing regime to issue sanctions against Albanese in a move the Italian legal scholar rightly described as 'obscene' and 'mafia intimidation tactics'. The report reveals how universities not only invest their endowments in corporations linked to Israel's war machine, but also engage in directly or support research initiatives that contribute to it. It is not only a damning indictment of the complicity of academia in genocide, but also a warning to university administrations and academics that they hold legal responsibility. In Israel, Albanese observes, traditional humanities disciplines such as law, archaeology, and Middle Eastern studies essentially launder the history of the Nakba, reframing it through colonial narratives that erase Palestinian histories and legitimise an apartheid state that has transitioned into what she describes as a 'genocidal machine'. Likewise, STEM disciplines engage in open collaborations with military industrial corporations, such as Elbit Systems, Israel Aerospace Industries, IBM, and Lockheed Martin, to facilitate their research and development. In the United States, Albanese writes, research is funded by the Israeli Defence Ministry and conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with various military applications, including drone swarm control. In the United Kingdom, she highlights, the University of Edinburgh has 2.5 percent of its endowment invested in companies that participate in the Israeli military industrial complex. It also has partnerships with Ben-Gurion University and with companies supporting Israeli military operations. While Canadian institutions do not appear in Albanese's report, they very easily could and, indeed, we argue, should. Canada's flagship school, the University of Toronto (UofT), where one of us teaches and another is an alumnus, is a particularly salient example. Over the past 12 years, the UofT's entanglements with Israeli institutions have snowballed, stretching across fields from the humanities to cybersecurity. They also involve Zionist donors (both individuals and groups), many of whom have ties with complicit corporations and Israeli institutions, and have actively interfered with university hiring practices to an extent that has drawn censure from the Canadian Association of University Teachers. This phenomenon must be understood in the context of the defunding of public higher education, which forces universities to seek private sources of funding and opens up universities to donor interference. After calls for cutting such ties intensified amid the genocide, the UofT doubled down on them over the past year, advertising artificial intelligence-related partnerships with Technion University in Haifa, joint calls for proposals with various Israeli universities, and student exchange programmes in Israel. The UofT also continues to fundraise for its 'Archaeology of Israel Trust', which was set up to make a 'significant contribution to the archaeology of Israel' – a discipline that has historically focused on legitimising the Israeli dispossession of the Palestinian people. It also inaugurated a new lab for the study of global anti-Semitism, which is funded by the University of Toronto-Hebrew University of Jerusalem Research & Innovation Alliance. In addition to institutional partnerships, UofT's Asset Management Corporation (UTAM), which manages the university's endowment, has direct connections with many companies that are, as per Albanese's report, complicit in the genocide in Palestine, including Airbnb, Alphabet Inc, Booking Holdings, Caterpillar, Elbit Systems, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, and Palantir Technologies. A 2024 report found that 55 of these companies operate 'in the military-affiliated defence, arms, and aerospace sectors' and at least 12 of UTAM's 44 contracted investment managers have made investments totalling at least $3.95 billion Canadian dollars ($2.88bn) in 11 companies listed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) as supporters of the construction and expansion of illegal settlements in the Palestinian territories. Furthermore, 17 of UTAM's 44 contracted investment managers are responsible for managing around $15.79 billion Canadian dollars ($11.53bn) in assets invested in 34 companies identified by The American Friends Service Committee as benefiting from the ongoing genocide in Gaza. UofT is not unique among Canadian universities in this regard. According to a report on university divestment, Western University, too, promotes ongoing partnerships with Ben-Gurion University and invests more than $16m Canadian dollars ($11.6m) in military contractors and nearly $50 million Canadian dollars ($36.5) in companies directly complicit in the occupation of Palestine and the genocide of Palestinians. The list of complicit companies again includes Lockheed Martin, as well others listed by Albanese like Chevron, Booking Holdings, Airbnb, and Microsoft. McGill University, another top Canadian university, has also invested in Lockheed Martin, as well as notable military industrial companies like Airbus, BAE Systems, Safran, and Thales, which have also been accused of providing weapons and components to Israel. In the context of the ongoing genocide, students, staff, and faculty at such complicit universities – including at each of our respective institutions – have been demanding that their universities boycott and divest from Israel and companies profiting from its warfare. They are not only explicitly in the right according to international law, but are actually articulating the basic legal responsibility and requirement borne by all corporate entities. And yet, for raising this demand, they have been subjected to all manner of discipline and punishment. What Albanese's report lays bare is that university administrators – like other corporate executives – are subject to and, frankly, should fear censure under international law. She writes, 'Corporations must respect human rights even if a State where they operate does not, and they may be held accountable even if they have complied with the domestic laws where they operate. In other words, compliance with domestic laws does not preclude/is not a defence to responsibility or liability.' This means that those administrating universities in Canada and around the world who have refused to divest and disentangle from Israel and instead have focused their attention on regulating students fighting for that end are themselves personally liable for their complicity in genocide, according to international law. We could not possibly put it more powerfully or succinctly than Albanese herself does: 'The corporate sector, including its executives, must be held to account, as a necessary step towards ending the genocide and disassembling the global system of racialized capitalism that underpins it.' It is our collective responsibility to make sure that happens at universities as well. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
