HCHR_ Kazem Gharibabadi, the Vice-President of the Judiciary for International Affairs and the Secretary-General of the High Council for Human Rights said in the TV program “To the Horizon of Palestine” (Ofoghe Felestin) about Iran's response to the Zionist regime and the possibility of human rights bodies reacting to this action: “Human rights bodies did not react to Iran's operations; In fact, these bodies should have reacted to the Israel regime's attack on the diplomatic facilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is considered part of Iran's territory.”
Gharibabadi added: “When the Zionist regime committed this aggression, we witnessed the meeting of the Security Council, but unfortunately, Western countries such as U.K, the U.S and France did not even condemn this obvious aggression against Iran's diplomatic places. We have international treaties and conventions in this regard, and Iran's action is a completely legitimate action under the United Nations Charter and in accordance with the standards of international law”.
He clarified: “From a legal point of view, international organizations and human rights bodies are not in a position to consider this action as a violation of international laws and regulations. Human rights bodies should deal with the crimes committed by the Zionist regime in Gaza for more than 6 months, but unfortunately we haven’t witnessed the slightest action by these bodies. The Zionist regime's war in Gaza has left more than 110,000 wounded and martyred, hundreds of thousands of buildings and infrastructure have been destroyed, this regime has committed all kinds of crimes, but we still haven’t witnessed an emergency session of the Human Rights Council regarding these crimes.
The support offered by the Western countries to the Zionist regime made this regime arrogant and made human rights empty of content
Referring to the list of crimes committed by the Israeli regime, the Secretary General of the HCHR stated: “If human rights mechanisms are to react, the crimes of the illegitimate Zionist regime since its inception must be addressed. Over the past 7 decades, the Israeli regime has committed countless crimes. Since the first days of Al-Aqsa Storm, this regime has committed all the crimes against the people of Gaza that fall under criminal law. Crime against humanity, crime of aggression and war crime, genocide, ethnic and racial cleansing, all these crimes have been committed in the first week.
Giving an example, he continued: “In war crimes and racial and ethnic cleansing, there is no need to massacre a race or a nation; In the Statute of the International Criminal Court or the Rome Statute, one of the examples of racial and ethnic cleansing is depriving a nation of access to water, food and medicine, which is classified as genocide. Some of the crimes committed by this regime were revealed a few months later, such as the crime they committed in the hospital in Gaza, rape of women and girls and many other crimes.
Emphasizing that we are facing a completely barbaric and criminal regime, Gharibabadi noted: “About the Zionist regime, human rights cannot be discussed.The western supporters of the Zionist regime made this regime very arrogant and made human rights empty of content. We could talk about the protection and promotion of human rights until 6 months ago, but now human rights organizations and supporters of this criminal regime have lost their face for talking about human rights and criticizing the human rights situation in independent countries.
Many free nations of the world are pleased with the action of the Islamic Republic of Iran in its legitimate self-defense
The Vice-President of the Judiciary for International Affairs emphasized: “We are now facing the lack of action of human rights mechanisms against the criminal Zionist regime! In the shadow of inaction against this regime for more than 6 months, international public opinion has been waiting for a serious action from international bodies, but now this expectation has turned into disappointment from international organizations. The fact that the Islamic Republic used its right to self-defense, I am sure that many free nations of the world are happy with this action”.
He continued: “We are not warmongers; but if we are attacked, even if it is to the diplomatic places of our country, the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond decisively, at least this has been proven after the Islamic Revolution. Neither the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran nor the zealous people of our country who have national pride will not tolerate such insolent behavior against their Generals and diplomatic agents.
Gharibabadi admitted: “Iranian people were waiting for such a retaliatory action, just like the situation in which our people expected a decisive response to the U.S regime after the assassination of the martyr General Soleimani, they also expected the same in the case of the Zionist regime's attack on Iran's diplomatic facilities. After the supreme leader firmly said that the Zionist regime will be punished, we were supposed to punish this regime in its own occupied territory and not to its goals in third countries. Here, we have to leave the issue of deterrence, because here the issue of defense and active response is discussed to defend and protect the interests and national security.
Diplomatic and consular places are considered part of that country's territory, and Iran's retaliatory action was under the United Nations Charter
Gharibabadi also paid attention to this discussion from the legal aspect and stated: “We do not need legal measures regarding actions against the Zionist regime, because this regime does not recognize international law and human rights at all. However, from a legal point of view, Article 51 of the United Nations Charter allows any country that is subjected to armed aggression to defend itself and take legitimate action before the Security Council takes measures to maintain peace and security”.
The Secretary General of the HCHR added: “There are two points here; First, the Security Council did not take any action; therefore, Iran's action is in the category of self-defense, because it was an attack on the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to international law, diplomatic and consular places are considered part of the country's territory. If something happens in the embassy or diplomatic places of a country, for example, a terrorist group attacks an embassy, even the police is not allowed to enter the embassy unless the ambassador or consul general allow them, because it is considered the territory of that country”.
Regarding the fact that some analysts say that the issue of the embassy being the territory of the country has a conventional aspect and not a scientific aspect, Gharibabadi said: “Unfortunately, some people present such wrong conclusions; During the Al-Aqsa Storm, some people said that the Zionist regime has the right to self-defense! While we are not facing the situation of two governments, we are facing an occupying and aggressor regime, and a nation under occupation, and in such a situation, international law does not grant the right to self-defense to the occupying regime”.
He continued: “In the case of the attack on the Iranian embassy, when the issue of common law is brought up, we should know that common law is a part of international law and one of its sources. In this regard, some media misused news tactics”.
“Iran and our armed forces did not consider civilian targets and targeted military targets”
The Secretary-General of the HCHR continued: “In its response, the Islamic Republic of Iran targeted military targets and did not consider civilian targets at all. The Islamic Republic of Iran and our armed forces chose their targets very carefully and there were no attacks on civilian places, including hospitals and schools, and even economic and populated places. This does not mean that Iran was worried about the reaction of others to this retaliatory action, but rather, the Islamic Republic of Iran showed an ethical, humane and Islamic model of fulfilling its responsibilities to international law and asserting its rights in this regard. Iran is not like the Zionist regime, attacking civilian targets and women and children is something that can only be done by the Zionist occupying regime”.
Regarding people putting pressure on the governments to end the crimes of the Zionist regime, the Secretary-General noted: “The public opinion of the world and the innocent people of Palestine were disappointed by the governments and international organizations, but now we’ve witnessed the formation of a huge capital called International Public Opinion. Here, religion, border, geographical territory and continent no longer matters, people from every race, religion and geographical region have come to the streets in support of Gaza. At first, the stances were limited to Iran and some Islamic countries, but then the authorities of Western countries also took a stand, not because of the protection of human rights and the Palestinian people, but under the pressure of public opinion, and these pressures have made the Zionist regime more isolated”.
In the end, Gharibabadi said: “to stop the crimes of Zionist regime, two key actions are necessary; the first is the resistance and standing of the people and resistance forces, and the second is the pressure of international public opinion. Another key point is that if the recent attack of Zionist regime had remained unanswered, the regime would have become more brazen in attacking the interests and security of Iran and even other countries. This is a very important message. The action of the Islamic Republic is completely legitimate and under the United Nations Charter, but at the same time, we should not neglect political and legal actions, including the pursuit of this regime's crimes in international forums as well as legal and judicial follow-ups.