Authors’ Note: The members of the Fact-Finding Mission were appointed by the President of the UN Human Rights Council; they are not U.N. staff and do not receive a salary for their work. While the UN Human Rights Office provides support in the Fact-Finding Mission, the members serve in their individual capacity and are independent from any government or organization, including the U.N. Any views or opinions presented herein are solely those of the mandated members.
In September 2022, massive protests broke out across Iran, sparked by the unlawful death of Jina Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman while in the custody of Iran’s morality police. They had arrested her days earlier for allegedly not wearing the “mandatory hijab.” As anti-government protests swept the country, Iran’s security forces responded with violence.
To investigate these events, the United Nations Human Rights Council established the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran ( “FFM Iran” or “the Mission”) in November 2022. To lead the mission, the then-president of the Human Rights Council appointed us as expert members: Sara Hossain (Bangladesh), Shaheen Sardar Ali (Pakistan), and Viviana Krsticevic (Argentina). We were supported by a secretariat of investigators and legal officers.
The Human Rights Council gave the Mission a two-pronged mandate. First, it called for investigating allegations of human rights violations, in particular in relation to women and girls, in the context of the protests. Second, it mandated collection, consolidation and analysis, and preservation of evidence of such violations, including in view of cooperation in any legal proceedings. We, the expert members, interpreted this latter part of the mandate as directly related to supporting ongoing and future accountability efforts, including for truth, justice and reparations. Through our investigations, we concluded that the Iranian government had committed gross human rights violations in the context of the 2022 protests, some of which amount to the crimes against humanity of murder, imprisonment, torture, rape and other forms of sexual violence, enforced disappearance, and other inhumane acts.
The Mission’s Findings
Over the last two years, we collected over 38,000 evidence items, including a vast amount of open-source information, such as audio-visual material received from the Iran Digital Archive, some of which was verified and analyzed. We reviewed hundreds of court and medical documents, and analyzed them, making use of independent digital and medical forensic expertise. We also conducted in-depth interviews, both remote and in person, with some 300 victims and survivors, both inside and outside Iran. We relied on the important work of many civil society organizations, with whom we concluded information-sharing agreements after reviewing their methodologies. We further reviewed information from the Iranian government, including laws, policies, official statements, official media, and reports.
The evidence collected supported our findings—on the standard of “reasonable grounds to believe”—that gross human rights violations were committed by the Islamic Republic of Iran in the context of the 2022 protests. We found that these were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a civilian population, namely women, girls, and others expressing support for human rights, including ethnic and religious minorities and LGBTQ+ persons. Some children, as young as seven years old, were also victims of these heinous crimes.
At the FFM Iran, in accordance with the mandate given by the Human Rights Council, we applied a gender lens to the investigation, examining how and whether each of the allegations affected the situation of women and girls.
Through our in-depth investigations into root causes of the protests, we found that structural and institutionalized discrimination against women and girls in Iran were at the heart of the protesters’ grievances. We concluded that such discrimination was thus both a trigger and enabler of the ensuing protest violence and harsh and arbitrary crackdown against women, as well as men and children, who took to the streets during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests. In doing so, the FFM Iran deliberately sought to situate our work within the broader context of decades of activism by Iranian women, recognizing their longstanding struggles and achievements, and the high price many of them have paid in the pursuit of equality and justice.
This investigative approach allowed us to examine the cumulative effect of underlying discriminatory laws and policies, past and ongoing patterns of repression of women and girls, and crimes against humanity committed by the Iranian government in the context of the protests. Taken together, we found these to constitute a severe deprivation of the fundamental rights of women and girls, contrary to international law. This formed the basis for our finding that persecution on the grounds of gender, as a crime against humanity was committed. This legal approach was also affirmed in the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Al Hassan case and in the ICC Prosecutor’s recent requests for arrest warrants in the situation in Afghanistan, building on the work of the ICC Prosecutor’s Special Adviser on gender and other discriminatory crimes.
In addition, our intersectional approach allowed us to conclude that ethnic and religious minorities, in particular Kurds and Baluchis, as well as LGBTQ+ persons, were particularly targeted in the Iranian government’s crackdown on the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests that encompassed demands of the wider population for basic human rights.
Responsibility
In its second mandate (2024/2025), the FFM Iran deepened its investigation into the roles, structures, and responsibilities of the entities and individuals considered most responsible for human rights violations in the context of the protests, namely, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and its paramilitary force, the Basij; the police (FARAJA), including its special forces; and the Moral Security Police (which includes the so-called morality police); the Ministry of Intelligence, the Ministry of Interior, and the Judiciary; as well as Governors of some provinces.
Our investigation focused on the role of these entities and actors in relation to human rights violations and crimes under international law committed in four areas: use of force, detention, the judicial system, and enforcement of the mandatory hijab. The Mission investigated the de jure and de facto roles and authority of heads of the entities involved, as well as in relation to the physical perpetrators of the crimes. It considered whether they had knowledge of crimes, and their roles, including whether they had undertaken any preventative or punitive measures, such as investigations, administrative punishments, or prosecutions of their subordinates.
For the judicial system, we examined the role and responsibility of judges in the commission of crimes against humanity of torture, persecution, and other inhumane acts in relation to emblematic cases, given their central role in repression of the protesters. We noted that while members of the judiciary are generally insulated from responsibility for acts of adjudication, in some exceptional circumstances they may be held accountable, including for crimes against humanity. In relation to the roles of judges in issuing death sentences, we found that the executions so far of 10 men involved in the protests were carried out in circumstances that amounted to the crime against humanity of murder. This builds on earlier approaches taken in post-World War II jurisprudence, while still novel for both an investigative body and recent international jurisprudence.
Ultimately the FFM Iran is an investigative, and not a judicial body. Thus, while it has publicly named a number of high-ranking officials, given their roles and authority within the respective responsible entities, any final determination of their criminal responsibility will need to be made by judicial authorities following proceedings meeting fair trial standards and due process guarantees under international human rights law.
A Roadmap for Justice, Accountability, and Reparations
In our second mandate, we consulted victims and survivors about their expectations for truth, justice, and reparations, to ensure that our recommendations were informed by the demands and needs of those who have directly suffered from State violence and abuse. In this context, we separately consulted some 50 victims and survivors (whom we had earlier interviewed in November 2024) to share their perceptions on, and expectations for, accountability. Many victims spoke of their appreciation for this opportunity to share their experiences in a closed setting with others — some for the first time. They emphasized that the FFM Iran’s acknowledgement of the harm they had suffered was a meaningful step in their healing process. Their message to us was loud and clear about their expectations of Iran’s judicial system. Victims and survivors, based on their lived experience, clearly stated that they had no confidence in the domestic system to provide justice to them, let alone truth or reparations. Many referred to government officials, including judicial officers, subjecting them, and their family members, to constant harassment; they also described how such harassment of their lawyers precluded them from obtaining redress domestically.
Our investigation reached the same conclusion. The Iranian government insists it has taken numerous measures toward providing redress to victims, including payment of compensation, and prosecution of several state officials. We examined many of the measures allegedly taken, including the government’s own investigation into the protest-related violence, and found that these lack independence and are inadequate as a response to the egregious violations and crimes established.
In this context, and notwithstanding the Iranian government’s primary duty to provide redress to victims, we developed a roadmap on justice, accountability, and reparations, focussing primarily on measures that can be taken outside Iran and with the support of the international community.
First, we found that accountability is only possible when victims and survivors are safe and secure enough to avail themselves of these rights. Since the protests, many victims and survivors were compelled to flee Iran, often at a tremendous personal cost. The FFM Iran has extensively detailed the threats that victims, survivors, their families, and supporters face inside and outside Iran, including through ongoing transnational repression, particularly targeted to silence those engaged in exposing the truth or calling for justice. We therefore continue to emphasize the importance of third countries extending protection or granting humanitarian visas for victims of human rights violations, including those facing persecution on the grounds of gender.
Second, we recommended continuing consultations with victims and survivors as part of a viable and sustainable reparations process. While the FFM Iran in its third mandate will continue to undertake this important work, civil society organizations can also play a central role in this regard, and are encouraged to take forward and facilitate such processes. Many lessons can be learned from victims and their associations from around the world, including from Syria, South Africa, The Gambia, Timor Leste, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, and Sri Lanka We encourage Iranian civil society to take inspiration from them.
Third, the international community should continue to support truth-telling initiatives and, in particular, protect journalists and human rights defenders in Iran and abroad in order to counter false government narratives and provide victims and survivors justice through truth. While the FFM Iran is one such mechanism, other UN human rights mechanisms, truth commissions, and memorials, can also carry out truth-telling, as can legal, media, or civil society initiatives. Such efforts can give a voice to victims and ultimately lay the ground for a broader healing process within Iran.
Fourth, the international community should consider establishing a Victims’ Fund. This should be developed in close consultation with victims, in and outside Iran, and Iranian civil society organizations, and should aim to provide individual, collective, or hybrid reparative measures to Iranian victims, survivors, and their family members in the near or long-term. Our March 2025 report provides some suggested modalities for the establishment of such a fund, including potential ways to source it. For example, the frozen assets of Iranian officials responsible for gross human rights violations or crimes under international law could be repurposed as reparations.
Fifth, judicial avenues should be explored in third countries to open investigations and prosecute alleged perpetrators of crimes under international law. They could establish territorial jurisdiction in the case of transnational repression and persecution, as well as extra-territorial jurisdiction. Opening such judicial avenues could be on the basis of the nationality principle (especially passive personality jurisdiction, for example, that the victim is their national). Countries can also follow the principle of universal jurisdiction without procedural limitations (for example, without requiring a link between the alleged perpetrator and the prosecuting State).
States should also apply Article 5 (2) of the Convention against Torture to acts of physical or psychological torture found by the FFM Iran. This provision requires any State party to that convention to establish extra-territorial jurisdiction if the alleged victim of torture is its national. The Convention also requires in Article 5(1) that “each State Party to take measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over such offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction, and it does not extradite him.”
In addition, States should apply relevant domestic criminal codes and specific crimes against humanity laws to non-nationals present in their territory with respect to the commission of crimes found by the FFM Iran. Against this background, States should consider opening structural investigations into the general situation linked to the 2022 protests, even without an identified suspect. They could also take similar proactive steps, especially where victims, or perpetrators, of violations described in the FFM Iran’s reports may be present on their territory.
At the international level, options for jurisdiction are more limited. Although Iran is not party to the Rome Statute of the ICC, victims can consider filing a complaint under article 15, requesting that the ICC Prosecutor exercise jurisdiction over crimes under international law, by alleging that the crimes occurred partially on the territory of a State that is a party.
A more immediate avenue may be through Iran’s obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). ICERD provides for the referral of a dispute that is not settled with regard to a breach of a State party’s obligations under that treaty to the International Court of Justice for decision, opening a legal path for provisional measures and reparations for entrenched racial discrimination, against targeted ethnic and religious minorities.
Finally, we have called for solidarity with those inside and beyond Iran who face discrimination and violence for standing up for equality, truth, and justice. They include women and men who are unfairly imprisoned, those on death row, those forced into exile, and those suffering severe trauma, as well as their families. We have called for the international community, including governments, institutions, corporations, and civil society actors to stand by them. We recognize that countless acts of solidarity in the country and abroad have saved lives, protected rights, and given courage and solace to many women and men in Iran in moments of hopelessness.
Conclusion
In March, the Human Rights Council extended and broadened the mandate of the FFM Iran, to continue investigations into recent and ongoing allegations of human rights violations and to collect, document, and preserve evidence accordingly. Our evidence repository, expertise, and analytical products are available for sharing with legal proceedings, broadly defined as processes that meet international human rights standards and that may provide redress to victims.
Although we are still defining the new mandate’s focus areas, we believe it provides a crucial opportunity for the FFM Iran to continue to accompany victims and survivors as they continue to seek truth, justice, and reparations. On this journey, the support of member States, civil society, and legal practitioners who believe in safeguarding gender equality and human rights, is of critical importance.
