At an international conference near Paris, Professor Leila Nadya Sadat, who served as Special Adviser on Crimes Against Humanity to the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor from 2012 to 2023, called for increased accountability for Iran’s 1988 massacres of political prisoners. The event, attended by international dignitaries and human rights advocates, centered on the Iranian regime’s history of human rights abuses and its continuing violations.
Professor Sadat, an expert on the 1988 massacres, described it as a crime against humanity, marked by acts of murder, extermination, torture, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and other severe atrocities. She highlighted that these crimes were systematic and state-directed, urging the international community to pursue criminal prosecutions, reparations, and truth-telling initiatives.
Although the ICC has limited jurisdiction over Iran, Sadat, who is also the Director of the Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute at Washington University Law School, outlined alternative paths to justice. These include invoking universal jurisdiction to prosecute perpetrators found abroad and establishing a UN mechanism to collect evidence for future prosecutions. She also raised the possibility of classifying the 1988 massacre as genocide, a step that could rally international support for accountability.
In her concluding remarks, Professor Sadat expressed hope for a future where the Iranian people can reclaim their country and hold trials to address past injustices. She urged the global community to support those fighting for justice and human rights in Iran.
The full text of Professor Leila Sadat’s speech follows:
Thank you so much for that kind invitation and that kind introduction.
President-elect Mrs. Rajavi, your excellencies, dear friends, dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, Madame et Monsieur, since we are in France,
It’s very emotional to be back here, and I’m honored to return to Paris and to this conference for this very important meeting at this time. Last year’s conference was a kind of awakening for me as I learned about the historic crimes of the Iranian regime and particularly the 1988 massacre. It was also inspiring to meet so many talented and determined individuals seeking truth, justice, accountability for themselves and their loved ones, and a better future for Iran.
I honor you and your sacrifices and your losses, and I’m proud to be here as some small contingent of international assistance for you. Thank you so much.
I’ve spent some time since being here last year learning more about Iran. It’s an extraordinary country, famous for its music, art, architecture, textiles, and literature, especially its poetry, an ancient civilization that gifted the world much learning in mathematics, and philosophy. Iran is equally famous for the kindness and the warmth of its people. A civilization that held an empire for centuries. Iran may remain a critically important state today and an important regional power.
But in the past 45 years, Iran has faltered under the burden of a criminal regime whose abuses, especially against opposition groups like the MEK, the PMOI, have not been acknowledged by the international community and support for truth, justice, and accountability simply has not materialized. This has emboldened Iran’s leaders to commit more crimes. In 1981 and 1982, those killings were followed by the 1988 massacre of which you are all too well aware.
More recently, we had the example of the 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, who died in police custody after being arrested for allegedly not wearing her hijab in accordance with the regime’s dictates. Her death led to protests that in turn were violently suppressed by the state with hundreds killed and jailed across the country, and this repression continues today.
The impunity for and denial of justice of the crimes of 1988 has led the regime to continue oppressing Iranians at home and abroad who seek only to exercise their fundamental and universal human rights, rights granted by customary and conventional international law, and rights that are inalienable, meaning that they cannot be taken away by anyone.
Last year, I was asked to examine the 1988 massacre, and based upon the available evidence concluded, that it was indeed a crime against humanity and that the victims and survivors had been subjected to this crime of crimes, which shocked the conscience of humankind. I did not arrive at this conclusion lightly. Having served for ten years at the ICC, I know how egregious these offenses are and how the victimization that they inflict devastates entire communities.
Moreover, crimes against humanity are always accompanied by financial crimes and represent a form of what we call system criminality and collective violence that is extraordinarily difficult to overcome as you are witnessing. They devastate and injure an entire society just as a cancer can metastasize and kill an individual.
For this reason, we need strong medicine in the form of accountability, including criminal prosecutions, if necessary, as well as a variety of other healing modalities, including reparations, truth, and other mechanisms to address the pain and suffering of a society that has been devastated.
Crimes against humanity, as you have read perhaps in the report of Mr. Rehman, are crimes committed in a widespread or systematic manner. They’re directed against a civilian population carried out pursuant to a state or organizational policy.
4-The conference featured an impressive lineup of international experts, including:
Professor Chile Eboe-Osuji, former President of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
Professor Leila Sadat, former Special Adviser on Crimes Against Humanity to the ICC Prosecutor pic.twitter.com/CPWsG6m25U— Iran Freedom (@4FreedominIran) August 27, 2024
The crimes of the 1988 massacre include murder, extermination, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, enforced disappearance, sexual and gender-based violence, and the crime of persecution. The grave desecrations, the reburials, and other elements of the trauma relating to the disposal of the remains are themselves a different crime against humanity. The crime against humanity of inhumane acts and themselves a separate form of persecution.
While the JVMI has worked tirelessly to assemble evidence of these crimes, it’s taken some real time to get the international community to acknowledge them. Although important reports and findings were issued in 2017, 2020, in 2022, and most recently, the famous report of July 2024. And this report in 2024 calls for the establishment of an international accountability mechanism to address these crimes as others, and I know you’ll hear directly from Professor Rehman later today.
He has concluded, like many of his predecessors and myself, that the 1988 extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances and other crimes may amount to crimes against humanity. He has also raised the possibility that they could be characterized as genocidal, the intentional destruction in whole or in part of a racial, national, ethnic, or religious group.
In the remainder of my time then, I’d like to talk about these accountability mechanisms, what could they look like, and I’ll return to the issue of genocide in closing. Having worked at the ICC for a long time and having been at the, Rome Conference where it was negotiated, I’m aware very much of the power of the court but also of the limits of the court.
Iran has not joined the court, obviously, and the 1988 crimes were committed prior to the entry and force of the Rome Statute. So, the court can’t exercise jurisdiction directly. But as we just heard from Judge Eboe-Osuji, that’s not the end of the story.
As Mrs. Rajavi has noted, the regime is continuing its crimes. It’s continuing a practice of extrajudicial killings, torture, sexual and gender-based violence, persecution, and enforced disappearances.
#1988Massacre
2. “I think having read now the reports that have been given to me as well as the Amnesty International report, and some of the other testimonies, these clearly are crimes against humanity under international law.— Iran Freedom (@4FreedominIran) August 25, 2023
Crimes committed after July 1, 2002, are within the temporal scope of the court’s jurisdiction, and we can bring them within its territorial scope if at least one element of the crime is committed in an ICC state party.
Thus, while the victims of the 1988 massacre may not have direct recourse to the court, the residents of Ashraf 3 located in Albania, an ICC state party, are within the jurisdiction of the ICC, and if Iran conducts operations against them, could be protected under the protective umbrella of the Rome Statute.
Evidence of the 1988 massacre could be introduced in such a case by way of showing criminal intent with respect to current crimes. There are thousands of Iranians living abroad in ICC state parties. And in the Bangladesh-Myanmar situation, the court clearly found that it can exercise jurisdiction so long as one element of the offense is committed on the territory of an ICC state party.
The second, which the report refers to, is universal jurisdiction. Those are cases that are brought in a jurisdiction different than the jurisdiction where the crimes were committed. There are perpetrators of the 1988 massacre, these death commissioners, who are living abroad, and they may be found in states that have laws permitting their prosecution.
Sweden successfully did so even though the accused was eventually returned to Iran as part of a hostage swap, but that’s not the end of the story. More cases can be brought.
With the possible adoption of a new crimes against humanity treaty as early as 2026 and many states already having jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, this is a very viable option that should be encouraged and continued.
Moreover, many states are eliminating barriers to prosecution, including immunities, including France and Germany, which may make prosecution easier abroad.
The third possibility, building upon the second, is the creation of a mechanism by the United Nations that could serve as a possible vehicle for gathering evidence as was created for Syria. The international impartial and independent mechanism for Syria, which we call the IIIM, it was created by the General Assembly, sits in Geneva, and it collects evidence that can be used for eventual prosecutions.
There’s a similar mechanism for Myanmar. There’s another one for Iraq that was recently closed. Establishing one for Iran is an idea worth pursuing. It would be done presumably through the General Assembly.
Establishing one for Iran, I think, is definitely an idea that could be pursued. And this one could cover the 1988 massacre as well as ongoing crimes and collect and preserve evidence, so much of which you have already, that could one day also be turned over to a special ad-hoc tribunal for Iran, which is an idea that I think should be seriously contemplated as well.
Thus, there are ample opportunities for investigation and mechanisms for accountability. Activating them more fully requires political will. And for some of the options, regime change to really become effective and make justice for Iranian victims a priority.
There are court cases to be won, and they will be, I’m sure, given the skill and tenacity of the lawyers and institutions working on these problems.
But for you, it is not just courts of law that matter, it’s the court of public opinion. And this brings me to my final point, which is the section of Professor Rehman’s report suggesting that the 1988 massacre could be characterized as the crime of genocide.
Winning this argument in a court of law is extraordinarily difficult because courts and tribunals adjudicating cases of genocide have taken a very narrow view of that crime.
However, even if one cannot win a specific case in court, a serious claim that has been advanced that the massacre of 1988 was genocidal in character could galvanize public support for accountability. As the New York Times recently noted, the moral and popular meaning of this term has been completely detached from its legal meaning, and genocide is a powerful word that sways hearts and minds.
Moreover, under the convention, states have a duty to prevent genocide, and a genocidal regime is likely to be a recidivist that is to repeat its crimes. There are some costs to advancing this claim, and it’s hard to know if they will work.
The Nazis were prosecuted at Nuremberg for crimes against humanity. There’s nothing lesser about crimes against humanity. These crimes are equally notorious and evil. Both crimes against humanity and genocide are jus cogens crimes. That is their non-dirigible, and all states must, in all circumstances, refrain from their commission.
But there’s not yet a treaty on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, although one is in the process of elaboration. Thus, advancing charges of genocide for some or all of the killing is a serious idea that is worthy of additional consideration.
In closing, let me say that I’m certain that one day, you will have your country back, and you will be conducting your own trials.
And friends, it will then be up to you as a free people to decide how to proceed with accountability for the past.
I look forward to that bright day when the sun shines upon all of you everywhere in Iran and outside of Iran, and the freedom that you will experience and the suffering that you have endured will also be a light to oppress people and an inspiration to them all over the world.
Until then, I wish you great success and Godspeed, and I’m glad to be here and be part of the journey with you. Thank you so much.
