Against the Civilian Population during the January 2026 Events in Iran

The first part documented, based on direct testimonies and field evidence, patterns of grave human rights violations during the January 2026 events, including the use of lethal force with intent to kill, widespread and arbitrary arrests, concealment of bodies and secret burials, enforced disappearances, and torture.

Building on those documented findings, Part Two addresses questions of responsibility and accountability. Its focus is on chains of command, prior knowledge and decision-making, and the structural mechanisms through which repression was authorized and affirmed. This includes the role of public statements by senior officials in legitimizing violence, as well as official acknowledgments indicating awareness and acceptance of lethal outcomes. These elements are then assessed within the framework of international criminal law, and the legal characterization of the events is evaluated against the criteria for crimes against humanity.

Chain of Command, Prior Knowledge, Decision-Making, and Structural Authorization of Repression

1. Discursive and Cognitive Conditioning Prior to January 2026

Available evidence indicates that the repression of the January 2026 events occurred within a pre-existing framework of discursive and cognitive conditioning. Prior to the outbreak of these events, official state rhetoric repeatedly emphasized the necessity of decisive, securitized, and uncompromising responses to any form of social protest.

Within this context, on 7 July 2025, an official editorial published by Fars News Agency described the mass executions of political prisoners in 1988 as a “successful historical experience” and explicitly called for their repetition against current political prisoners and opponents. The publication of such a position by a media outlet closely affiliated with the state security apparatus, prior to the January events, indicates that the option of maximal violence, including mass killing, had already been discursively legitimized within official narratives.

2. Ali Khamenei; Construction of the Repressive Framework and Issuance of Political Authorization

In the months leading up to the January 2026 events, Ali Khamenei repeatedly characterized popular protests in public speeches as the product of foreign interference, including by the United States and Israel, and described protesters using labels such as “saboteurs,” “rioters,” and “agents of the enemy.” He asserted that the protests were not “spontaneous or internal” and stated that the ruling system “will not retreat in the face of saboteurs.”

By drawing an ostensible distinction between “protesters” and “rioters,” Khamenei stated:
“We will speak with protesters, but rioters must be put in their place.”

In practice, these statements functioned as political authorization for the escalation of repression and the use of coercive violence against protesting populations. He further framed the protests as part of an “enemy conspiracy” aimed at destabilizing the country and warned that the system would not yield under such conditions. This discursive framing removed protesters from the status of rights-bearing citizens and redefined them as legitimate security threats subject to repression.

3. Continuity of Lethal Repression; Linking 2019 and 2026

There is documented precedent for the issuance of orders authorizing lethal repression by Ali Khamenei. During the nationwide protests of November 2019, a special investigative report published on 23 December 2019 by Reuters cited internal Iranian Interior Ministry officials who disclosed that approximately 1,500 people were killed. The report stated that Khamenei had instructed senior officials to:
“Do whatever it takes to stop them.”

The convergence of rhetoric, methods, and outcomes demonstrates that the January 2026 repression represents a continuation of an established and consciously applied policy for confronting popular uprisings, rather than a temporary or situational response.

4. Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei; Judicial Consolidation of Repression

Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, Head of the Judiciary, publicly labeled protesters as “rioters” and “instigators of unrest” and emphasized the necessity of swift, decisive, and deterrent punishment without leniency. He declared that “there will be no more concessions” and that the judiciary, in coordination with intelligence bodies, would identify and prosecute “the main leaders and instigators.”

Ejei further stressed that no “delay whatsoever” would be tolerated in handling these cases. These positions reveal the role of the judiciary as an instrument for consolidating and completing field-level repression, extending the cycle of violence from the streets into detention centers and courtrooms.

5. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf; Political and Legislative Legitimation of Repression

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Parliament, described the protests as a “terrorist war resembling ISIS” and as an “organized” operation, portraying protesters as part of an “enemy conspiracy” aimed at “manufacturing deaths.” Emphasizing the simultaneous occurrence of protests across multiple cities, he stated that the system would not limit itself to “post-incident reactions.”

These statements, combined with public threats against the United States and Israel and his praise of Khamenei as the “soul of the Iranian nation,” reflect an effort to frame violent repression as a national security necessity within legislative discourse and public opinion.

6. Masoud Pezeshkian; Executive Alignment with Violent Repression

Masoud Pezeshkian, President, labeled protesters as “rioters” and “terrorists” and attributed the protests to “hostile conspiracies against Iran,” including by the United States and Israel. He called for “decisive action” by security forces and claimed that protesters had been “trained inside and outside the country” to create chaos.

By urging citizens to “prevent disorder” and characterizing any challenge to the leadership as “war against the Iranian nation,” his statements underscore the role of the executive branch in endorsing and intensifying repression.

Official Acknowledgment, Knowledge, and Acceptance of Consequences

In his first public address following the violent suppression of the January 2026 protests, which primarily involved mass killings on 8 and 9 January 2026, Ali Khamenei formally acknowledged, for the first time, the killing of “several thousand” people. These remarks were made on 17 January 2026.

In this speech, Khamenei attributed responsibility for the killings to protesters, the United States, particularly Donald Trump, Israel, and what he termed “seditionists,” while making no reference to the responsibility of security or military forces. This position constitutes an explicit acknowledgment of the масwтаб and gravity of the human toll, while simultaneously demonstrating awareness and acceptance of the lethal consequences at the highest level of authority, coupled with a refusal to accept responsibility or to order investigation and accountability.

From the perspective of international law, this official acknowledgment, when considered alongside prior statements, public orders, and observed operational patterns, constitutes a strong indication of prior knowledge, decision-making, and the continuation of repression without corrective or preventive action.

Legal Assessment

Establishing the Elements of Crimes Against Humanity in the January 2026 Events in Iran

(This section consolidates the legal assessment and final legal analysis into a coherent framework using international criminal law terminology, in accordance with Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.)

1. Applicable Legal Framework

Under customary international law and Article 7 of the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity are established when specified acts are committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a state or organizational policy. The legal qualification requires the presence of the following elements:

1. An attack directed against a civilian population.
2. The widespread or systematic nature of the attack.
3. The commission of acts enumerated in Article 7.
4. Knowledge of the attack and conscious participation by the perpetrators.

The findings of this report indicate that the January 2026 events meet all these elements.

2. Existence of an Attack Against the Civilian Population

The body of evidence demonstrates that the actions of security, law enforcement, and judicial authorities did not constitute sporadic responses to unrest, but rather formed a coherent course of conduct directed against a civilian population. Targets included unarmed protesters, bystanders present at protest sites or along escape routes, wounded individuals in medical facilities, and families of victims. Repeated direct gunfire at vital body parts, mass arrests, and the continuation of violence after control of the scene establish the existence of an “attack” in its legal sense.

3. Widespread and Systematic Character

The January 2026 events occurred simultaneously across dozens of cities and provinces and resulted in the killing of thousands of civilians, mass arrests, and widespread enforced disappearances. The geographical scope and scale of victimization independently satisfy the criterion of “widespread.”

At the same time, the use of similar methods of repression across different locations, recurring patterns of shooting, arrest, torture, and secret burial, coordination among security, judicial, and executive bodies, and the use of internet shutdowns as a complementary tool collectively demonstrate the “systematic” nature of the attack.

4. Acts Constituting Crimes Against Humanity

Based on the documented findings, the following acts were committed in a widespread and systematic manner:

• Murder; direct gunfire to the head and chest, execution-style killings, and killings along escape routes or inside medical facilities.
• Severe deprivation of liberty; arbitrary arrests without judicial warrants and without access to lawyers or family notification.
• Torture and inhuman treatment; severe beatings, threats of death, sexual violence, and deliberate denial of medical care.
• Enforced disappearance; denial of detention, prolonged lack of information to families, and sudden return of bodies or death notifications without explanation.
• Other inhumane acts; concealment of bodies, night-time burials, financial and psychological coercion, and forced silence.

5. State Policy and Chain of Responsibility

The existence of a state policy is established through converging evidence; including prior discursive conditioning, public orders calling for uncompromising action, coordination among armed forces, the judiciary, and the executive, and implicit or explicit acceptance of lethal outcomes without corrective measures. These indicators demonstrate that the acts were carried out in furtherance of preserving the power structure through violent repression.

6. Knowledge and Acceptance of Consequences

Public statements by senior officials following the events, including formal acknowledgment of the killing of “several thousand” people, demonstrate full awareness of the lethal scope of the repression and acceptance of its consequences without initiating independent investigations or accountability mechanisms. This reinforces the requisite mental element for international criminal responsibility.

Legal Conclusion

On the basis of the above analysis, the January 2026 events in Iran meet all the legal elements required to establish crimes against humanity; including the widespread and systematic nature of the attack, the targeting of a civilian population, the commission of acts enumerated in Article 7 of the Rome Statute, and the existence of a state policy accompanied by knowledge and acceptance at the highest levels of authority.

Human and Social Consequences

The January 2026 events produced profound and enduring human and social consequences. At the individual level, direct victims of the repression suffered severe physical injuries, denial of medical care, and long-term psychological harm. Families of those killed or forcibly disappeared, in addition to the loss of their loved ones, were subjected to pressure, threats, enforced silence, and serious obstacles to accessing truth and justice.

At the societal level, coordinated and large-scale repression weakened public trust, entrenched structural fear, and eroded social cohesion. The presence of security forces in public and medical spaces, interference in medical processes, and expedited judicial proceedings intensified feelings of insecurity and abandonment, significantly restricting citizens’ access to fundamental rights.

The consequences of these events are not confined to the immediate period of repression. Their impact on children, adolescents, and other vulnerable groups; including through direct exposure to violence or witnessing it within their living environments; is already evident. This situation increases the risk of normalizing state violence and reproducing cycles of human rights violations in the future.

Final Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on field documentation, identified patterns of conduct, official positions, and legal analysis, this report concludes that the January 2026 events in Iran constitute crimes against humanity. A widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population, the existence of a state policy, prior knowledge and decision-making, and awareness and acceptance of lethal consequences without corrective action or effective accountability together fulfill all elements required for this legal characterization. The persistence of impunity significantly heightens the risk of recurrence of such crimes.

As demonstrated in the analysis, the January 2026 events meet all the elements necessary to establish crimes against humanity; including the widespread and systematic nature of the attack, the targeting of a civilian population, the commission of acts enumerated in Article 7 of the Rome Statute, and the existence of a state policy accompanied by the awareness of senior officials.

Recommendations

In light of the above findings, the following recommendations are made:

1. To the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission

• Continue and deepen investigations, with a focus on chains of command and individual and institutional responsibility;
• Preserve evidence, including testimonies, medical records, and data related to secret burials;
• Ensure effective protection measures for witnesses and families of victims.

2. To United Nations Bodies and States

• Utilize available accountability mechanisms, including the principle of universal jurisdiction;
• Implement targeted measures against responsible individuals and entities, where appropriate;
• Support independent efforts aimed at truth-seeking and documentation.

3. To Human Rights Organizations and the International Community

• Support victims and families in accessing truth, justice, and reparations;
• Strengthen independent and secure documentation capacities;
• Actively counter denial, distortion, and the normalization of violence.

The findings presented in this report demonstrate that the January 2026 events cannot be understood as the result of momentary decisions, sporadic reactions, or isolated errors. The alignment of prior official discourse, repeated public statements by senior authorities, the role of judicial and political institutions in consolidating repression, and official acknowledgments after the events together form a coherent body of evidence pointing to prior decision-making, awareness of lethal consequences, and the continuation of a repressive policy without corrective action or independent accountability.

This conclusion, alongside the extensive human and social consequences documented, underscores the urgent need to prioritize the preservation of evidence, ensure the protection of witnesses and families of victims, and activate effective international accountability mechanisms.