International lawsuit demands truth, accountability for war crimes perpetrators in Iran’s Minab School
Initiated by the “In the Name of Iran” campaign, which operates with the slogan “Caring for Iran” during the U.S.-Israel conflict, a lawsuit drafted by a broad and diverse spectrum of prominent Iranian figures, civil society activists, and political figures condemning and pursuing legal action against the U.S. and Israel’s war crime in bombing the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in the city of Minab, which resulted in the martyrdom of 168 of Iranian students, has been published in both English and Persian. The lawsuit is addressed to competent international and national bodies for the legal pursuit of this crime. It has been signed by over 1,144 well-known Iranian researchers and civil and political activists. The signatories of the lawsuit urge all responsible international and national authorities, including the International Criminal Court, the UN Security Council, the UN Human Rights Council, and national courts and prosecutors with universal jurisdiction, to act with urgency and decisiveness to uncover the truth, achieve justice, and hold the perpetrators of the crime accountable.
The legal document, citing a clear violation of Article 4 of the UN Charter, describes the attack as a “war crime” and a “blatant act of aggression,” emphasizing the deaths of 168 young students. The signatories of this statement, rejecting claims of self-defense, have called on prosecutors in countries with “universal jurisdiction,” including Germany, France, and Belgium, to initiate international arrest warrants for those responsible for the incident, regardless of political considerations. The English version of the statement has also been published by the Global Conscience Initiative and has been signed by dozens of prominent global figures. Jeremy Corbyn, Ahmed Davudoglu, Abdullah Gul, Mohammad Javad Zarif, and Mohamed El-Baradei are among these international signatories.
The full text of the lawsuit and a complete list of over 100 signatories from among global figures, are provided below:
To:
• The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court
• The United Nations Security Council
• The United Nations Human Rights Council
• The Secretary-General of the United Nations
• Prosecutors and national judicial authorities in countries that recognize the principle of universal jurisdiction over international crimes, including: Germany, France, Belgium, Spain, Norway, the Netherlands, and other countries whose domestic laws allow for the prosecution of international crimes under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
The signatories of this lawsuit, with utmost concern and a sense of responsibility for upholding fundamental human principles and international law, draw the immediate attention of competent international and national authorities to a series of actions that occurred following the illegal military attack by the United States of America and Israel against the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran on February 28, 2026; an attack that, according to established principles of international public law, constitutes a clear and serious violation of the principle of non-use of force enshrined in Article 4 of the UN Charter.
The principle of non-use of force is one of the fundamental pillars of contemporary international legal order and is only admissible in two exceptional circumstances: first, upon the express authorization of the UN Security Council; and second, within the framework of exercising the right of self-defense in response to an actual, ongoing, or imminent armed attack, in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter.
In the case of the attack in question, neither of the above conditions has been met. The Security Council has not authorized the use of force, and no credible and reliable evidence has been presented to prove the existence of an armed attack or an imminent and unavoidable threat against the United States of America or Israel. Therefore, the claims made by American and Israeli officials to justify this operation within the framework of the principle of “self-defense” lack legal basis from an international law perspective and are inconsistent with the accepted interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter.
Consequently, the aforementioned attack must be assessed within the framework of international law as an unlawful use of force and an act involving elements of aggression. This action was not a necessary response to an imminent and real threat, but rather a pre-planned action, coinciding with diplomatic negotiations and completely lacking military necessity.
Furthermore, this illegal aggression has led to serious violations of international humanitarian law and the commission of war crimes against the civilian population, and its effects have become apparent from the very initial stages of the operation.
Among these violations, the deadly attack on an elementary school in the city of Minab – which resulted in the deaths of dozens of children – is a striking example of blatant disregard for the fundamental principles of the laws of armed conflict in terms of its severity and human impact.
In light of the nature of this event and the international community’s commitment to combating impunity for international crimes, the signatories of this lawsuit request that competent international and national authorities initiate an urgent, independent, impartial, and effective investigation into this attack and prosecute those responsible at all levels of command and decision-making.
Moreover, given that many countries recognize the principle of universal jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression, national courts and prosecutors in European, American, and other judicial jurisdictions with this jurisdiction can initiate criminal investigations independently of the location of the crime or the nationality of the perpetrators and, if responsibility is established, issue arrest warrants and indictments. This includes countries such as Germany, France, Belgium, Spain, Norway, the Netherlands, and other countries whose domestic laws allow for the prosecution of international crimes under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
Page 3