Introduction
The Israeli military strike on Evin Prison in Tehran represents one of the most catastrophic instances of gross human rights violations and fundamental breaches of international humanitarian law in recent decades. This attack, conducted during the twelve-day conflict between Israel and Iran, not only constitutes a direct infringement of the national sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran but also openly violates core principles of the laws of armed conflict, including the Principle of Distinction, the Principle of Proportionality, and the Prohibition of the Use of Force. Evin Prison, a judicial and administrative institution used for the detention of inmates, played no operational role in the armed conflict. Consequently, the targeting of this facility is legally, ethically, and morally indefensible.
This report, grounded in reputable international sources, humanitarian law principles, and human rights documentation, provides a comprehensive legal analysis of the attack. It explores the various dimensions of international law violations, as well as the disastrous human, psychological, financial, and social consequences resulting from the strike. Furthermore, the report highlights Israel’s legal responsibility, the prospects for judicial prosecution before international tribunals, and the far-reaching implications of this crime for the international legal order and global public opinion. This assault is not merely a military operation; it is a tangible manifestation of egregious disregard for human dignity, national sovereignty, and the international legal system.
This analysis aims to elucidate the legal and humanitarian dimensions of this tragedy, provide legal documentation, and enhance the capacity for legal action in international forums – ultimately underscoring the imperative of holding the aggressor state accountable and supporting the victims of this atrocity.
Comprehensive Legal Analysis of Human Rights and International Law Violations
Violation of the Principle of Distinction Between Military and Civilian Objects
Under international humanitarian law, Evin Prison is classified as a civilian facility serving the national judicial and penal system. Israel’s attack on this prison – where inmates are predominantly individuals with no operational role in the conflict or any immediate threat to Israeli security – constitutes a clear violation of the Principle of Distinction. Even in the hypothetical scenario where a security-related target is claimed to exist within the prison, an attack affecting the entire facility and its occupants breaches the obligation to ensure precise targeting and limit harm exclusively to military elements involved in hostilities.
Legal Basis:
- Article 48 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977)
According to Article 48, parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between civilians and military objectives (IHL Treaties, 1977, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-48).
Evin Prison is a facility used to detain individuals charged or convicted on political, cultural, media-related, security, or economic grounds. An attack on such an institution – absent clear and compelling evidence of its direct participation in military operations – is a blatant violation of this principle.
- Article 51 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977)
This article mandates that attacks must be directed exclusively against military objectives (IHL Treaties, 1977, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51).
Legal Conclusion:
- A manifest violation of the laws of armed conflict.
- Establishment of international responsibility for Israel as the direct perpetrator of the attack.
- Grounds for potential prosecution before the International Criminal Court (ICC) under the category of war crimes.
Violation of the Principle of Proportionality
The attack on Evin Prison resulted in the deaths and injuries of numerous inmates, a significant fire outbreak, and extensive structural damage to the facility. Under the Principle of Proportionality, the scale of casualties and destruction is grossly disproportionate to any purported military advantage claimed. International humanitarian law mandates that, even in the presence of military objectives, incidental civilian harm must be minimized and must never exceed a reasonable threshold.
Even if Israel were to assert the existence of a specific military target within Evin Prison, an assault causing the death of dozens of detainees, injuries to others, complete destruction of parts of the facility, and widespread fire is evidently disproportionate. In fact, no military objective existed within the prison at all.
Legal Basis:
- Article 51, Paragraph 5(b), of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977) (IHL Treaties, 1977, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51)
- Article 8, Paragraph 2(b), of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998) (OHCHR, 1998, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/rome-statute-international-criminal-court)
This act qualifies as a war crime under Article 8 of the Rome Statute, as it involves the deliberate targeting of a civilian facility not directly participating in hostilities.
Legal Consequences:
- Criminal responsibility for commanding officers and those who executed the attack
- Possibility of filing a formal complaint regarding war crimes committed against civilians
The violation of the Principle of Proportionality constitutes an indiscriminate attack, which is explicitly prohibited under the statutes of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and is classified as a grave violation of the laws of war.
Extrajudicial and Arbitrary Executions and the Violation of the Right to Life
The individuals detained or serving judicial sentences at Evin Prison were not involved in any military activities. Their deaths resulting from the bombing – executed without trial or due legal process – constitute a violation of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which guarantees the right to life.
The detainees who perished in this attack became indirect victims of a calculated military operation by a foreign regime, devoid of any judicial oversight. These killings cannot be justified under any legal framework, as the victims were disarmed, in custody, and posed no active threat. The killing of individuals while in detention or captivity is deemed unlawful under international law and constitutes an extrajudicial execution. If such acts are demonstrated to be part of a systematic or repeated pattern, they may amount to crimes against humanity.
Legal Basis:
- Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (OHCHR, 1966, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights)
- United Nations Human Rights Principles on the Protection of Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment
Legal Consequences:
- Universal jurisdiction applies to this crime, allowing any international or national court to exercise jurisdiction over the case under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
- These incidents may also fall under the category of crimes against humanity if the attack is determined to be part of a widespread or systematic pattern targeting a civilian population.
Violation of State Obligations to Protect Persons Deprived of Liberty
The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) impose a clear obligation on states to protect prisoners from harm, violence, and danger. An assault on a prison – particularly in the absence of adequate protective measures to prevent or respond to such an incident – represents a violation of this obligation. Targeting a nation’s legal infrastructure, such as its prison system, is equivalent to undermining a symbol of national sovereignty.
States have a fundamental duty to safeguard the lives, health, and dignity of prisoners against both internal and external threats. Given their inability to escape or defend themselves, prisoners rank among the most vulnerable populations during armed conflict. The recent direct attack on Evin Prison, which resulted in the deaths and injuries of inmates, it violates this principle.
Legal Basis:
- Nelson Mandela Rules (United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners) (United Nations, 2019, https://www.un.org/en/un-chronicle/nelson-mandela-rules-protecting-rights-persons-deprived-liberty)
- Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners (OHCHR, 1990, https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/basic-principles-treatment-prisoners)
Legal Consequences:
- Shared responsibility of the aggressor state and international institutions in addressing the humanitarian crisis resulting from the attack.
- Increased international legal accountability for the aggressor state (Israel), establishing grounds for judicial proceedings before competent courts.
Violation of the Principle of the Prohibition of the Use of Force
Pursuant to Article 2, Paragraph 4 of the United Nations Charter, the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state is unequivocally prohibited. By infringing upon Iran’s airspace and targeting facilities within Tehran, Israel has engaged in a blatant violation of this fundamental principle of international law.
The assault on Evin Prison, situated in the center of Iran’s capital, constitutes a direct act of military aggression against the national sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran. This action was conducted without authorization from the United Nations Security Council and does not conform to the parameters of lawful self-defense as outlined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, lacking the elements of “immediate necessity” and “proportional response.”
Legal Basis:
Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state” (United Nations, 2025, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text).
Legal Consequences:
- Israel has committed a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, thereby establishing a legal basis for a legitimate reciprocal response by Iran.
- This attack constitutes an act of aggression, which, under international law, is considered one of the gravest crimes against peace.
Human, Financial, Psychological, and Social Consequences
The Israeli attack on Evin Prison – executed within the framework of the twelve-day conflict, which many analysts characterize as an attempt to destabilize Iran’s political system – has resulted in significant material and human losses, as well as profound psychological, social, legal, and security-related repercussions for Iranian society, the families of inmates, and public sentiment. This section examines these consequences, with particular emphasis on their human, emotional, and societal dimensions.
Loss of Life
The casualties resulting from the Evin Prison bombing included members of the prison’s administrative staff, conscripted soldiers, incarcerated individuals, family members visiting for legal purposes, and local residents in proximity to the facility. To date, 80 lives have been lost due to this attack. Among the deceased, 41 were administrative staff members, 13 were conscripted soldiers, 5 were convicted inmates, and the remaining individuals included family members of prisoners and nearby residents – among whom were women and young children.
One of the most tragic aspects of the Israeli strike on Evin Prison involved the loss of five prison social workers: Akram Mohammad-Salimi, Zahra Ebadi, Atefeh Ba’aj Zadeh, Mahnaz Khosh Kerdar, and Pourandokht Saadat Nejad. Notably, Zahra Ebadi was martyred alongside her five-year-old son in the administrative building of the prison. This heartbreaking event underscores the devastating impact of military actions on civilians and prison personnel (Rokna, 2025, https://share.google/9GDvw7f0f07MbD0Ik).
The Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran has officially released the names of the martyrs among the administrative staff and conscripted soldiers of Evin Prison as follows:
Martyrs – Evin Prison Administrative Staff:
- Ali Qanat Kar
- Abolhassan Sharifi
- Ahmad Radmehr
- Akram Mohammad-Salimi
- Omid Mollaye Shahri
- Bahar Lotfi
- Pourandokht Saadat Nejad
- Javad Saeedi
- Hassan Shojaei
- Hassan Salehi
- Hassan Nazari
- Hossein Zolfaghari
- Hossein Yavar Yad
- Hossein Yousef Khani
- Hamid Saeedi
- Hamid Ranjbari
- Rouhollah Tavassoli
- Zahra Ebadi
- Zohreh Sadat Hosseini
- Seyed Amirhossein Khademi
- Shirin Esmaeili
- Atefeh Ba’aj Zadeh
- Abbas Shafiee
- Ali Haj Ali
- Ali Karam Moghaddam
- Gholamreza Kamani
- Fatemeh Siahpush
- Fatemeh Ghanbari
- Farhad Fallahi
- Kourosh Molla Yousefi
- Mojtaba Omidi
- Mojtaba Agha Babaei
- Mohammad Mir
- Mohammad Hemmati
- Maryam Vahed Panah
- Masoud Sabzi
- Mehdi Shah Bahrami Moghaddam
- Mehdi Sarem Poor
- Mahnaz Khosh Kerdar
- Vahid Heydar Poor
Martyrs – Evin Prison Conscripted Soldiers:
- Amirali Fazli
- Amir Mohammad Rahmati
- Elia Nobakht
- Parsa Yadollahi
- Pouyan Sereshti
- Seyed Mohammad Amin Rouhbaksh
- Ali Habibi
- Alireza Mahmoudi
- Alireza Vafaee
- Mahan Setareh
- Mohammad Sadegh Khalasi
- Mostafa Movahedi
- Hamidreza Mirzaei (IRNA, 2025, https://share.google/zQy7jnJ1UXH3RcUV5)
Material Damages
The Israeli attack targeted at least two locations within Evin Prison. One strike occurred near the Shahid Moqaddas Prosecutor’s Office, located directly below the main entrance of the prison. This resulted in damage to the prosecutor’s office building, the prison’s outer wall, several administrative buildings, and the library. Another explosion took place in the northeastern section of the prison, near the Shahid Kachouyi Judicial Complex, causing significant damage to the in-person visitation building and nearby residential structures. As a result, neighboring residents adjacent to the prison’s visitation hall and judicial offices were also adversely affected.
In response to the attack, female prisoners from the women’s ward were transferred to Qarchak Varamin Prison, while male inmates from Ward 4 were relocated to the Greater Tehran Central Penitentiary (The Washington Post, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2025/07/06/israel-iran-evin-prison-attack/).
The areas either directly targeted or severely impacted by the powerful shockwaves of the explosions included the guard posts, the visitation hall, administrative offices, the infirmary, the women’s ward, the Ward 4 library, and the Evin Prosecutor’s Office.
Psychological Consequences
A) Psychological Trauma Among Prisoners
- Sudden Terror of Death:
A missile attack on a confined space where occupants lack means of defense or escape instills paralyzing fear at the moment and may lead to lasting anxiety disorders such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Brain and Cognition Clinic, 2025, https://share.google/gGgtmRigmM7zyR4bp).
- Nighttime Trauma and Insomnia:
Many prisoners experience recurring nightmares, night terrors, panic attacks, and insomnia following the attack (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2025, https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health/translations/persian/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-(PTSD)).
- Exacerbated Sense of Helplessness:
Prisoners, already in a fragile psychological state, find that the bombing of a facility that should be protected by law intensifies their feelings of worthlessness and utter defenselessness.
B) Mental Health Disorders Among Families
- Acute Anxiety and Secondary Shock:
Families of prisoners experience psychological shock, chronic anxiety, and severe depression upon hearing news of the attack. The uncertainty regarding the fate of their loved ones exacerbates these pressures (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2025, https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health/translations/persian/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-(PTSD)).
- Increased Risk of Psychological Breakdown Among Mothers and Wives of Prisoners
- Disorders in Children of Families:
Children whose parents are imprisoned in Evin face secondary traumatic experiences that lead to persistent fear of the future, existential anxiety, distrust of social institutions, and behavioral disorders (Brain and Cognition Clinic, 2025, https://share.google/gGgtmRigmM7zyR4bp).
C) Expansion of Psychological Insecurity in Society
- The assault on Evin Prison – an institution that, even amidst the most severe wartime conditions, should be regarded as deserving of protection in public perception -symbolically violated established “humanitarian red lines” and heightened the prevailing sense of psychological insecurity within society (Front Line Defenders, 2025, https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/iran-concerns-over-israeli-strikes-evin-prison-new-amendments-espionage-law-mass).
- Citizens, particularly those who are educated and politically or socially active, perceived that no location – even prisons – remained exempt from Israeli attacks.
Social Consequences
A) Crisis of Public Trust in the International System
- The silence of international institutions regarding the attacks on prisoners – who are recognized as defenseless individuals under the Geneva Conventions – has left Iranian society feeling isolated, marginalized, and deprived of international justice.
- This situation has further entrenched the perception of “global injustice” across various segments of society.
B) Heightened Social Hostility Towards Israel and Its Western Supporters
- The bombing of defenseless prisoners by Israel has incited a new level of reciprocal animosity and intensified anti-Israel radicalism within Iranian society.
- Survivors and human rights activists have called for Israel’s prosecution in international courts; however, the ongoing international silence has only exacerbated public outrage (Front Line Defenders, 2025, https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/iran-concerns-over-israeli-strikes-evin-prison-new-amendments-espionage-law-mass).
Conclusion
The Israeli attack on Evin Prison constitutes a severe violation of fundamental principles of international law, including the principles of distinction between military and civilian targets, proportionality, and the prohibition of the use of force. This act also represents an affront to human dignity, criminal justice, and international protective mechanisms for persons deprived of their liberty. It breaches established norms of international humanitarian law and the human rights obligations of states, thereby necessitating accountability for Israel.
The repercussions of this attack extend beyond the immediate deaths and injuries of staff, prisoners, and their families, leading to collective trauma, psychological and social crises within society, profound distrust toward international institutions, and heightened regional and global tensions. Legally, targeting civilian facilities such as prisons without immediate military necessity and failing to observe proportionality constitutes not only a war crime but, if persistent or part of a pattern, may also amount to a crime against humanity.
Additionally, the targeted and extrajudicial killings of detainees represent a clear violation of the right to life as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, establishing grounds for universal jurisdiction to prosecute this crime. According to the principles outlined in the Rome Statute, individual criminal responsibility applies to officers, senior officials, and all individuals involved in planning, ordering, and executing this attack.
Furthermore, the silence or neutral responses from certain international bodies in the face of this egregious act undermine the legitimacy of institutions that claim to defend human rights and reinforce perceptions of global injustice, particularly among nations in the Global South. The attack on Evin Prison is not merely an isolated incident but marks a critical juncture in the credibility of fundamental human rights principles of international law in light of geopolitical considerations.
Therefore, it is imperative that:
- All documents, testimonies, and evidence related to the attack be comprehensively collected and archived to establish a basis for legal action;
- At both regional and international levels, legal mechanisms such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the United Nations Human Rights Council should be utilized, alongside the activation of the principle of universal jurisdiction, to prosecute the perpetrators;
- The global community leverages the power of media, public diplomacy, and cooperation with independent civil society organizations to ensure that the attack on Evin Prison is recorded in international memory as an instance of a “silent crime against civilians.”
Ultimately, the attack on Evin was not merely an assault on a physical structure but an attack on human dignity, the psychological security of society, fundamental human rights principles, and the international order based on law. If this attack remains unaddressed by legal and international mechanisms, it will set a precedent for the justification and recurrence of similar crimes elsewhere in the world.
Resources
- IHL Treaties (1977), Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions – Article 48, Accessible at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-48
- IHL Treaties (1977), Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions – Article 51, Accessible at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51
- OHCHR (1998), Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Accessible at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/rome-statute-international-criminal-court
- OHCHR (1966), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Accessible at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights
- United Nations (2019), The Nelson Mandela Rules: Protecting the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty, Accessible at: https://www.un.org/en/un-chronicle/nelson-mandela-rules-protecting-rights-persons-deprived-liberty
- OHCHR (1990), Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, Accessible at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/basic-principles-treatment-prisoners
- United Nations (2025), United Nations Charter (full text), Accessible at: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
- Rokna (2025), 5 female social workers martyred in Evin Prison, Accessible at: https://share.google/9GDvw7f0f07MbD0Ik (In Persian)
- Irna (2025), Announcing the names and pictures of the martyrs of the administrative staff and conscripts of Evin Prison, Accessible at: https://share.google/zQy7jnJ1UXH3RcUV5 (In Persian)
- The Washington Post (2025), Israeli strike hit four areas of Evin prison, civilians among the dead, Accessible at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2025/07/06/israel-iran-evin-prison-attack/
- Brain and Cognition Clinic (2025), PTSD from the War in Iran: Symptoms, Consequences, and Pathways to Recovery, Accessible at: https://share.google/gGgtmRigmM7zyR4bp (In Persian)
- Royal College of Psychiatrists (2025), post-traumatic stress disorder, Accessible at: https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health/translations/persian/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-(PTSD)
- Front Line Defenders (2025), Iran: Concerns over Israeli strikes at Evin Prison, new amendments to “espionage law,” mass arrest, and safety of detained human rights defenders, Accessible at: https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/iran-concerns-over-israeli-strikes-evin-prison-new-amendments-espionage-law-mass