Iran: Unilateral sanctions against international law suffocate people’s breathing space

On 9 September 2022, the US imposed new sanctions on Iran for allegedly supplying drones to Russia. The US Treasury Department stated in a press release that these sanctions would hold Iran “accountable”. The US also imposed sanctions on Iran’s Intelligence Ministry, which it accuses of involvement in cyber-attacks in Albania.
  At a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council, Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s Vice-President of the Judiciary for International Affairs, described the US sanctions as crimes against humanity. He also said the sanctions prevented cooperation in dealing with the refugee crisis and in the fight against drugs.
  Alena Douhan is the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the realisation of human rights. We spoke with her about the sanctions against Iran.

Current Concerns: From 7 to 18 May, you visited Iran as UN Special Rapporteur on Unilateral Sanctions to get an idea of the effects of the unilateral sanctions. How do you assess these sanctions from a legal, economic and political perspective?
Alena Douhan: The political perspective is outside of my mandate so I will focus on the legal and factual perspectives. I can say that the unilateral sanctions against Iran, and indeed most unilateral sanctions generally, are rather dubious under international law as they are imposed without or beyond the authorisation of the UN Security Council and do not take the form of retortions or countermeasures that international law authorises. Any measures in the course of retortions shall not violate any international obligations: from multilateral agreements and customary norms of international law in various areas: trade, postal services, transportation, human rights; up to its bilateral agreements.
  When one speaks about the mechanisms of countermeasures, any means of pressure can only be taken in full conformity with the law of international responsibility: measures shall be taken by the directly injured state in response to a previous violation of international law (with due account of situations of violations of erga omnes obligations) in full conformity with the aim (to restore fulfilment of international obligations), principles (necessity and proportionality to the violation) and limitations of countermeasures (prohibition to violate peremptory norms of international law, including to use force, to apply reprisals in international humanitarian law; or to violate fundamental human rights). 

The unilateral sanctions against
Iran are against international law …

Since August 2020 no UN Security Council sanctions are imposed on Iran. Sanctions applied by states and regional organisations raise serious concerns about the fulfilment of obligations in the spheres of amity, diplomatic law, law of international responsibility, immunities of states and state property, and promotion and protection of human rights. These measures therefore can be qualified as unilateral coercive measures and are illegal under international law, as recognised in numerous resolutions of the UN Human Rights Council and the UN General Assembly.

… and against human rights

The impact of unilateral sanctions on a country’s economy usually affects the human rights of its whole population in numerous ways, affecting particularly the most vulnerable groups, and that is clearly visible in the case of Iran. Human rights violations add another layer of illegality to unilateral sanctions, as sanctioning countries are obliged by international conventions to respect, protect and fulfill human rights, just like all countries must do.

Critics of unilateral sanctions, such as those repeatedly imposed by the USA and the EU, say that such sanctions are not only against international law, but also an outright act of war. How do you assess such statements?
The nature of war is always evolving so that’s an interesting question. War in the sense of international law involves armed conflict, so unilateral sanctions shall not be considered as acts of war. The Geneva Conventions as well as Additional covenants and the protection they give to civilian populations do not apply to the situations of unilateral sanctions, therefore I believe that while sanctions may be against international law their impact, even when high, shall not be qualified as those of war crimes.

Impact of sanctions equivalent
to what happens in a war

At the same time, it is important to recognise that the humanitarian impact of unilateral sanctions can sometimes be very high, even the equivalent of what happens in a war. People suffer and can die when sanctions prevent shipments of medicines and medical equipment or even food to a country, or when its vital infrastructure can’t be maintained, affecting supplies of water and other necessities of life. That is while I am very carefully following the Application submitted by Venezuela to the International Criminal Court (Venezuela II). Due to the serious problems and nearly non-existence of the responsibility and redress mechanisms to the victims of unilateral sanctions, international adjudication can be a good solution to prevent the use of sanctions, hold their perpetrators accountable and to provide for compensation to their victims.
  It is necessary to take into account however, that attribution of specific consequences to the specific state / specific type of unilateral sanctions may be rather problematic (much more problematic than attribution of activity and harm in the course of military conflicts) due to the multiplicity of sanctions regimes even in one state, the multiplicity of states imposing sanctions, and the existence of secondary sanctions, threats of sanctions, de-risking policies and over-compliance from the side of banks, businesses and other private actors.

Humanitarian exemptions largely ineffective

With regard to sanctions, the sanctioning states repeatedly claim that there are humanitarian exemptions. Is this the case and how does it work in practice?
It’s true that most unilateral sanctions include exemptions that are meant to allow the continued flow of medicine and food to sanctioned countries.
  In reality, however, these humanitarian exemptions are largely ineffective for various reasons. One is that sanctions are complex, overlapping and not clear, which results in the fear of possible secondary sanctions or civil and criminal penalties, even against international and national humanitarian actors. It can be very costly and time-consuming to obtain the licenses necessary to ship even the exempt goods. Then there is a big problem with over-compliance with unilateral sanctions, to avoid penalties from accidental violations. Because of this, banks, shipping companies and insurers of cargo sometimes decline to provide their services even for humanitarian goods that can be legally shipped to a sanctioned country, including for international humanitarian organisations and even for the UN agencies.

Most severe humanitarian consequences

In Iran the most severe problems exist as concerns the delivery of medicine and medical equipment for people suffering from rare and severe diseases, like EB, thalassemia, haemophilia, some forms of diabetes, cancer, autism and many other. As a result, mortality rates are increasing; life expectancy is getting shorter and the health status as well as the quality of life is deteriorating.
  Joined by some other special rapporteurs, I have forwarded e.g., communications to companies and states where they are registered about the impossibility to procure life-saving medicine; medical equipment; or to have transplantations for onco-children. Unfortunately, companies are reluctant to propose relevant and often unique goods and services due to the fear of secondary sanctions or the unreadiness of banks to transfer money. States of their registration being often against the extraterritorial application of unilateral sanctions, cannot guarantee security of their businesses and refer to freedom of business activity. After coming back from Iran, I have had several meetings with Permanent Missions of states where companies producing lifesaving unique medicine necessary for EB patients and people with Thalassemia are registered, and asked them for assistance to ensure that the medicine can be procured and delivered.

Call for lifting of sanctions against “critical goods”

Another problem refers to the very narrow understanding of humanitarian goods, which can hardly be isolated from other aspects of the sanctions, so if sanctions prohibit fuel imports there can be a situation where humanitarian goods arrive in the country and can’t be transported to the places where they are needed. In particular, you can hardly ensure health standards if people do not have access to safe water and sanitation; cannot use transportation to get to the hospitals; or have to sell their medicines even provided by the governments to buy food for their families. Recently, I, joined by some other special rapporteurs, have issued a press release calling for lifting sanctions¹ on critical goods, services and infrastructure including water, electricity, transport, civil aviation, medicine, medical equipment, spare parts, purified water, seeds, fertilisers and many other items.

No approval for development projects

The last point which I have to mention as regards humanitarian exemptions refers to the differentiation between humanitarian and development projects. It has been repeatedly reported by the humanitarian organisations and UN institutions that even if they manage sometimes to get licences for food or medicine deliveries, no license is ever given to implement development projects, which therefore undermines the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and prevents governments from the possibility to fulfil their obligations to guarantee a decent life on their territory.

Life-threatening effects

In your preliminary report, you expressed great concern about the life-threatening effects of sanctions in the health sector. What are the effects in Iran?
The effects are seen in many ways. Iranian pharmaceutical companies have difficulty obtaining raw materials from abroad for making medicines. Quite often they have to use alternative means that make procurement take much longer, more expensive and do not necessarily guarantee the high quality of the materials. Iran is producing domestically around 95 per cent of its medicine but it still depends on imports of high-quality raw materials, technologies, spare parts and software.
  As for medicines and medical equipment that must be imported, over-compliance with sanctions prevents shipments, adds costs and causes delays for material needed to treat a number of diseases, including certain types of cancer, thalassemia, haemophilia, leukaemia, ichthyosis, multiple sclerosis, epidermolysis bullosa (EB), autism, and certain forms of diabetes. As a result, prices are higher and shortages exist. In accordance with the reports received, the average mortality rate of people with thalassemia has increased from 25–30 to 130–170 after 2018.
  It is reported that this has led to an influx of counterfeit medicines, which only adds to the harm. Then there is the problem of foreign companies refusing to sell software and spare parts for medical equipment that is needed in Iran for purposes like regulating doses of medicines or monitoring the condition of hospital patients.
  In the face of the economic burden imposed by unilateral sanctions on Iran many Iranians appear in vulnerable situations and become 100 per cent dependent on governmental support. Due to the unavailability of additional funds and shrinking revenue, Iran is not able to build and equip new health facilities, despite the growing need for that in the face of lower income of people in the country and inflows of Afghan refugees (in particular, it has been reported that since August 2021 more than 850,000 of them appeared in Iran, with 5,000 – 10,000 coming every day).

The problem of over-compliance with sanctions

In the last interview with our journal, you already spoke of an over-compliance with sanctions, especially on the part of those countries and organisations that want to provide aid. Does this also apply to Iran?
Yes. The over-compliance problem affects donors of humanitarian aid to Iran, whether they are other countries or NGOs. In particular, they face problems from banks that won’t handle transactions involving Iran or anything that sounds like being of any reference to Iran, including selling so-called Persian dolls not originating from Iran or that discourage transactions by charging higher fees, requiring onerous documentation or taking longer to process them.
  Due to over-compliance Iranians appear to be cut off from international cooperation in many areas including sport, art and science. It has been reported that professionals, including health workers, are losing access to online communication and research platforms, cannot register to participate in international conferences, cannot transfer money to pay membership fees, are prevented to apply for study and research grants, and are prevented from submitting articles to foreign journals.²

Raising awareness, building global cooperation networks

Can you tell what the impact of your work as UN Special Rapporteur on unilateral sanctions is?
One of the things I am doing is raising awareness of the humanitarian problems that unilateral sanctions cause, and also about these sanctions too frequently not complying with the international legal obligations of countries that impose them. The fact that news media around the world report on my official visits to Iran and other countries, and take note of my reports to the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly and to my statements more generally, is evidence that this is working. Acknowledging the problem is the first step toward resolving it.
  I also try to build cooperation networks between states, scholars, non-governmental organisations, UN agencies. Last week I came back from a trip in which I discussed cooperation possibilities for humanitarian impact assessments with a number of UN agencies, including FAO, WHO, UNESCO, UNCTAD and many others.

Impressed by the courage of the people and the mutual help

What have been your impressions of the country and the people in Iran? How do the people deal with the sanctions in their daily lives?
I respect Iran and its history and culture, and of course its population as well. What impressed me during my visit is the courage of the Iranian people and their ability to adapt as best as possible to living in an environment that is shaped in large part by the unilateral sanctions that have been imposed against the country. I was rather impressed by the assistance provided by the most vulnerable groups to their group members to cope with the challenges of unilateral sanctions.
  I need to note that the Government of Iran has taken a number of measures to mitigate the impact of unilateral sanctions via developing the domestic production of around 95 per cent of medicine; encouraging domestic production and agriculture; reallocating subsidies; and opening free access to primary healthcare and schooling to Afghan refugees.
  These measures are however not sufficient to guarantee a decent life for the people of Iran. It is possible to say that the whole population of Iran is affected by unilateral sanctions in one form or another, and those who are vulnerable are suffering the most.  •

¹ https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/03/un-experts-urge-states-consider-humanitarian-impacts-when-imposing-or
² https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/07/unilateral-sanctions-threaten-scientific-research-and-academic-freedom-un