New York / Tehran – It was an attack with symbolic power – and with far-reaching consequences: From symbolism to indictment – why the strike on Tehran’s most well-known prison exceeds the bounds of war. Evin Prison in northern Tehran, known as a symbol of state repression and political persecution, became the target of an Israeli airstrike on Monday. Israel justified the attack by claiming it was targeting “regime facilities and instruments of repression” in the heart of the Iranian capital. But what may be seen from the Israeli perspective as a targeted weakening of power structures is now being condemned by the international community as a blatant breach of international humanitarian law. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights reacted swiftly and sharply. In a statement, the attack on Evin Prison was denounced as a “grave violation of international humanitarian law.” A prison that mainly holds political detainees – including journalists, human rights activists, and regime critics – can under no circumstances be considered a legitimate military target. The attack violates the basic principles of warfare, particularly the protection of civilians and non-military infrastructure.
Tehran itself stated that all inmates had been brought to safety following the attack so that the damaged facility could be repaired. However, it remains unclear where the prisoners were transferred – and under what conditions. Human rights organizations expressed concern about possible secret relocations, restricted access to justice, and lack of contact with families. The attack on Evin Prison marks a new level of escalation in the already tense conflict between Israel and Iran. While Tel Aviv refers to its right to self-defense and claims to have targeted “state instruments of repression,” questions arise about proportionality – and about the limits of military legitimacy. Precisely because Evin Prison is such a politically charged symbol, the attack shifts it into the center of a debate about warfare, the rule of law, and moral responsibility.
The United Nations called on Israel in the strongest terms to fulfill its obligation to protect civilian facilities and individuals – and to ensure that all future military operations adhere strictly to the standards of international humanitarian law. It is unacceptable that facilities like Evin, no matter how much they may represent state oppression, become battlegrounds. The people behind those walls – then as now – are not combatants, but often victims of a repressive system themselves. The international community now faces the task of not only defusing the spiral of escalation between Israel and Iran diplomatically, but also evaluating it under international law. Because if even prisons are no longer safe from bombs, the very foundation of international law begins to erode.
English 
German 
