![The market-builder who restrained the market [Part 2]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/PHOTO-2026-08-25-17-16-32-360x180.jpg)
![The merchant preceding the Prophetic mission [Part 1]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/01-360x180.jpg)
![International law ‘under siege’, says Iranian ambassador to SA [+ videos]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/AGM-Nadel-panel-1.webp)
Iranian Ambassador to South Africa, Mansour Shakibmehr, accused the US and Israel of violating international law during a National Association Democratic Lawyers (Nadel) panel discussion focused on Gaza, Iran and the erosion of global legal institutions.
By YASEEN BARDIEN
The Islamic Republic of Iran’s Ambassador to South Africa, Mansour Shakibmehr, accused the United States and Israel of war crimes, genocide and undermining international law.
He was speaking as one of the panellists at an open session hosted by the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (Nadel) on May 7. The event formed part of the annual general meeting of the organisation.
The panel discussion was entitled ‘International Law Under Siege: Legal Resistance from the Global South’. The discussion engaged the erosion of international law, the genocide in Palestine, and broader Global South implications.
Addressing an audience of lawyers, journalists, political party members and religious leaders, Shakibmehr defended Iran’s military actions as lawful self-defence, and praised South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). He argued that Western powers have enabled decades of violence in Palestine and West Asia.
Framing support for Palestine as central to Iran’s post-revolution policy, Shakibmehr accused Israel of carrying out genocide in Gaza with the backing of Western allies, saying Iran had paid a price in its support for Palestine.
‘Palestine is an important issue that never could be ignored. Our main problem is Israel and its expansionist and aggressive policies,’ Shakibmehr stated.
He said countries supporting Israel were ‘partners in the genocide’ and must be held accountable in court.
He accused both the US and Israel of violating international law, citing decades of occupation, siege, illegal settlements, killing of civilians, and targeting of women and children as clear violations of international law and international humanitarian law.
Shakibmehr also referred to South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), describing it as ‘not just a legal action’ but one that carried a ‘moral and historical message’. He added that ‘the fight against oppression knows no geopolitical boundaries’.
Shakibmehr also rejected claims that Iran was close to developing nuclear weapons, describing the claims as politically motivated.
You may also want to read
Since the beginning of its nuclear programme, according to Shakibmehr, Iran has clearly emphasised the peaceful nature of its activities and its full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Shakibmehr argued that the US had weakened international institutions by blocking action against Israel and Iran at the United Nations Security Council. He said the US, despite holding veto power intended to protect international peace and security, had become a ‘great violator of international peace and security’.
Shakibmehr said that the US and Israel are attempting to reshape the global order in their own interests. ‘Today, the bully regimes of the US and Israel are trying to destabilise the global system and replace it with their own desired order. Therefore, they have launched targeted attacks on independent countries.’
Referencing Article Two, Paragraph Four of the Charter of the United Nations, the ambassador declared the actions of the US and Israel as clear violations of international law. He cited the bombing of Shajareh Tayyebeh Girls’ School in Minab that killed 120 children, 26 female teachers, seven parents, two school caretakers and a bus driver, and the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as the most glaring examples.
‘The killing of civilians, especially children, is not only a war crime, it’s a blatant violation of international law,’ he said.
Shakibmehr defended Iran’s military response as lawful under Article 51 of the UN Charter. ‘The exercise of this right was not for revenge, but within the framework of international law and the protection of a country’s national security and sovereignty.’
The ambassador further accused the US and Israel of committing ‘ecocide’ through attacks on fuel and pharmaceutical infrastructure. He said the attacks had caused widespread pollution and forced evacuations.
Retired Judge Siraj Desai, who chaired the panel, argued that international legal institutions have become largely ineffective, particularly in relation to Gaza and the attacks on Iran. ‘The United Nations has lost all its relevance,’ he said.
In reference to the attack on Iran, Desai added that there had been no real explanation for the war.
He also criticised what he described as selective application of international law. ‘How on earth are we going to indict Donald Trump? He’s a law unto himself.’
Veteran anti-apartheid activist and a leading voice for the liberation of Palestine, Dr Allan Boesak, echoed many of the concerns, arguing that international law itself has lost its legitimacy.
‘As long as I have a life, if there ever were such a thing as international law and rules of law, they are no more,’ he said.
Boesak described Iran as a ‘beacon of clarity’ and reflected on the country’s political endurance during sanctions, war and diplomatic pressure. He said Iran’s stance had given hope to people seeking alternatives to existing global power structures.
Ebrahim Rasool said the current international legal system is not fit for purpose, arguing that global institutions are unable to respond effectively to modern crises such as war and migration. He believes that we are trying to fit square pegs into a ‘round hole’.
Rasool argued that international law favoured powerful nations through what he described as ‘exceptionalism’, where some states apply rules to others while exempting themselves. ‘The laws you make for others must not apply to yourself,’ he said.
Touching on Iran’s conflict with the US and Israel, Rasool said the war exposed vulnerabilities within powerful global structures. ‘What Iran has done is to pierce the appearance of strength and to show vulnerability through an asymmetrical war that is being fought,’ he said.
During a Q&A session, political analyst Na’eem Jeenah also questioned whether international law had ever been neutral, arguing that it was historically shaped to protect colonial and powerful states.
‘I don’t think that international law is under siege. Firstly, it was never really meant to be international. It was always meant to serve a particular class of nations,’ said Jeenah.
He described South Africa’s case at the ICJ as an attempt by the Global South to reclaim international law in a way that challenged the more powerful nations.
Activist Yasmin Sooka echoed similar concerns, arguing that international law is applied selectively.
‘The deeper crisis that we face today is that some states openly assert the right to decide when international law applies. What we’re really witnessing is not merely selective enforcement, but the selective suspension of any kind of universality.’
Throughout the discussion, speakers argued that international law has been applied selectively and has lost legitimacy, particularly in the failure to hold powerful nations accountable for their actions against Palestine and Iran.
Video footage was recorded by Anwar Omar and edited by Thaakiera Ackerdien.
