According to Khabaronline, an Iranian news agency, the resolution passed with 25 votes in favor, 7 against, and 14 abstentions. China, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Pakistan, and Vietnam voted against the resolution. Countries including Brazil, Egypt, Qatar, South Africa, Kuwait, Thailand, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo abstained, while Mauritius was absent from the vote.
The resolution, proposed by Iceland, Germany, North Macedonia, the Republic of Moldova, and the United Kingdom, includes allegations regarding the human rights situation in Iran. It calls on Tehran to cooperate with Human Rights Council mechanisms and to halt what the sponsors describe as measures restricting citizens’ rights.
The text also emphasizes the continuation of the Council’s human rights scrutiny of Iran and, on an alleged basis, calls for the extension of the mandates of the fact-finding mission and the Special Rapporteur on Iran to continue collecting information and presenting further reports.
Prior to the vote, Iran’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Office in Geneva rejected the legitimacy of both the special session and the resulting resolution.
Ali Bahreini stated that Iran would not yield to external pressure and would not tolerate what he described as “covert aggression presented under the guise of concern.” He stressed that the Islamic Republic of Iran possesses independent national mechanisms to investigate and ensure accountability for acts of violence and terrorism, and therefore sees no need for externally imposed mechanisms.
Bahreini also pointed to the record of some of the resolution’s sponsors and supporters, describing the move as contradictory. He argued that governments accused of war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing, or systematic human rights violations—including violence against their own populations—lack the credibility to lecture Iran on social governance and human rights. He characterized the process as a “political spectacle” which, he said, is unlikely to convince global public opinion under current circumstances.
The adoption of the resolution comes as the pattern of opposing and abstaining votes once again highlights deep divisions within the Human Rights Council over how to approach Iran and the politicization of human rights mechanisms—a divide that has become a recurring feature of Iran-related discussions in international institutions.
Your Comment