Direct Attacks on the Right to Health and the Right to Life of the Iranian Population

According to reports by Iran’s official news agencies, approximately twenty-five pharmaceutical units and companies across the country have been subjected to direct and indirect strikes during the attacks carried out by the United States and Israel. These targets range from pharmaceutical manufacturing plants to storage warehouses and distribution centers. According to the Director-General of the World Health Organization, the attacks have inflicted “substantial” damage on Iran’s health infrastructure. Among the numerous affected sites, several illustrate the depth of the resulting humanitarian crisis with particular clarity.

A specialized pharmaceutical warehouse designated for patients with multiple sclerosis and other chronic conditions—as well as a storage site for infant formula—was completely destroyed when it was hit by a missile, igniting a fire that obliterated all essential medicines and supplies. For thousands of patients and families, this facility represented the sole point of access to life-saving drugs and indispensable nutritional items. The destruction of such a site is not merely the loss of a building; it is the destruction of hope and life for individuals whose survival is dependent on uninterrupted access to these medications.

Tofigh Daru Pharmaceutical Company, one of Iran’s principal manufacturers of advanced medicines for patients suffering from cancer, multiple sclerosis, and hemophilia, was also directly targeted. Damage to such a facility is effectively indistinguishable from directly targeting the patients reliant on these critical treatments.

Similarly, Saha Darou Pharmaceutical Company, affiliated with the Iranian Red Crescent Society and one of the principal suppliers of saline solutions, antibiotics, and emergency medical supplies in times of crisis, was among the sites struck. This attack directly undermined the health system’s capacity to respond to the urgent medical needs of patients, wounded individuals, and civilians during armed conflict and humanitarian emergencies.

The Pasteur Institute of Iran, with more than a century of experience in vaccine research and production and a longstanding partnership with the World Health Organization, was likewise among the targets. The importance of this scientific institution extends beyond Iran’s borders, contributing significantly to regional and global health security, particularly in the field of infectious disease research and control.

These attacks were directed not at military installations but at civilian life and, more specifically, at the “right to health” and the “right to life” of the most vulnerable groups in society: newborns dependent on infant formula for survival; cancer, multiple sclerosis, and hemophilia patients who face severe disability or death without uninterrupted access to essential medicines; and families already burdened by illness, conflict, and economic hardship who now confront critical shortages of medicines and medical supplies.

The scale of this humanitarian disaster becomes even clearer when considered alongside the extensive economic and medical sanctions imposed on Iran, as well as what Iranian authorities describe as an unlawful naval blockade by the United States. Under such circumstances, the destruction of pharmaceutical infrastructure cannot be viewed merely as an industrial loss; rather, it constitutes an action that renders the replenishment of medicines and the provision of health services to vulnerable populations practically impossible.

Under the rules of international humanitarian law, hospitals, pharmaceutical factories, medical warehouses, and humanitarian relief institutions constitute civilian objects entitled to special protection. Intentional attacks against such objects are strictly prohibited. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) emphasizes that attacks against objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population—including medicines and essential medical supplies—constitute serious violations of international humanitarian law. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has likewise affirmed that the principle of distinction between civilian and military objects is a fundamental and non-derogable rule of customary international law. From a criminal law perspective, intentional attacks against protected civilian medical infrastructure amount to war crimes, particularly when directed against the most vulnerable segments of the civilian population.

To date, no evidence, technical assessment, or credible documentation has been provided by the attacking States to demonstrate that these pharmaceutical facilities or health-related institutions possessed military or dual-use functions—evidence that might even nominally support any lawful justification for such strikes.

Condemnation, accountability, and international scrutiny of these attacks are not merely a national demand; they represent a global imperative to defend one of the most fundamental principles of humanity in times of armed conflict: that medicines, hospitals, and the health of civilian populations must never be transformed into military targets.