Iran files complaint against Grossi to Security Council

The letter from “Amir Saeed Iravani”, Ambassador and Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Security Council, complaining about the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is as follows:

Following the instructions of my government, I would like to convey to Your Excellency the deep concern of the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the serious negligence and failure to act by the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mr. Rafael Grossi, in carrying out his duties and responsibilities under the Agency’s Statute. In this regard, I would like to draw your attention and the attention of the esteemed members of the Security Council to the following points:

1.The public statements made by the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Mariano Grossi, on the eve of the recent act of aggression by the Israeli regime against the Islamic Republic of Iran, constitute a clear and serious breach of the principle of impartiality inherent in the responsibilities of his position. Such statements are completely inconsistent and contrary to the duties and legal obligations set forth in the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

2. In view of the repeated, documented and explicit warnings by the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the apparent threats by the Israeli regime against Iranian nuclear facilities and sites, sites that are fully under the comprehensive safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency and are exclusively dedicated to peaceful purposes, the Director General of the Agency was committed and obliged to take appropriate preventive and deterrent measures in line with the Agency’s mandate and objectives.However, neither the Director General nor the Agency has fulfilled this obligation. The failure to take any effective or deterrent action in response to these threats is a clear example of dereliction of duty under the provisions of the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the established norms of international law.

3. Of particular legal importance is the reaction of the Director General of the Agency at the press conference following the opening of the Board of Governors on 9 June 2025.When confronted with explicit threats by the Israeli regime against Iran’s safeguards-protected nuclear facilities, he merely referred to alleged Israeli “concerns” that should be addressed, while deliberately avoiding any reference to the binding prohibitions enshrined in international law and enshrined in IAEA General Conference resolutions GC(34)/RES/533 and GC(44)/RES/444, which expressly prohibit any threat or use of force against nuclear facilities intended for peaceful purposes. This deliberate omission is a clear example of the Director General’s failure to implement binding legal principles within his jurisdiction.

4. The Director General’s conduct in the wake of the Israeli aggression has clearly and consistently demonstrated an inability to meet the requirements of impartiality, objectivity and professionalism that his responsibilities require.In the statement made by the Director General to the Board of Governors on 16 June 2025, not only was the Israeli regime not named as the party responsible for this aggression, but no condemnation was expressed for the illegal targeting of nuclear facilities under safeguards, despite Israel’s own public and frank statements that these actions would continue “for as many days as necessary”. Such a failure to attribute responsibility and refrain from issuing condemnation constitutes a breach of the Agency’s obligation to uphold the integrity of its safeguards system and undermines the fundamental principles of the global non-proliferation regime.

5.The Director General’s continued silence and inaction regarding these violations, which is contrary to the IAEA’s legal responsibilities and obligations arising from relevant UN Security Council resolutions, effectively amounts to complicity through omission in acts of aggression that are unprecedented in the Agency’s history.

6. Such an event is unprecedented. The Director General has not previously responded to the Israeli regime’s illegal and provocative actions. Following the regime’s unprecedented threat to use nuclear weapons against the civilian population in Palestine and Gaza, the ambassadors of the OIC member states in Vienna, in a joint letter dated 15 December 2023 (INFCIRC/1165), addressed to the Director General, called on him to adopt a clear, principled and public position within the framework of the Agency’s mandate.Despite the clarity and collective nature of this request, the Director General has neither issued a public statement nor taken any formal action to recognize or condemn this grave threat, thus failing to fulfill his responsibilities under the Agency’s Statute.

7. Quite the contrary, the Director General has consistently adopted a politicized, selective and discriminatory approach towards the Islamic Republic of Iran. When Iran, within the framework of its sovereign rights and in accordance with Article 9 of the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, legally revoked the appointment of some inspectors, the Director General immediately responded with a public and condemnatory statement.In his report to the Board of Governors dated November 2023 (GOV/2023/58), he used extremely harsh and accusatory language and specifically targeted the Islamic Republic of Iran, in a manner inconsistent with the principles of impartiality, restraint and objectivity expected of his position and as set out in the Agency’s Statute.

8. The Director General’s conduct constitutes a clear and persistent breach of his legal obligations in the field of impartiality, professionalism and objectivity, as set out in the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency. This conduct has materially undermined the Agency’s credibility, objectivity and institutional legitimacy. The Islamic Republic of Iran declares that these actions are in no way compatible with the Director General’s binding obligations under Article 3 of the Agency’s Statute and constitute a failure to perform the duties assigned to him, contrary to the requirements of independence, integrity and impartiality required for holding this position.

It would be appreciated if the present correspondence could be circulated as a document of the Security Council.