Terrorist crimes are considered among the most serious crimes against humanity, and a request for the reopening of such cases can be made at any time.
To begin with, it must be noted that analyzing a legal case requires access to its official documents, investigation results, and, in some instances, intelligence reports. However, unlike the Mykonos case, there is minimal access to the file of Dr. Abdulrahman Ghassemlou’s assassination. Therefore, this legal note is based on the existing narratives found in documents of the U.S. Department of State and archived reports from Austrian and French newspapers of that period.
In the initial stage, following the Vienna police’s notification of the murder of Dr. Ghassemlou and his companions, criminal investigations began with the arrest of Mansour Dargazi (a.k.a. Mansour Bozorgian Asl) and Jafari Sahraroudi, who was hospitalized at the time. Strangely, the Austrian criminal police abruptly closed the investigation and handed the suspects over to the Iranian embassy.
In response to a complaint filed by Dr. Ghassemlou’s wife, the court stated that the suspects were released due to insufficient evidence. Subsequently, in November 1992, the Austrian Supreme Court upheld the formal legality of the proceedings, but in a vague and controversial ruling, it claimed that necessary evidence and documentation were not submitted during the trial.
Can the case be reopened despite the passage of many years since the assassination?
Yes. Since terrorist acts are classified among the gravest crimes against humanity, they are not subject to statutory limitations. Therefore, the case can be reopened at any time with the presentation of new evidence.
In light of this, several key points must be highlighted:
- Jurisdiction:
As the crime occurred within the territory of Austria, Austrian courts have exclusive jurisdiction over the case. Despite repeated violations of international human rights standards—particularly regarding the right to a fair trial and access to justice—no international legal action is currently feasible in this matter. At the time, Austria had not yet criminalized international crimes beyond genocide in its domestic law. However, in 2008, Austria acceded to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and its domestic courts were granted jurisdiction over all crimes listed in the Rome Statute. Additionally, Austria now recognizes international law as an integral part of its legal system.
Of particular note is the clear violation of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, as the assassination team entered Austria on diplomatic passports as staff of the Iranian embassy in Vienna, using diplomatic pouches to smuggle in the weapons used. Both Austria and Iran are state parties to this convention.
- U.S.-Austria Counterterrorism Cooperation:
Austria has a counterterrorism cooperation agreement with the United States. The 2016 Austrian Anti-Terrorism Act introduced mechanisms for stronger responses to terrorism. Accordingly, the declassified documents from the U.S. State Department urging investigation into Dr. Ghassemlou’s assassination can and should be utilized. Given that the perpetrators are affiliated with the Quds Force, which has been designated as a terrorist organization under recent U.S. legislation, and considering that many Western countries comply with these sanctions, legal pursuit under U.S. legal frameworks could be possible. - European Court of Human Rights (ECHR):
The Austrian judiciary failed to ensure a fair trial and access to justice despite credible evidence linking the suspects to the assassination. Therefore, the case could be brought before the European Court of Human Rights on grounds of violation of fair trial guarantees and the right to an effective remedy, as per the European Convention on Human Rights. - Universal Jurisdiction in European Countries:
The principle of universal jurisdiction has been incorporated into the domestic laws of major European countries, particularly Germany and Sweden.
If any of the identified perpetrators are currently traveling under any aliases, the case may be submitted to specialized prosecutors in these countries. In such instances, the European Arrest Warrant mechanism can be invoked. If any of the suspects are located within the territory of the EU, the requesting country may seek extradition based on binding obligations among EU member states.
Hana Human Rights Organization
July 8, 2025