TEHRAN – Iran has sharply rebuked Canada for presenting itself as a global defender of human rights, arguing that the country should instead face scrutiny for its own record of systemic racism and abuses against Indigenous peoples.

In a statement on Thursday, Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations criticized Ottawa after Canada welcomed the passage of an anti-Iran human rights resolution it had drafted for the UN General Assembly’s Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural Issues).

“Spare us Canada’s self-righteous rhetoric,” the mission said. “This is a country with a well-documented history of thousands of Indigenous children buried in unmarked graves, still grappling with deeply rooted structural racism—yet it now postures as a global human rights advocate when it comes to Iran.”

The mission added that if human rights were not routinely exploited for political leverage, Canada would be the one facing international accountability.

“If ‘human rights’ had not been weaponized by the usual suspects, Canada would be the one on trial—sitting in the dock under resolutions, not strutting on the world stage.”

On Wednesday, the UN’s Third Committee adopted the draft resolution titled “Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran,” with 79 votes in favor, 28 against, and 63 abstentions.

The text—reflecting a politically motivated and selective assessment—“condemns what it describes as an alarming rise and continued use of the death penalty” in Iran, language that Tehran rejects as inaccurate and biased.

Before the vote, Iran’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Gholamhossein Darzi, rejected the resolution as “politically driven, selective, and entirely counterproductive.”

He said the accusations against Iran relied on “unverified claims and selectively interpreted information.”

Darzi stressed that the resolution ignores Iran’s progress on human rights, as well as its efforts to promote socio-economic development and strengthen legal protections in line with constitutional and international commitments.

He also faulted the text for failing to condemn the blatant violations of international law carried out by the Israeli regime and the United States during their 12-day military attacks on Iran in June.

According to Darzi, the drafters deliberately omitted any mention of the harmful effects of unilateral coercive measures on the human rights and well-being of the Iranian people.

“We firmly believe that if human rights were not being misused as a political tool by certain countries, the main sponsor of this draft—Canada—would itself be the target of resolutions in this body: for the atrocities against its Indigenous communities; for neglecting the living and economic conditions of its own population; and for providing military support to the Israeli regime as it commits genocide and war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories,” he said.

He concluded that resolutions of this kind, detached from realities on the ground, “are designed not to advance human rights, but to apply political pressure.”

Despite frequent human rights advocacy by Western governments, observers and several UN member states have noted instances of inconsistent approaches, particularly regarding developments in Palestine and Lebanon. While Western countries regularly issue resolutions and statements criticizing the human rights record of states they oppose, they have been less vocal about Israeli military actions that have resulted in significant civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon. Analysts also point to continued Western arms exports to Israel, the use of vetoes at the UN Security Council on resolutions calling for investigations, and limited responses to strikes on civilian infrastructure. These trends illustrate ongoing concerns about selective application of human rights standards in international forums.