The trigger mechanism and the impact of the reimposition of UN Security Council sanctions on Iran's economy and human rights have become a major concern for economic and legal actors as well as the general public in Iran. Regardless of the legal invalidity of the use of the snapback mechanism by the three European countries, the main question of this study is: What are the human rights implications of activating the snapback mechanism and reinstating UN sanctions?
This research, using a descriptive-analytical method and based on library sources and documented UN reports, compares the negative effects of unilateral U.S. sanctions on Iran—such as violations of the right to health, the right to development, the right to education, humanitarian law, and the psychological impacts—with those resulting from the reactivation of UN sanctions after the snapback mechanism.
The study concludes that although the reimposition of UN sanctions against Iran may be legally justified under Resolution 2231, their impact on human rights cannot be ignored. Sanctions that disrupt access to medicine, healthcare services, education, and humanitarian aid conflict with the fundamental principles of international law. Therefore, international sanctions, especially when imposed through mechanisms such as the trigger mechanism, must be carefully evaluated from a legal and humanitarian perspective.