Despite their apparent acceptance of international human rights covenants and claims of adherence to international human rights instruments, the United States and the Zionist regime have—in recent conflicts, including the war in Gaza and issues concerning Iran—severely violated the fundamental tenets of these very standards. Furthermore, institutions that purport to champion human rights have not only failed to condemn these atrocities but have effectively transformed human rights into a quasi-colonial instrument serving the interests of hegemonic powers. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach and utilizing document content analysis, this study examines the reasons behind the selective approach adopted by international institutions regarding human rights violations in Iran and Gaza, as well as their stance toward the policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The findings indicate that the application of double standards and the instrumentalization of human rights reveal the inherently political and colonial nature of these institutions. In this context, given that the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is rooted in supporting the oppressed—and in light of the inefficacy of existing mechanisms—the re-examination and formulation of an "Islamic Human Rights Document," grounded in Quranic teachings and constitutional principles, emerges as a strategic necessity. Although previous efforts in 1989 did not come to fruition due to the lethargy of Islamic nations, the current atrocities have rendered the revival of this initiative all the more urgent.