The Hague, October 3
The World Court ordered the United States on Wednesday to ensure that sanctions against Iran, due to be tightened next month, do not affect humanitarian aid or civil aviation safety.
Judges at the International Court of Justice handed a victory to Tehran, which had argued that sanctions imposed since May by the administration of US President Donald Trump violate the terms of a 1955 Treaty of Amity between the two countries.
The ruling is likely to have at most limited practical impact on the implementation of sanctions, which Washington is reimposing and tightening after pulling out of the 2015 nuclear deal that Iran signed with world powers.
The court order issued on Wednesday is temporary pending a resolution of Iran’s full lawsuit against Washington by the ICJ, something that could take years.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement “the decision proved once again that the Islamic Republic is right and the US sanctions against people and citizens of our country are illegal and cruel. “The United States must comply with its international commitments and lift obstacles to Iranian trade,” it added.
The ICJ is the United Nations’ highest court for resolving disputes between nations. Its rulings are binding, but it has no power to enforce them, and both the United States and Iran have ignored them in the past.
The court said assurances offered by Washington to ensure sanctions do not affect humanitarian conditions were “not adequate”.
“The court considers that the US must...remove by means of its choosing any impediment arising from the measures announced on 8 May 2018,” said Presiding Judge Abdulqawi Yusuf, reading a summary of a ruling by the 15-member panel of justices.
The sanctions may not hurt “exportation to the territory of Iran of goods required for humanitarian needs such as medicines, medical devices and foodstuffs and agricultural commodities as well as goods and services required for the safety of civil aviation,” he said.
While US sanctions “in principle” exempt food and medical supplies, the court said “it has become difficult if not impossible for Iran, Iranian nationals and companies to engage in international financial transactions” to purchase such goods.
The Trump administration argued last month that Iran’s request was an attempt to misuse the court and that the 1955 treaty specifically ruled out using courts to resolve disputes.
US State Department Legal Adviser Jennifer Newstead had said Iran’s real quarrel was its frustration over the US pullout from the nuclear pact, under which Tehran restricted its disputed uranium enrichment programme under UN monitoring in exchange for a lifting of most international sanctions.— Reuters
US ends ‘Treaty of Amity’ after ICJ ruling
The US said on Wednesday it was terminating a 1955 treaty reached with then ally Iran after Tehran cited it in an international court ruling against Washington’s sanctions policy
“I’m announcing that the US is terminating the 1955 Treaty of Amity with Iran. This is a decision, frankly, that is 39 years overdue,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said
The UN’s top court ordered the US to lift sanctions on humanitarian goods for Iran in a ruling widely seen as a rebuke to Trump -- but which Pompeo described as a “defeat for Iran”
Symbolic judgment?
Rulings by the Hague-based ICJ, which rules on disputes between United Nations members are binding, but it has no mechanism through which it can enforce its decisions
In 1986 Washington disregarded the court’s finding that it had violated international law by supporting the pro-US Contra rebels in Nicaragua. Iran in turn ignored the ICJ’s ruling in 1980 to release hostages taken during the Iran hostage crisis
There was no immediate reaction from the United States, but Trump has previously shown his disdain for overarching international organisations that limit US sovereignty, including the United Nations
He recently heavily criticised the separate International Criminal Court in The Hague over a probe into alleged US abuses in Afghanistan
from The Tribune https://ift.tt/2NlLSxV
via IFTTT https://ift.tt/eA8V8J
No comments: