Ha! The irony here is the International Court of Justice is the principal judicial organ of the United Nation – funding largely by the U.S. Further, what law is “international law”? In the Muslim world, there is only sharia law. Wait, it gets better. The lawsuit was based on a treaty signed by Iran and the United States more than a half-century ago with the Shah, well before the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Iran Takes U.S. to Court Over Nuclear Deal and Reimposed Sanctions
Behrouz Kamalvandi, a spokesman for Iran’s nuclear agency, talked to reporters in Tehran on Tuesday about the country’s decision to sue the United States for reimposing sanctions after withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal.CreditAtta Kenare/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Iran has sued the United States at the International Court of Justice in a new, if dubious, strategy to nullify the nuclear sanctions reimposed by President Trump, which are starting to inflict pain on Iran’s already troubled economy.
Story continues below advertisement
The International Court of Justice, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, said in a statement on Tuesday that the lawsuit was based on a treaty signed by Iran and the United States more than a half-century ago — well before the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the American-backed shah and ushered in the prolonged estrangement in relations between the countries.
The United States vowed to fight what it called a “baseless” lawsuit.
Mr. Trump ordered the nuclear sanctions reimposed on May 8 as part of an announcement withdrawing his government from the 2015 nuclear agreement negotiated by Iran and major powers, including the United States, under the Obama administration.
Mr. Trump has assailed that agreement, which lifted the sanctions in return for Iran’s verifiable pledges to use nuclear power peacefully, as “the worst deal,” despite support for it by the other participants, including Britain, France and Germany, major American allies.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, the anti-proliferation monitor of the United Nations, has repeatedly said the nuclear agreement is working.
But the accord’s future is in grave doubt over the Trump administration’s decision to abandon it. Iranian officials have said they are preparing to renounce the accord if European participants cannot find a solution.
“We are, of course, continuing to carry out and implement our obligations,” a spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Behrouz Kamalvandi, told reporters in Tehran. “but at the same time, taking every scenario into consideration, we are preparing ourselves.”
The Iranian lawsuit was filed Monday and asked the International Court of Justice, which is based in The Hague, to order the United States to “terminate the 8 May sanctions without delay.”
The lawsuit also demanded that the United States compensate Iran for financial damage already done by the reimposed sanctions. An amount was not specified.
The State Department said in a statement that it was aware of Iran’s lawsuit. “Iran’s application is baseless, and we intend to vigorously defend the United States before the I.C.J.,” the department said.
It was not immediately clear why Iran chose to invoke the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States, signed in Tehran in 1955, as the basis for such a lawsuit. The Iranians did not cite that treaty in attempts to stop the nuclear sanctions when they were first imposed.
A date for a hearing on Iran’s complaint was not announced by the court. Although the court’s decisions are binding, it has no power to enforce them.
Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif of Iran, who was a principal negotiator of the nuclear agreement, said on his Twitter account that the lawsuit reflected Iran’s commitment to “the rule of law in the face of U.S. contempt for diplomacy & legal obligations.”
But experts who specialize in sanctions-related laws said the merits of the Iranian lawsuit might be weak, partly because of what they called Iran’s own transgressions of the 1955 treaty.
“The move appears largely symbolic and for largely domestic consumption,” said Farhad R. Alavi, managing partner of the Akrivis Law Group in Washington. “Even a ruling or declaration in favor of Iran, however unlikely, would have very limited impact on the realities on the ground.”
Advertisement
In reimposing the sanctions, the Trump administration has warned other countries that they risk American penalties if they continue to do business with Iran, including purchases of oil, Iran’s most important export.
The administration has rejected pleas for exceptions from the reimposed sanctions sought by major international companies. Multibillion-dollar deals envisioned with Western firms have been abandoned or delayed.
President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, whose support for the nuclear agreement was his signature campaign issue, said on Saturday that Mr. Trump’s decision to abandon the accord and reimpose sanctions had left the United States more isolated.
But fears of the economic impact already have done major damage in Iran. The value of Iran’s currency has plummeted over the past few months, and economic protests have increased, including by merchants in Tehran.
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you
and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently
banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds.
They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival.
Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
00votes
Article Rating
19 Comments
Oldest
NewestMost Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Suresh
5 years ago
Sure they are upset as all their well laid out bribes did not work . LOL !
They have no case. Their parliament never ratified it. And all the evidence collected after breaking through their security warehouse and getting all the evidence , they stand exposed as frauds.
But you never know if a pro-iranian judge decides to overlook it.
aemoreira1981
5 years ago
A lot of technicalities could come into play. Every detail will be parsed over.
Achmed Mohandjob
5 years ago
If the EU, the UK, China, etc., decide to do business with ireene .. that is their right. If the US decides to do NO business, with ANY nation that does business with ireene, that is its right.
It’s ridiculous and just silly posturing.
Israel has a MOUNTAIN Of EVIDENCE from IRAN showing how they VIOLATED the agreement. That is the reason why we withdrew. This stupid court can rule any way they want but it will have no effect since their rulings are not binding. Iran is desperate.
Based on the wording, I actually believe they may win on a technicality – failure to give 1 year’s notice of termination, which could have been done at any time after 1966.
Anna Konda
5 years ago
Let the evil Iranian phuks sue. The US will continue with sanctions and give the “world court” the middle finger! ????????????
The idea is that the sanctions would be declared illegal and the US enjoined from implementing punishment, for at least a year (the relevant treaty requires 1 year’s notice of intent to end; it was signed in 1955 and ratified by the US Senate during the Eisenhower era).
Poor donkey, but the other half is the true ASS (1981).
Patrick B. Ludwig
5 years ago
pacta sunt servanda . . a lesson the USA should slowly understand.
Tilt
5 years ago
Golden opportunity for the US to sever ALL ties with the UDN (United Despotic Nations)
If this lunacy gets the time of day in the UN, trump should stop funding the UN completely and remove any UN presence from the US and any major US ally (including all NATO capitals)
Trump should create a new “league of nations” that will accept only stable DEMOCRATIC nations
Would be dead on arrival in the Senate. Trump cannot unilaterally stop anything; only Congress can, and Democrats would shut down the Senate over this issue even if it means no budget gets passed. Doing so unilaterally would be grounds for impeachment (usurping Congressional powers).
As for the base issue, Trump knew or should have known about the treaty. Not knowing about it is a major fail on his end.
Amazing. Good points. I was thinking exactly the same thing. There is no reason to be part of some organization that never agrees with you.
darnash
5 years ago
Why are we even part or a party to an International Court. It is simply an anti American institution. We need to get out of it and the UN and tell them both to go packing with not one remnant of their existence in the geographic United States.
It is the conflict of our age, yet no one dares talk about it. The true story of the Islamic Supremacist war on free speech as told by those on the front lines fighting for our First Amendment rights,
.
Pamela Geller tells her own story of how she became one of the world's foremost activists for the freedom of speech,
individual rights, and equality of rights for all. "It's my story, it's what happens when someone fights for freedom in America today,"
Geller explained.
Today Islamic supremacists are demanding more accommodation of Islamic principles
and practices than ever, and daily growing more aggressive in eroding our freedoms – with politically
correct public officials only too happy..
Popular conservative blogger Pamela Geller and New York Times bestselling author
Robert Spencer sound a wake-up call for Americans to stop the Obama administration from limiting our
hard-won...
The Ground Zero Mosque: The Second Wave of the 9/11 Attacks is a groundbreaking documentary on the controversy
over the planned Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.
Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
