This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/world/middleeast/us-iran-sanctions-international-court.html

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
International Court Orders U.S. to Ease Some Iran Sanctions International Court Orders U.S. to Ease Some Iran Sanctions
(about 1 hour later)
In a rebuke to the Trump administration, the International Court of Justice ordered the United States on Wednesday to ease some sanctions against Iran, including those related to the supply of humanitarian goods and the safety of civil aviation. PARIS — In a rebuke to the Trump administration, the International Court of Justice ordered the United States on Wednesday to ease some sanctions against Iran, including those related to the supply of humanitarian goods and the safety of civil aviation.
The interim ruling was made in response to a plea from Tehran after President Trump’s announcement in May that he would withdraw the United States from the 2015 international agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The United Nations’ highest court, known as the World Court, was responding to an urgent plea from Tehran after President Trump’s announcement in May that he would withdraw from the 2015 international accord limiting Iran’s nuclear ambitions. His decision was followed by a first round of sanctions in August and a second round is due in November.
There was no immediate formal response from Washington, but the United States is likely to challenge the ruling. The court in The Hague, sometimes called the World Court, is the United Nations’ highest judicial body. It has no formal power to enforce its decisions, and the United States has long ignored its rulings. The court order, unanimously handed down by its 15 judges, amounts to an injunction put in place while Iran’s lawsuit challenging the sanctions, filed in July, winds its way through the court — a process that could take years.
The decision on Wednesday was not the last word on Iran’s effort to overturn the sanctions since it was an interim injunction. A final ruling could take years. But Iran took the interim order as vindication. During hearings in August, Iran argued that the United States was strangling the country “through naked economic aggression” and was violating the Treaty of Amity signed by the two countries on economic relations and consular rights in 1955, long before Iran’s Islamic revolution turned the them into enemies.
In response to the court decision, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced in a news conference that the United States would cancel the treaty with Iran.
And Peter Hoekstra, the United States ambassador to the Netherlands, said on Twitter that the ruling was “a meritless case over which the court has no jurisdiction.”
“Even so, it is worth noting that the court declined today to grant the sweeping measures requested by Iran. Instead, the Court issued a narrow decision on a very limited range of sectors,” Mr. Hoekstra added.
Iran, however, took the outcome as vindication.
“The decision proved once again that the Islamic Republic is right and the U.S. sanctions against people and citizens of our country are illegal and cruel,” the Foreign Ministry in Tehran said, according to state media.“The decision proved once again that the Islamic Republic is right and the U.S. sanctions against people and citizens of our country are illegal and cruel,” the Foreign Ministry in Tehran said, according to state media.
Iran had sued the United States at the International Court in a dubious strategy to nullify the new round of sanctions, which have started inflicted pain on Iran’s troubled economy. Lawyers for the United States had argued that Iran was misusing the court because it had no jurisdiction in the case since the dispute involves American national security. Rulings by the court, which is based in The Hague and settles disputes between nations, are legally binding, though it has no way of enforcing them. In the past, both the United States and Iran have ignored its rulings.
Mr. Trump had long scorned the 2015 accord, saying in an address in the White House: “This was a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made. It didn’t bring calm, it didn’t bring peace, and it never will.” Wednesday’s decision is not expected to change Washington’s course. Mr. Trump had long scorned the 2015 accord, saying in an address in the White House: “This was a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made. It didn’t bring calm, it didn’t bring peace, and it never will.”
Mr. Trump’s decision met with the disapproval of the other signatories to the nuclear deal — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the European Union. The United States, however, offered assurances in August that sanctions would not affect Iran’s humanitarian needs.
Iran has argued that the re-imposition of sanctions by the United States contravenes a friendship treaty between Tehran and Washington dating from 1955, long before the 1979 revolution that led to a freeze in the countries’ relationship. But the court found that such promises were “not adequate to address fully the humanitarian and safety concerns” raised by Iran.
But the United States has argued that the international court had no jurisdiction in the affair. In fact, the United States ambassador to the Netherlands, Peter Hoekstra, echoed that theme on Wednesday, writing on Twitter after the decision, “This is a meritless case over which the court has no jurisdiction.” Washington’s plans to pull out of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and its announcement of new sanctions have drawn strong opposition from other countries who are party to the deal, including allies such as Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia and China.
The court said on Wednesday that Washington should ensure that its sanctions do not restrict Iran’s export of medicine and medical devices, food, and agricultural commodities, along with spare parts and equipment necessary to ensure the safety of civil aviation. They have openly said that they want to uphold the nuclear deal. But despite their opposition to the sanctions, which also hurt their business deals with Iran, some Europeans have already annulled trades with Iran as they fear a punitive response from Washington.
Judge Abdulqawi Yusuf, heading a 15-member panel, said the international court had decided that the United States must “remove by means of its choosing any impediment arising” from the sanctions imposed in May. Wednesday’s interim ruling was handed down because the judges said they recognized the urgency of Iran’s plea at this stage of the proceedings.
Reading the court’s judgment, the judge said Washington should not curb “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.” The summary said the sanctions must not affect exports to Iran of goods required for humanitarian needs such as medicines and medical devices, foodstuffs and agricultural commodities, as well as goods and services required for the safety of civil aviation.
In theory, the court ruled, American sanctions do not include food and medical supplies, but “it has become difficult if not impossible for Iran, Iranian nationals and companies to engage in international financial transactions” relating to such purchases.In theory, the court ruled, American sanctions do not include food and medical supplies, but “it has become difficult if not impossible for Iran, Iranian nationals and companies to engage in international financial transactions” relating to such purchases.
Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, praised Europe on Wednesday for taking a “big step” to maintain business despite the American withdrawal from the pact, which promised an easing of sanctions in return for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program. It also urged the two parties to take no further steps to exacerbate the conflict.
The Tasnim news agency quoted Mr. Rouhani as saying that Mr. Trump’s increasing pressures on Tehran were intended to secure “domestic political gains.” Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, praised Europe on Wednesday for taking a “big step” to maintain business ties despite the American withdrawal from the pact, which promised an easing of sanctions in return for curbs on Iran’s nuclear program.
The Tasnim news agency quoted Mr. Rouhani as saying that Mr. Trump’s increasing pressures on Tehran were intended to secure “domestic political gain.”
Tehran’s bid to get the sanctions suspended is only its latest case against the United States at the World Court. In 2016, Tehran brought a suit against the freezing of nearly $2 billion worth of Iranian assets abroad, which courts in the United States courts have said should go to American victims of terrorist attacks.
The hearings in that case are scheduled to begin next week.