Wed Oct 3rd, 2018 at 06:05:06 PM EST
After the threat to the ICC located in the city of The Hague by John Bolton recently, another top court has ruled against the United States of America. No "Invasion Act" yet conceived to kidnap the judges of the International Court of Justice located in the Peace Palace funded by Andrew Carnegie over 100 years ago.
UN court orders US to ditch Iran sanctions | DW |
The United Nations' top court ordered the United States to lift sanctions on humanitarian goods to Iran.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling is a blow to the Trump administration, which withdrew from the 2015 international nuclear accord in May and reimposed sanctions on Iran.
The ICJ unanimously ruled that Washington "shall remove by means of its choosing any impediments arising from the measures announced on May 8 to the free exportation to Iran of medicines and medical devices, food and agricultural commodities."
Continued below the fold ...
The Netherlands-based court said sanction on goods "required for humanitarian needs... may have a serious detrimental impact on the health and lives of individuals on the territory of Iran."
US sanctions on spare parts for aircrafts were also ordered to be lifted because of the "potential to endanger civil aviation safety in Iran and the lives of its users."
Decisions made by the ICJ are binding and cannot be appealed, but the court has no means of enforcing its rulings. The ruling is preliminary as hearing the full case is a process that could take years
Alleged violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America)
Thus, on 6 August 2018, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 13846 "Reimposing Certain Sanctions" on Iran and Iranian nationals. In particular, Section 1 concerns "Blocking Sanctions Relating to Support for the Government of Iran's Purchase or Acquisition of U.S. Bank Notes or Precious Metals; Certain Iranian Persons; and Iran's Energy, Shipping, and Shipbuilding Sectors and Port Operators". Section 2 concerns "Correspondent and Payable -Through Account Sanctions Relating to Iran's Automotive Sector; Certain Iranian Persons; and Trade in Iranian Petroleum, Petroleum Products; and Petrochemical Products". Sections 3, 4 and 5 provide for the modalities of "`Menu-based' Sanctions Relating to Iran's Automotive Sector and Trade in Iranian Petroleum, Petroleum Products, and Petrochemical Products". Section 6 concerns "Sanctions Relating to the Iranian Rial". Section 7 relates to "Sanctions with Respect to the Diversion of Goods Intended for the People of Iran, the Transfer of Goods or Technologies to Iran that are Likely to be Used to Commit Human Rights Abuses, and Censorship". Section 8 relates to "Entities Owned or Controlled by a United States Person and Established or Maintained Outside the United States". Earlie Executive Orders implementing United States commitments under the JCPOA are revoked in Section 9. Section 2 (e) of Executive Order13846 provides that certain subsections of Section 3 shall not apply with respect to any person for conducting or facilitating a transaction for the provision (including any sale) of agricultural commodities, food, medicine or medical devices to Iran.
2. The issue of satisfactory adjustment by diplomacy under Article XXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity (paras. 45-51)
The Court recalls that, under the terms of Article XXI, paragraph 2, of the 1955 Treaty, the dispute submitted to it must not have been "satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy". The Court concludes from the wording of this provision that there is no need for it to examine whether formal negotiations have been engaged in or whether the lack of diplomatic adjustment is due to the conduct of one party or the other. It is sufficient for the Court to satisfy itself that the dispute was not satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy before being submitted to it.
In the present case, the communications sent by the Government of Iran to the Embassy of Switzerland (Foreign Interests Section) in Tehran on 11 and 19 June 2018 did not prompt any response from the United States, and there is no evidence in the case file of any direct exchange on this matter between the Parties. As a consequence, the Court notes that the dispute had not been satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy, within the meaning of Article XXI, paragraph
2, of the 1955 Treaty, prior to the filing of the Application on 16 July 2018.
VI. OPERATIVE CLAUSE (PARA. 102)
Indicates the following provisional measures:
The United States of America, in accordance with its obligations under the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, shall remove, by means of its choosing, any impediments arising from the measures announced on 8 May 2018 to the free exportation to the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran of
(i) medicines and medical devices;
(ii) foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and
(iii) spare parts, equipment and associated services (including warranty, maintenance, repair
services and inspections) necessary for the safety of civil aviation;
The United States of America shall ensure that licences and necessary authorizations are granted and that payments and other transfers of funds are not subject to any restriction in so far as they relate to the goods and services referred to in point (1);
○ Press Release International Court Of Justice in The Hague - Oct. 3, 2018
○ US Risks War Crimes Accusation for Saudi Support
○ Barack Obama and an Act of War
○ New American Century - A Balance of ME Failure