The Council’s delay in applying the CFI ruling, which has long annulled the terror tag off the PMOI – the viable opposition to Tehran’s religious regime, has been “Adding insult to injury” for the oppressed Iranian people and their just resistance and “Adding fuel to fire” for the people in the Middle East.
On both aspects, crisis and mayhem awaits all those concerned. It is tragic how “bowing” to Tehran’s unremitting demands, has been termed politically as “appeasement” or ” concession” sometimes accompanied with incentive packages”
This is extremely well phrased by a friend in his article on recent events in Gaza:
*The loss of innocent lives in Gaza is deplorable. Behind the horrific scenes, a culprit of the current crisis crouches unscathed – the ruling regime in Iran. This beast, which seeks to establish an “Islamic” empire by exporting its brand of Islamic fundamentalism throughout the region, has in many ways been nurtured and emboldened by the appeasement policies of the past three decades. And for those wrong-headed policies toward the ayatollahs’ regime, the West shares in the responsibility for the bloodshed and carnage inflicted on the Middle East
The mullahs in Iran are masters of deception and fishing out of muddy waters.
This of course does not white-wash alarming facts on Human Right violations in that country:
120 000 political prisoners – affiliated with the PMOI, have been executed by this regime in only a couple of years (30 000 of them being massacred in a couple of months) There are numerous mass graves, already confirmed by UN special reporter on Iran in his earliest reports At least 9 minors have been hanged in the first 6 months of last year, which is unprecedented in any country’s history which is a new aspect of “constitutionalized crime” Mediaeval punitive measures are legalized under the name of religion only to preserve power for the mullahs: Stoning two people in a week Punishing activists related to the PMOI by throwing them off a cliff or crumbling a wall on them Cutting off limbs and a hands of thieves Bashing to death student activists or political dissidents under the pretext of fighting drugs. Hanging 20 prisoners who have had various charges in only one day Initiating threats to Embassies and political emissaries for political blackmailing (IRNA news agency: 8 January reporting 70 000 extremist students have enrolled for suicide bombing) Establishing entities to export terrorism through out the region, from the Horn of Africa to East Europe and even European countries Openly defying International warnings on attaining nuclear Arsenal.
Is there a stop to all this?
As far as the Iranian people and their resistance is concerned, they have repeatedly answered this through protestations and strikes in Iran and outside.
There is a need for a “Change”
One and only one alternative is available to rid us of all this misery:
Stop obstructing and hindering democratic change in Iran.
This of course has been explicitly and vividly outspoken by the Court of First Instance of Luxembourg, which ruled out French EU Presidency’s attempts to put the movement into the black list, emphasizing that this movement is a resistance movement which has been struggling to establish democracy:
Judgment of the Court of First Instance in Case T-228/02
The Organisation des Modjahedines du peuple d’Iran (OMPI, People’s Mujahidin of Iran), was founded in 1965 and set itself the objective of replacing the regime of the Shah of Iran, then the mullahs’ regime, by a democracy. In the past, it has had an armed branch operating inside Iran. It has stated, however, that it has expressly renounced all military activity since June 2001.
2 December 2006
Who are the PMOI
Before this the POAC – PROSCRIBED ORGANISATIONS APPEAL COMMISSION in the UK, which is the highest governmental institution to judge on proscribing terrorist groups into the black list, in its release dating 30 November 2007 wrote:
The PMOI is an Iranian political organisation and a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) (which is not proscribed in the UK). It was founded in 1965. The purpose was initially to oppose the regime of the Shah. Its present stated purpose is, and has been for some years, the replacement of the existing theocracy with a democratically elected, secular government in Iran. It took an active part in the protest within Iran that ultimately led to the downfall of the Shah in 1979. Thereafter, it speedily came into conflict with the succeeding fundamentalist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini. The PMOI contend that there followed for several years within Iran a sustained regime of oppression, violence and killings orchestrated by the clerical rulers of the country. This campaign within Iran was contemporaneous with the war between that country and Iraq during the years 1980 to 1988. Towards the end of 1981, many of the members of the PMOI and supporters went into exile. Their principal refuge was in France. But in 1986, after negotiations between the French and the Iranian authorities, the French government effectively treated them as undesirable aliens, and the leadership of the PMOI with several thousand followers relocated to Iraq.
Considering the nature of the religious dictatorship in Iran, this movement has lead a widespread campaign under various tactics to paralyze the regime and win freedom to liberate all those who wish to act for change.
In the process of their exile the movement has been gaining considerable support within International Political spectrum:
“Since the proscription in 2001 and the occupation of Iraq in 2003 the PMOI have continually pursued a campaign to legitimise their status as a secular, democratic movement intent upon the peaceful overthrow of the present undemocratic regime in Iran, to which end they seek to enlist support at the highest level in the United Kingdom (and elsewhere) for the promotion of that object. The organisation has engaged the sympathy of a number of members of both Houses of Parliament. The present Appellants are thirty five in number (one since deceased), being sixteen members of the House of Commons and nineteen members of the Upper House. Included in the latter group are one former Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and five QCs.
These Parliamentarians maintain that the continued proscription of the PMOI invokes the constraints imposed by virtue of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 from their otherwise right to support the PMOI by all available democratic and lawful means. Accordingly, their status to apply and appeal in this case is afforded to them by section 4(2) of the 2000 Act. They say that they wish to, and consider that they are entitled to, invite support for the PMOI, arrange meetings to further the political activities of the PMOI, address meetings to encourage support for the PMOI and invite others to provide money and property to further the political activities of the PMOI. They say that that have been prevented from being in contact with the PMOI, and carrying out these activities in support of the PMOI.
The reaction of the EU Council to all four Court verdicts has been to prologue the implementation of the Council in order to find a way to compromise the Iranian people and their resistance once again for extremely unstable interests.
Why the EU Council must apply the law
The Court of First Instance of the Communities in its judgment of 4thDecember 2008 annulled Council Decision of 15 July 2008 in so far as it concerned the inclusion of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) in the EU terror list. The judgment was based on both procedural grounds and the Council’s failure to substantiate the allegation of terrorism against the PMOI. Accordingly, the Court ordered the Council to pay the PMOI full legal cost. Therefore, following the CFI judgment, the PMOI is no longer in the terror list and the Council is obliged to give immediate effect to the judgment.
The EU Council played its cards on procedural layers by filing an application for interpretation, as to buy time. The court rejected this as ‘ manifestly inadmissible’ in its 4th December 2008 verdict.
A legal opinion written by Professor David, head of International Law in ULB at Brussels reads:
As a matter of principle, all judgments by the Court of First Instance are considered definitive and should be immediately implemented, even if there is an appeal against the judgment. According to Article 242 of the European Community Treaty “actions brought before the Court of Justice shall not have suspensory effect.” Therefore, in the present case, even if the Council appeals against the annulment of the decision to include the PMOI on the list, the CFI judgment must be implemented and the appeal should not have any suspensory effects
The Council how ever played tricks by claiming that the *”decision” as a “regulation” using the following excuse:
The only exception according to Article 60 of the Status of the Court of Justice is when a “regulation” is annulled by the CFI, an appeal against the judgment before the ECJ shall have suspensory effect. In this case there is absolutely no doubt that the Court has annulled Council Decision 2008/583 of 15 July 2008 and not any regulation.
To come directly to the point:
The Council tried embarrassingly to dodge consistent and repeated rulings of the EU Court for annulling the terror tag on the Iranian opposition by cunning ways only to fall flat on its own face:
Facing a “checkmate,” they are now in session.
This time, there is no room for errors. There is a one time decision making which makes a lifetime error or progress, the choice for the Iranian people is clear: they want democratic change through their resistance movement.
The KEY to the Iranian crisis in the region is helping the PMOI in it’s strive for establishing democracy in Iran.
The question is “Does the EU Council acknowledge that it has an Ace up its sleeve?
