The EU Council has made up its mind a few months ago to keep MEK –pivotal opposition force against Tehran- in the terrorist list again. It seems that the Council is bargaining once again with fundamental principles of International conventions, and defying the verdict of EU Court of Justice issued on December 12th which ruled in favor of Mojahedin. (The Council did not even appeal this verdict.) A letter written by Tony Blair to a member of British Parliament, March 2007 reveals that the decision had already been made, regardless of the protocol required by law, which had given the movement time till the 30th February to give its reasons: “EU has reviewed the listing…. and on 30 January reaffirmed its decision to include the MEK (PMOI) on its list of terror organizations.”Source remains anonymous
In February 2007, the Council reached an agreement that the reasons for the inclusion of Mojahedin in the list still apply. What are those reasons? No one knows. Documents and research only point to vague reference to the Mojahedin back ground with the “Iraqi regime” but has confused dates and figures, which under weighs the referred documents. It also refers to the MEK attacks into Iran, which is rejected by the movement saying that they have been restricted in Ashraf camp since the war, supervised by coalition forces according to the Fourth Geneva Conventions.
The whole case therefore seems to be legally void of any solid facts or reasons.
The argumentsAccording to legal terms, the Council is violating the principle of the presumption of innocence and is mocking the legal procedures of a fair hearing , already declared by the EU high court.In simple words, the EU Ministers are openly mocking International Opinion including yours and mine. By doing so, of course they are emboldening a religious fascist regime which has an unprecedented record of violating human rights and is conducting terrorist activities across the region.
The Question how ever is, why so much fuss, over a movement that the Iranian regime has already declared to be wiped out and despised in Iran? The answer is engraved in the Question.The PMOI was blacklisted as part of the policy of appeasing the mullahs' regime. The Council defiance of the Court is continuation of the same failed policy. The policy of appeasement was aimed to promote moderation in Iran. But it was counter-productive. The outcome of that policy was the rise to power of Ahmadinejad. Finally, it was the mullahs who extended their standards to Europe.
Shedding light on the backgroundI have included a modest chronology in brief that would give an insight to the value this political exchange has in any future geopolitical change in the Middle East region.
IRNA, October 3, 2001: “In a meeting with Jorgen Krobog, deputy Foreign Minister of Germany, Ali Ahani, deputy Foreign Minister, demanded ban on the activities of Mojahedin Organization in Europe.”
AFP – 21 October 2004: According to the preparatory text for European proposals on Iranian nuclear program, the EU 3 that if Iran complies the "We would cooperate in the prevention and suppression of terrorist acts in accordance with respective legislation and regulations. We would continue to regard the MEK (Iranian resistance group) as a terrorist organization."
Entekhab (a stat-run daily) 28 October 2002: The Spanish ambassador said in an interview with the Iranian daily "There were three issues that Iran wanted to address with EU. When Spain was the President, the two sides were able to resolve these differences. On of the major issues was including the People's Mojahedin Organization to the list of terrorist groups by EU."
27 December, 2001: In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and based on UN Security Council Resolution 1373, the EU decided to compile its own list of individuals and organizations linked to terror. The PMOI was not on the initial list.
Early 2002: The Tehran regime pressed the EU to include the PMOI in the list, at a time when the EU was seeking to boost trade relations with Iran.
29 March, 2001: The UK proscribed the PMOI on its national list of terrorist organizations under the UK Anti-Terrorism Act.
2 May, 2002: At the UK’s behest and under Spanish presidency, the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council included the PMOI in the EU list of terrorist organizations. The decision must be reviewed every six months by all EU member states. The PMOI’s assets were frozen in the EU, making fund-raising impossible.
26 July, 2002: The PMOI filed a petition before the EU Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, attacking the decision of the Council on the grounds of infringement of the following: The right to a fair hearing, essential procedural requirements, the right to effective judicial protection, the presumption of innocence, a manifest error of assessment, the right to revolt against tyranny and oppression.
12 February 2003: The UK joined the case as a third party in support of the Council decision, but was the only EU member state to do so.
7 Feb., 2006: At the oral court hearing the UK refused to substantiate its claim that other EU “competent authorities” besides the UK Home Secretary had also decided to list the PMOI as a terrorist organization.
1 | 2