The final round of hearings for the legal representatives of Iran and the U.S. took place on Thursday, September 8, at the International Court of Justice, marking the end of a four-day process regarding Iran's complaint against the re-imposition of U.S. sanctions on Tehran. The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the U.S. action to restore sanctions as a "violation of the Treaty of Amity" signed between the two countries in 1955 and has lodged a complaint in The Hague. Over the past four days, the legal teams of both sides presented their arguments, with each team addressing the other's points over two days. The last session of this phase on Thursday morning focused on the arguments of the U.S. team, which deemed Iran's reliance on the Treaty of Amity as lacking "good faith." The U.S. team referenced statements made a day earlier by Abbas Araghchi, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister, who said that the complaint process in The Hague would only lead to "political and psychological pressure on the U.S." According to ISNA news agency, Araghchi stated on Wednesday that any decision made during the lengthy process of examining Iran's complaint at the International Court of Justice would not be binding under international law, but he believed the pressures resulting from this action would be "effective." The Iranian legal team argued on Monday and Wednesday that the U.S. violated the Treaty of Amity by re-imposing economic sanctions against Tehran, which they claimed aimed to cripple Iran's economy and create difficulties for its people. However, U.S. lawyers responded to Ayatollah Khamenei's remarks, which stated that economic problems stem from "mismanagement, not sanctions." Another argument presented by the U.S. legal team on Thursday morning was that the nuclear agreement known as the JCPOA has its own political mechanism for resolving disputes, and therefore, by bringing this matter to The Hague, Iran has "abused" the International Court of Justice. At the end of the fourth and final day of Iran's complaint against the U.S., the presiding judge announced that the court's ruling on this complaint would be announced soon, within a few weeks. If the International Court of Justice rules in favor of its jurisdiction to handle this case, the issuance of a judicial ruling on this complaint may take years. Following the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA on May 8, the first round of sanctions against Iran was implemented on July 13, and the next round is scheduled to begin on November 4. The International Court of Justice, based in The Hague, Netherlands, is considered the highest court of the United Nations. Although it issues binding rulings, it lacks enforcement power.
The Four-Day Process of Iran's Complaint Against the U.S. in The Hague Concludes
The International Court of Justice concluded hearings on Iran's complaint against the U.S. for reinstating sanctions, which Iran claims violates a 1955 treaty. The U.S. argues that Iran's actions lack good faith and that the nuclear deal has its own mechanisms for dispute resolution. The ruling is expected in the coming weeks, but if the court accepts jurisdiction, a final decision could take years.
👥 Key Players
⚡ Actions
📰 What Happened
Iran concluded hearings against the U.S. over sanctions at The Hague, claiming treaty violations.
- Iran complain United States
- Iran's legal team argue United States
- U.S. legal team respond Iran
💡 Why It Matters
📚 Background
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for Iran's economy and international relations.
📝 Key Evidence
🏷️ Entities Mentioned
Translated from the original and edited for English readers. View original source →
Translation confidence: 85%