{"id":1071,"date":"2007-02-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-02-08T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/2007\/02\/08\/a-just-decision-to-keep-terrorists-on-the-list\/"},"modified":"2021-01-21T18:50:17","modified_gmt":"2021-01-21T15:20:17","slug":"a-just-decision-to-keep-terrorists-on-the-list","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/posts\/1071","title":{"rendered":"A Just Decision to Keep Terrorists on the List"},"content":{"rendered":"

The European Council announced on 31st January following the 2778th Council meeting of Economic and Financial Affairs that it has "decided to provide the PMOI with a statement of reasons for keeping it on the EU’s ‘asset freeze list’ of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts, and to give the PMOI one month to present its views, together with any supporting documentation". <\/p>\n

Nothing is violated and the council has decided to comply with the judgment of the Court of First Instance. That is exactly what MKO had claimed to have been deprived of, yet the group is frustrated over the council’s decision because the outcome contradicts what they expected. <\/p>\n

As a reaction, reported by Iran Focus, a number of European parliamentarian advocates of MKO including Alejo Vidal Quadras, Luisa Morgantini), Manuel Dos Santos, and Edward McMillan-Scott accused the European Union of breaching a ruling by Europe’s Court of First Instance saying that the decision is “violating the rule of law and placing the Council’s opinion above that of the highest EU courts’<\/span>\u009d and called it “both scanda<\/span>lous and shameful”<\/span>\u009d.<\/span><\/p>\n

How a legal decision adopted by a body those parliamentarians are its members turns to be “scandalous and shameful”<\/span>\u009d, terms commonly found in MKO’s literature, is a paradox that has to be explained by them. What do they have to s<\/span>ay about other decisions taken by the council?<\/p>\n

The decision, above all, has acted as a crushing blow over the body of the cult especially at a time when the insiders were being convinced to have achieved a big success. For sure, none of its European advocates can possibly influence the council’s decision since the council is wise enough not to unleash a dangerous terrorist cult and it is well aware that in no way can the cult exculpate itself of the provided reasons keeping it on the EU’s list. <\/p>\n

Here is the council’s decision: <\/p>\n

Terrorist list – Follow-up to court ruling in OMPI case<\/p>\n

The Council, following the judgment by the Court of First Instance on 12 December 2006 in the OMPI case (Organisation des Modjahedines du Peuple de l’Iran), decided to provide OMPI with a statement of reasons for keeping it on the EU’s asset freeze list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts, and to give OMPI one month to present its views, together with any supporting documentation.<\/p>\n

The Council will consider any reaction by OMPI within this period of time, before taking a final decision. <\/p>\n

It is recalled that on 12 December 2006, the Court of First Instance, in case T-228\/02-, OMPI, v. Council, annulled Council Decision 2005\/930\/EC insofar as it had imposed an asset freeze on OMPI following its inclusion on the terrorist EU list. The Court found i.a. that the decision ordering the freezing of OMPI’s funds had not contained a sufficient statement of reasons and that the right to a fair hearing had not been respected.<\/p>\n

The Council therefore decided to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment.<\/p>\n

 <\/o_p><\/p>\n

mojahedin.ws  <\/span>– 05\/02\/2007<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

it has”decided to provide the PMOI with a statement of reasons for keeping it on the EU’s ‘asset freeze list’ of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts, and to give the PMOI one month to present its views, together with any supporting documentation”. Nothing is violated and the council has decided to comply with the judgment of the Court of First Instance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":-1,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2],"module":[128],"ctype":[17],"blog":[225],"class_list":["post-1071","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-nejat-missions","tag-mujahedin-khalq-list-fto","module-dialogue","ctype-story","blog-mojahedin-ws"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1071","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1071"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1071\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1071"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1071"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1071"},{"taxonomy":"module","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/module?post=1071"},{"taxonomy":"ctype","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ctype?post=1071"},{"taxonomy":"blog","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nejatngo.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/blog?post=1071"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}