US, EU3, Russia, China call for Iran to be reported to UNSC

[Sandman]

That basically died, didn't it? Although checking up, it seems that Khatami got 80% of the vote. One presumes that the reformists will bounce back at some point.

[Colon™]

"supressed" would be more accurate: reformist candidates being barred from standing in elections, editors being prosecuted and student being beaten the **** out of them.

[lord of the mark]

does anyone know if there has ever been an occasion when the UNSC made a decision, and a state went to the international court of justice, and got the ICJ to dismiss the UNSC resolution? An international law equivalent to Marbury v Madison, so to speak? ISTM that the notion of the UNSC being in violation of international law is by no means a simple one. Which is not to say they can do ANYTHING, but if its a question of interpretation, my impression is that the UNSC's interpretation recieves plenty of deference from the ICJ. LOA? Anyone?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Re: US, EU3, Russia, China call for Iran to be reported to UNSC

Originally posted by lord of the mark
US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, and China have agreed to call for the IAEA to report Iran to the UNSC in March.

Note they did not call for a referral, which would lead more directly to sanctions. However Iran has opposed even a report, and this makes the first time the issue will be presented to the Council.

Note they also did not want it done in Feb, when the IAEA report will not yet be available, but agreed to wait till March, when it will be. It promises to be very interesting, as IAEA has apparently found a document that Iran purchased on the black market that is a blueprint for turning enriched uranium into bombs.

Note that in September, Russia and China abstained on an IAEA resolution to declare Irans secret enrichment a violation. (India broke ranks with non-Western major powers and voted yes)

but I doubt that anything less than a bombing mission(s) will be able to stop them in their tracks

[Ecthy]

What the heck is Marbury v Madison?

[Ecthy]

Looked it up on wiki, glanced over it.

Precedent law is a bit and a bit . Can't really tell how I feel about it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ecthy
What the heck is Marbury v Madison?

the point of the case is that the US Supreme Court asserted its right to determine if laws passed by congress, and acts of the executive were constitutional. I was asking if its possible to have a UNSC resolution declared illegal by an international legal body, in the same way.

[Arrian]

What would serve in place of the Constitution? The UN charter?

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
What would serve in place of the Constitution? The UN charter?

-Arrian

I presume. Whatever international law is said to consist of. By those who claim "the UNSC would have no legal basis to deny Iran its rights under the NPT."

[Ecthy]

Nobody's denying Iran its NPT rights. They just have NPT duties too, such as opening their nuclear sites to international inspectors. What claim has been made that would violate their rights under the NPT?

[Colon™]

I think that conflict is largely semantical, since the only means the ICJ has to enforce its rulings is to request it to the SC.

[Ecthy]

In other words, Iran needs to be nuked. Right or not?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Colon™
I think that conflict is largely semantical, since the only means the ICJ has to enforce its rulings is to request it to the SC.

Which was a question in US constitutional Jurisprudence "John Marshall made his decision, let him enforce it" attributed to Pres Andrew Jackson after Weber v Georgia.

I suspect an ICJ ruling that the UNSC was out of order would be highly embarrasing for at least some P5 governments.

But Id still like to know if theres any precedent for ICJ standing in judgement on the UNSC.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap




Because of blogs???

Sandman provides evidence that Iranian public opinion is not as united on this matter as some have said.

[lord of the mark]

scanning the ICJ website, it seems states can only bring cases against other states before ICJ. UN agencies can request advisory opinions from the ICJ, but if i read it right there doesnt appear to be a right for a state to request an advisory judgement regarding a UN agency.

So,if the UNSC adopts some action WRT to Iran, that govt of Iran considers illegal, the govt of Irans only recourse, aside from its own material means to resist, would be to the court of international opinion.

Of which court Apolyton OT is a component, G-d save the mark.