Iran institutes proceedings against the United States with regard to a dispute concerning alleged violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands
Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928
Website: www.icj-cij.org Twitter Account: @CIJ_ICJ

Press Release
Unofficial

No. 2016/19
15 June 2016

Iran institutes proceedings against the United States with regard to a dispute concerning
alleged violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity

THE HAGUE, 15 June 2016. The Islamic Republic of Iran (hereinafter “Iran”) instituted
proceedings yesterday against the United States of America (hereinafter “the United States”) before
the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, with
regard to a dispute concerning “violations by the Government of the United States of America of the
Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the United States of

America which was signed in Tehran on 15 August 1955 and entered into force on 16 June 1957”
(hereinafter “the 1955 Treaty”).

The Applicant explains that the United States, having for many years taken “the position that
Iran may be designated a State sponsoring terrorism (a designation which Iran strongly contests)”,
has adopted a number of legislative and executive acts that have the practical effect of subjecting
the assets and interests of Iran and Iranian entities, including those of the Central Bank of Iran (also

known as “Bank Markazi”), to enforcement proceedings in the United States, even where such
assets or interests “are found to be held by separate juridical entities . . . that are not party to the
judgment on liability in respect of which enforcement is sought” and/or “are held by Iran or Iranian
entities . . . and benefit from immunities from enforcement proceedings as a matter of international
law, and as required by the [1955] Treaty”.

Iran further argues that, as a consequence of these acts, “a wide series of claims have been
determined, or are underway, against Iran and Iranian entities” and that United States courts “have

repeatedly dismissed attempts by Bank Markazi to rely on the immunities to which such property is
entitled” under United States law and the 1955 Treaty. It further maintains that “the assets of
Iranian financial institutions and other Iranian companies have already been seized, or are in the
process of being seized and transferred, or at risk of being seized and transferred, in a number of
proceedings” and explains that, as of the date of its Application, United States courts “ha[ve]
awarded total damages of over US$ 56 billion . . . against Iran in respect of its alleged involvement
in various terrorist acts mainly outside the USA”.

The Applicant claims that the above-mentioned enactments and decisions “breach a number
of provisions of the [1955] Treaty”.

1
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, to Executive Order 13599—Blocking Property of the Government of Iran andthe
Iranian Financial Institutions, and to the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012. - 2 -

Iran thus “respectfully requests the Court to adjudge, order and declare as follows:

(a) That the Court has jurisdiction under the Treaty of Amity to entertain the dispute and to rule
upon the claims submitted by Iran;

(b) That by its acts, including the acts referred to above and in particular its (a) failure to recognise
the separate juridical status (including the separate legal personality) of all Iranian companies
including Bank Markazi, and (b) unfair and discriminatory treatment of such entities, and their
property, which impairs the legally acquired rights and interests of such entities including
enforcement of their contractual rights, and (c) failure to accord to such entities and their

property the most constant protection and security that is in no case less than that required by
international law, (d) expropriation of the property of such entities, and (e) failure to accord to
such entities freedom of access to the US courts, including the abrogation of the immunities to
which Iran and Iranian State-owned companies, including Bank Markazi, and their property,
are entitled under customary international law and as required by the Treaty of Amity, and
(f) failure to respect the right of such entities to acquire and dispose of property, and
(g) application of restrictions to such entities on the making of payments and other transfers of

funds to or from the USA, and (h) interference with the freedom of commerce, the USA has
breached its obligations to Iran, inter alia, under Articles III (1), III (2), IV (1), IV (2), V (1),
VII (1) and X (1) of the Treaty of Amity;

(c) That the USA shall ensure that no steps shall be taken based on the executive, legislative and
judicial acts (as referred to above) at issue in this case which are, to the extent determined by
the Court, inconsistent with the obligations of the USA to Iran under the Treaty of Amity;

(d) That Iran and Iranian State-owned companies are entitled to immunity from the jurisdiction of
the US courts and in respect of enforcement proceedings in the USA, and that such immunity
must be respected by the USA (including US courts), to the extent established as a matter of
customary international law and required by the Treaty of Amity;

(e) That the USA (including the US courts) is obliged to respect the juridical status (including the
separate legal personality), and to ensure freedom of access to the US courts, of all Iranian

companies, including State-owned companies such as Bank Markazi, and that no steps based
on the executive, legislative and judicial acts (as referred to above), which involve or imply the
recognition or enforcement of such acts shall be taken against the assets or interests of Iran or
any Iranian entity or national;

(f) That the USA is under an obligation to make full reparations to Iran for the violation of its
international legal obligations in an amount to be determined by the Court at a subsequent stage
of the proceedings. Iran reserves the right to introduce and present to the Court in due course a

precise evaluation of the reparations owed by the USA; and

(g) Any other remedy the Court may deem appropriate.”

*

As the basis for the jurisdiction of the Court, the Applicant invokes Article XXI,

paragraph 2, of the 1955 Treaty, to which both States are parties. This Article provides that: “Any
dispute between the High Contracting Parties as to the interpretation or application of the present
Treaty, not satisfactorily adjusted by diplomacy, shall be submitted to the International Court of
Justice, unless the High Contracting Parties agree to settlement by some other pacific means.”

___________ - 3 -

Note: The Court’s press releases are prepared by its Registry for information purposes only
and do not constitute official documents.

___________

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.
It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in

April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). Of the six
principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York. The Court has a
twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by
States (its judgments have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned); and,
second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United
Nations organs and agencies of the system. The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a
nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations.

Independent of the United Nations Secretariat, it is assisted by a Registry, its own international
secretariat, whose activities are both judicial and diplomatic, as well as administrative. The official
languages of the Court are French and English. Also known as the “World Court”, it is the only
court of a universal character with general jurisdiction.

The ICJ, a court open only to States for contentious proceedings, and to certain organs and
institutions of the United Nations system for advisory proceedings, should not be confused with the

other  mostly criminal  judicial institutions based in The Hague and adjacent areas, such as the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, an ad hoc court created by the
Security Council), the International Criminal Court (ICC, the first permanent international criminal
court, established by treaty, which does not belong to the United Nations system), the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon (STL, an international judicial body with an independent legal personality,
established by the United Nations Security Council upon the request of the Lebanese Government
and composed of Lebanese and international judges), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA,

an independent institution which assists in the establishment of arbitral tribunals and facilitates
their work, in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1899).

___________

Information Department:

Mr. Andrey Poskakukhin, First Secretary of the Court, Head of Department (+31 (0)70 302 2336)
Mr. Boris Heim, Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2337)
Ms Joanne Moore, Information Officer (+31 (0)70 302 2394)
Ms Genoveva Madurga, Administrative Assistant (+31 (0)70 302 2396)