Posts Tagged ‘International Court of Justice’

US in new global court showdown with Iran

October 8, 2018

The United States will confront Tehran at the UN’s top court on Monday over billions in frozen assets, in a case that could deepen the Trump administration’s rift with international justice.

Iran had dragged Washington before the International Court of Justice in June 2016 to oppose a US Supreme Court ruling that the $2 billion should go to victims of terror attacks blamed on the Islamic republic.

Monday’s hearing of US objections against Iran’s appeal comes a week after the ICJ in a separate case ordered the United States to ease sanctions reimposed after President Donald Trump pulled out of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.

Both the assets and the sanctions cases are based on a 1955 “Treaty of Amity” between Washington and Tehran that predates Iran’s Islamic revolution.

© ANP/AFP/File | The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague was set up after World War II to rule on disputes between United Nations member states. Its rulings are binding but it has no power to enforce them.

Last Wednesday the Trump administration announced it was not only tearing up the 1955 treaty but also that it was quitting the international accord relating to the UN top court’s jurisdiction.

It remained unclear how Washington will respond to the latest case before the court but US officials confirmed that its lawyers will be present at the hearing on Monday.

The ICJ was set up after World War II to rule on disputes between United Nations member states. Its rulings are binding but it has no power to enforce them.

– ‘Full reparations’ –

At Monday’s hearing a 15-judge bench is to listen to arguments by Washington’s lawyers over whether the ICJ can take up the case under its strict rules governing its procedure.

The US Supreme Court ruled in April 2016 that $2 billion in Iran’s frozen assets must go to American victims of terror attacks.

These included the 1983 bombing of a US Marine barracks in Beirut in which 241 soldiers were killed and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia. In total the decision affects more than 1,000 Americans.

Iran angrily accused Washington of breaking the 1955 treaty — even though it was signed at the time with the pro-US regime of the Shah — and called for the US “to make full reparations to Iran for the violation of its international legal obligations.”

Tehran said that because the US has maintained its designation of Iran as a major state sponsor of terrorism, its assets including the Central Bank also known as the Bank Markazi, have been “subjected to enforcement proceedings in the United States” even if they should benefit from immunity under the 1955 treaty.

A decision by the ICJ’s judges could take weeks or even months before being made public.

– ‘Compulsory jurisdiction’ –

Iran won a shock victory last week when the ICJ ruled that the US must lift sanctions against Tehran targeting humanitarian goods like food and medicine.

In response, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the United States was terminating the 1955 friendship treaty.

But Trump’s national security advisor John Bolton also announced that the United States was pulling out of the 1961 Optional Protocol and Dispute Resolution of the Vienna Convention.

The protocol establishes the ICJ as the “compulsory jurisdiction” for disputes unless nations decide to settle them elsewhere.

The step also comes after the Palestinians went to the ICJ to challenge the US move of its Israel embassy to Jerusalem.

Trump last month at the United Nations virulently rejected the authority of the International Criminal Court — a separate court based in The Hague that the US is not a member of — over a probe into US forces in Afghanistan.

AFP

Advertisements

US terminates 1955 ‘Treaty of Amity’ with Iran

October 3, 2018

The decision comes just hours after UN’s top court ordered the US to lift sanctions on humanitarian goods to Iran. Tehran had dragged Washington to the court, saying the sanctions violate the 1955 friendship agreement.

    
An image showing half of the US and Iranian flags, with the silhouette of Donald Trump's head overshadowing the center of the photo. (Imago/Ralph Peters)

The United States is terminating the 1955 Treaty of Amity with Iran, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Wednesday.

Pompeo’s announcement follows a ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations’ top court, on Wednesday ordering the United States to lift sanctions on humanitarian goods to Iran.

President Donald Trump in May announced a renewal of tough US sanctions on the Islamic Republic after abandoning the multilateral Iran nuclear agreement over its ballistic missile program.

Iran filed a lawsuit against the US at the ICJ in July, arguing that the sanctions violate the friendship agreement signed in 1955 between the two countries when Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was in power. The treaty, which established economic relations and consular rights between the two nations, continued to remain in force following the 1979 Islamic Revolution despite diplomatic tensions between Tehran and Washington.

Long overdue

Pompeo told reporters that the termination of the treaty was decades overdue.

“This is a decision frankly that is 39 years overdue,” Pompeo said. “Iran is abusing the ICJ for political and propaganda purposes and their case, as you can see from the decision, lacked merit.

The US move, a largely symbolic gesture, highlights deteriorating relations between Washington and Tehran.

Pompeo said the practical fallout from the decision to terminate the decades-old treaty remains to be seen.

“This marked a useful point for us to demonstrate the absolute absurdity” of the treaty, he said.

ap/msh (AP, Reuters)

https://www.dw.com/en/us-terminates-1955-treaty-of-amity-with-iran/a-45742464

UN court ruling on US sanctions shows Tehran is ‘right’: Iran

October 3, 2018

Tehran welcomed on Wednesday a ruling by the UN’s top court ordering Washington to suspend sanctions on humanitarian goods, as a “clear sign” that “Iran is in the right”.

The ruling by the International Court of Justice “once again shows that the US government… is day by day becoming more isolated,” the foreign ministry said in a statement.

© AFP/File | US President Donald Trump and Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani faced off at the UN in September. Tehran has hailed a ruling by the UN’s top court ordering Washington to suspend sanctions on humanitarian goods, as a “clear sign” it is “in the right”

It said the court had found that the crippling sanctions reimposed by Washington after it abandoned a landmark 2015 nuclear deal between major powers and Tehran were illegal.

“World public opinion and all independent countries will, with peace of mind, strive… to keep and carry out the JCPOA,” it added, using the official acronym for the agreement.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif called the court ruling “another failure for sanctions-addicted US government and victory for rule of law”.

“Imperative for int’l community to collectively counter malign US unilateralism,” he added in a tweet.

AFP

Related:

Sanctions on Iran: International Court of Justice rules against US

October 3, 2018

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ordered the US to ease sanctions it re-imposed on Iran after pulling out a nuclear deal last year.

Siding with Tehran, it said exports of “humanitarian” goods, such as food and medicines, should be allowed.

Judges listen to lawyers for Iran at the International Court of Justice (27 August 2018)

The US argued the court had no jurisdiction in the case as it concerned its national security.

The rulings of the ICJ – which is based in The Hague – are binding but the court has no power to enforce them.

It is the main judicial organ of the UN and settles legal disputes between member states. But both nations have in the past ignored the court’s rulings.

Announcing the decision on Wednesday, the court’s president, Judge Abdulqawi Yusuf, said: “The court considers that the United States must remove, by means of its choosing, any impediment (…) to the free exportation to the territory of Iran of goods required for humanitarian needs.”

Mohammad Javad Zarif praises European efforts to preserve the nuclear deal

Iran’s economy has slumped since US President Donald Trump ordered that sanctions be reinstated in May. Its currency, the rial, has dropped sharply.

A curb on ‘economic warfare’?

Analysis by Anna Holligan, BBC News, The Hague

The order calls for a partial easing of punitive measures. It covers medicines, medical supplies and equipment, food, agricultural products and aviation safety equipment.

This is essentially the first time international judges have ruled on what’s been described as a case of “economic warfare”.

It is a provisional measure issued in response to Iran’s urgent request ahead of the second round of sanctions scheduled to be reinstated next month.

The decision could encourage European companies, which ceased trading with Iran for fear of falling foul of President Trump, to reconsider their position, specifically those dealing in the humanitarian items outlined by the judges.

What were the arguments in court?

Iran said the sanctions violated the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights between Iran and the US, which grants the ICJ jurisdiction over disputes.

US-Iran sanctions: What do they mean?

It also said the reasons cited by President Trump for re-imposing the sanctions were unfounded because the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had repeatedly confirmed that Iran was complying with the terms of the 2015 nuclear accord signed by Tehran and six world powers.

US lawyers argued that the ICJ should not have jurisdiction and that Iran’s assertions fall outside the bounds of the treaty.

The ICJ has ruled previously that the 1955 treaty is valid even though it was signed before the 1979 Revolution in Iran, which saw the US-backed shah overthrown and heralded four decades of hostility between the two countries.

Why did the US abandon the nuclear deal?

The 2015 accord saw the Islamic Republic limit its controversial nuclear activities in return for relief from international sanctions.

But Mr Trump said the deal had “failed to achieve the fundamental objective of blocking all paths to an Iranian nuclear bomb” and did not deal with Tehran’s “malign activities, including its ballistic missile programme and its support for terrorism”.

In an attempt to compel Iran to agree to a new accord, the president reinstated sanctions that targeted the Iranian government’s purchase of US dollars, Iran’s trade in gold and other precious metals, and its automotive sector.

In November, a second batch of potentially more damaging sanctions will be re-imposed on Iran’s oil and shipping sectors as well as its central bank.

The other parties to the deal – the UK, France, Germany, China and Russia – have pledged to abide by their commitments under the existing deal. But many major firms have already pulled out of Iran.

BBC News

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-45729397

Related:

Oil Ticks Higher on Supply Concerns — Will The U.S. Keep Sanctions on Iranian Oil?

October 3, 2018

Market readies itself for the resumption of U.S. economic sanctions on Iran’s oil industry

Image result for Iran, Oil, flag, photos

.

LONDON—Oil prices edged up Wednesday morning, maintaining near four-year highs, as the market girded itself for the reimposition of U.S. economic sanctions on Iran’s oil industry.

Brent crude, the global benchmark, was up 0.1% to $84.93 a barrel on London’s Intercontinental Exchange . On the New York Mercantile Exchange, West Texas Intermediate futures were trading up 0.03% at $75.25 a barrel.

Brent has risen by roughly 17% since the start of August, largely on the back of a faster-than-expected decline in Iranian crude exports in the run to up to the enactment of U.S. oil sanctions on Nov. 4.

“Sanctions are in full effect in terms of the physical market,” said Bjarne Schieldrop, chief commodities analyst at SEB Markets. Traders are already buying physical oil for November delivery and beyond and they are “not doing it with Iran,” Mr. Schieldrop said.

The Iran Aluminium Co. plant in Arak.
The Iran Aluminium Co. plant in Arak. PHOTO: ALI MOHAMMADI/BLOOMBERG NEWS
.

Officials at the state-run National Iranian Oil Co. have said they provisionally expect crude shipments to have dropped to about 1.5 million barrels a day in September, compared with 2.3 million barrels a day in June, according to people familiar with the matter.

President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of a 2015 international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program in May, setting the stage for the reimposition of sanctions.

Prices have also been bolstered by a late September decision by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its partner producers not to raise production at a faster rate than previously planned. That helped send Brent squarely above the symbolic $80-a-barrel threshold last week, and it has since quickly climbed to hover around $85 a barrel.

OPEC and its production allies said they would adhere to current production quotas first implemented at the start of 2017. That means continuing a gradual ramp up in production that was agreed at the start of the summer in an effort to bring down over compliance with the initial agreement.

At the same time, there is growing market concern that OPEC and Russia have limited spare oil capacity to fully fill the Iranian shortfall, even if they wanted to, according to Stephen Brennock, analyst at brokerage PVM Oil Associates Ltd.

Still, some market observers think that in the long-run OPEC and non-OPEC supply—including from the U.S.—will offset declines in Iranian production and exports.

“This is particularly the case, as there are now clear signs that demand is slowing, which underpins our forecast that prices will fall to $60 a barrel by end-2019,” said Caroline Bain, chief commodities economist at Capital Economics.

Oil market observers Wednesday were looking ahead to weekly U.S. petroleum inventory data from the Energy Information Administration. U.S. crude stockpiles are expected to have risen by 1.3 million barrels, on average, last week, according to a survey of analysts and traders conducted by The Wall Street Journal.

Among refined products Thursday, Nymex reformulated gasoline blendstock—the benchmark gasoline contract—was down 0.03% at $2.13 a gallon. ICE gasoil, a benchmark for diesel fuel, changed hands at $740.50 a metric ton, on par with the previous settlement.

Write to Christopher Alessi at christopher.alessi@wsj.com

https://www.wsj.com/articles/oil-ticks-higher-on-supply-concerns-1538562854

Related:

UN court orders US to stop Iran sanctions

October 3, 2018

The International Court of Justice has ruled that US sanctions on medicine must be dropped immediately. The US has contested the right of the court to intervene in matters between Washington and Tehran.

    
The International Court of Justice

The UN’s top court ordered the United State to lift certain sanctions on Iran on Wednesday. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that sanctions against humanitarian goods were a danger to public safety.

The ICJ unanimously decided that Washington “shall remove by means of its choosing any impediments arising from the measures announced on May 8 to the free exportation to Iran of medicines and medical devices, food and agricultural commodities.”

US sanctions on spare parts for aircrafts were also ordered to be lifted because of the “potential to endanger civil aviation safety in Iran and the lives of its users.”

Iran filed a lawsuit against the US at the Netherlands-based court in July, arguing that the sanctions violate a decades-old bilateral treaty and are wrecking Iran’s economy and the value of its currency.

The ruling is preliminary as hearing the full case is a process that could take years.

Lawyers for the Trump administration, which reimposed the sanctions in May after pulling the US out of Tehran’s landmark nuclear accord, argued that the sanctions were justified by national security concerns and that the ICJ did not have the jurisdiction to rule on them.

Decisions made by the ICJ are binding and cannot be appealed, but the court has no means of enforcing its rulings.

Iran’s foreign ministry welcomed the ruling, saying: “The decision proved once again that the Islamic Republic is right and the US sanctions against people and citizens of our country are illegal and cruel.”

es/aw (AP, AFP)

https://www.dw.com/en/un-court-orders-us-to-ditch-iran-sanctions/a-45737767

Related:

Iran, US in tense wait for world court sanctions ruling

October 1, 2018

The International Court of Justice will hand down an eagerly awaited decision this week on Iran’s demand for the suspension of debilitating nuclear-related sanctions imposed by the United States.

Accusing Washington of “strangling” its economy, Tehran has asked the court in The Hague to order Washington to lift the measures, reimposed after US President Donald Trump pulled out of a multilateral 2015 accord.

Despite its long enmity with the United States, Iran brought the case under a 1955 “friendship treaty” that predates the country’s Islamic Revolution.

Washington has forcefully told the court, which rules on disputes between United Nations member states, that it has no jurisdiction to rule on the case as it concerns a matter of national security.

The ruling on Wednesday at 0800 GMT — in the grand surroundings of the 1913-built Peace Palace in the Dutch city — follows four days of hearings at the end of August.

Rulings by the ICJ are binding and cannot be appealed, but it has no way to enforce its decisions.

© ANP/AFP/File | The Peace Palace in The Hague, which houses the International Court of Justice

“If the court orders measures, they should be respected,” Eric De Brabandere, a professor of international law at the University of Leiden, told AFP.

If the court decides it has jurisdiction, it will likely “declare that the parties should refrain from aggravating the dispute”, but any steps beyond this remain to be seen, he said.

The 2015 nuclear deal saw Iran agree to limit its nuclear programme and let in international inspectors in return for an end to years of sanctions by the West.

But Trump pulled out of the deal in May, to the dismay of European allies, arguing that funds from the lifting of sanctions under the pact had been used to support terrorism and build nuclear-capable missiles.

– ‘Economic warfare’ –

At the United Nations General Assembly last week, Trump denounced the deal as “horrible” and “one-sided”.

During the ICJ hearings, Iran said the sanctions reintroduced in September are causing economic suffering for its citizens. US lawyers retorted that economic mismanagement was at the root of Iran’s woes.

A second wave of US measures is due to hit Iran in early November, targeting its vital oil exports.

Experts said the Iran-US case was an important opportunity for the ICJ to rule on the issue of “economic warfare” — not currently designated as a use of force.

The case “may offer the court sufficient legal basis to indicate a limit under international law to coercion by the US,” Geoff Gordon, an international law expert at the Asser Institute in The Hague, told AFP.

“International law, for reasons to do with power politics, has never formally recognised economic warfare to be a use of force as prohibited by the UN Charter, though economic sanctions can have the same effects and worse as guns and bombs.”

But he warned that “the decision is likely to be occasion for escalating tensions.”

Relations have plunged to a new low since Trump’s election, even as the US president reaches out to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un over his nuclear programme.

Trump and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani faced off at the UN last week, with Rouhani denouncing leaders with “xenophobic tendencies resembling a Nazi disposition.”

Despite their 1955 Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations, Iran and the United States have not had diplomatic ties since 1980.

The ICJ was set up in 1946, after the carnage of World War II, to rule in disputes between countries.

AFP

Iran: World Must Fight Against US Economic Dictatorship

August 6, 2018
World Must Fight Against US Economic Dictatorship

The United States has launched a global trade war against everything and everyone on the planet, largely against the European Union, Russia, China, Canada and Mexico.

The US is also gearing up for re-imposition of economic sanctions against Iran so that Tehran accepts to re-negotiate the 2015 nuclear deal it signed with the world powers. There is much tension between the two countries since President Donald Trump backed out of the 2015 nuclear deal in May, but the scenario changed when Trump called for talks without preconditions. Tehran has ruled out any talks with vindictive Trump, but sanctions are forthcoming either way.

To fight back, Iran filed a complaint with the International Court of Justice to hold the US accountable for its unlawful re-imposition of unilateral sanctions. Meantime, the EU, Britain, France and Germany, China and Russia have repeatedly reaffirmed their support “to the continued full and effective implementation of the JCPOA by all sides”.

The EU has even given support for the deal by giving European firms legal cover to operate in Iran. The European Council has endorsed the update of the blocking statute annexe on the nuclear deal with Iran. The “blocking statute” forbids EU firms from complying with US sanctions, allowing them to recover damages from such penalties and nullifying any foreign court rulings against them. But is this enough?

The blocking statute is due to enter force on August 6, when the first set of US sanctions are due. The second set is due November 4, just before US legislative elections. This action is clearly telling the whole world that the US administration is becoming even weaker and showing little ability to settle disputes with Iran and other countries, and has nothing left except extremely vicious warmongering and bullying tactics.

The US is losing its mind and now it is time to get united to fight against this economic dictator in the world and the economic dictatorship represented by the US government. This behavior has fully violated the rules and regulations of the United Nations and the rest of the global community.

The US uses economic sanctions to impose its will on other nations. It takes illegal actions as it desires and cares not for International Law or the UN Charter, or the General Assembly resolutions, or the Security Council resolutions. This kind of dictatorship must be seriously condemned and confronted by the UN and all member countries.

The anti-Iran measures taken by the US are much too systematic, deliberate, and free of control by diplomatic morality and conscience. What the US government is showing is really an under par mentality, and like a dictator is making wrong divisions based on “America First” war on diplomacy. This scenario must get adequate attention from the international civil society because nobody can predict what further dangerous and risky steps will be taken by the “dictator-in-chief” at the White House in order to “milk” Saudi Arabia and appease Israel.

Treating Iran as an enemy would wreak havoc on western interests. The Iranian government has responded in a very firm attitude that Iran will not yield to US pressures to re-negotiate the nuclear deal or stop supporting Syria, Iraq and the resistance front in the war against foreign-backed terrorism, Israeli Zionism and expansionism, Saudi Wahhabism, and American militarism.

It is very clear that the economic dictatorship represented by the US is very negative for global development and contributes strong destructive factors to the world business and energy society. The whole world has to unite against the Trump White House and their economic dictatorship. Today, it is the economy of Iran they are after. Tomorrow, it could be the economy of another nation, most probably China and Russia. The time to fight back is now.

FARS News

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13970511000880

Iran lodges complaint against US over renewed sanctions

July 17, 2018

Iran has lodged a complaint with the International Court of Justice against the United States’ reimposition of sanctions, the foreign ministry said on Tuesday.

The complaint was registered the previous day, spokesman Bahram Ghasemi said on the ministry’s website.

© AFP | Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif addresses economists in Tehran on July 16, 2018

The goal is “to hold US accountable for its unlawful re-imposition of unilateral sanctions,” Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif wrote on Twitter.

“Iran is committed to the rule of law in the face of US contempt for diplomacy and legal obligations. It’s imperative to counter its habit of violating (international) law,” he added.

The complaint came in response to Washington’s decision in May to abandon the 2015 nuclear deal and reimpose sanctions on Iran.

Tehran says the action violates international obligations, including the 1955 US-Iran Treaty of Amity — an agreement signed well before Iran’s 1979 revolution, but which is still invoked in ongoing legal battles.

Iran and the US have not had diplomatic relations since 1980 when American embassy officials were held hostage in Iran.

Nuclear-related sanctions will be reimposed by Washington in two phases in August and November, seeking to bar European and other foreign companies from doing business with Iran and blocking its oil sales abroad.

The ICJ is already due to hear a complaint on October 8 that Iran lodged two years ago against the United States for freezing around $2 billion (1.7 billion euros) of its assets held abroad.

AFP

Qatar ‘must stop support for terror’, top UN court told

June 28, 2018

Abu Dhabi on Thursday called on Doha to stop “supporting terrorist groups and individuals” and strongly denied human rights abuses against Qatari citizens before the UN’s top court.

The bitter Gulf crisis pitting Doha against its neighbours including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain moved to the international courts Wednesday, with Qatar accusing the UAE of fostering an “environment of hate” against its citizens.

© AFP/File | This file combination shows the leaders in the Gulf diplomatic battle: (L to R) Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Saudi King Salman, United Arab Emirates Prime Minister and ruler of Dubai Sheikh Mohammed and Bahrain’s King Hamad

But Abu Dhabi’s representatives Thursday fired back, saying relations were cut with Qatar “because of its support for terrorism, its interference with the affairs of its neighbours and its dissemination of hate speech.”

“Our government has asked Qatar time-and-again to cease this conduct,” the UAE’s ambassador to the Netherlands, Saeed Alnowais, told the International Court of Justice.

“Although Qatar repeatedly committed to do so, it has failed to live up to its commitments,” Alnowais said at the Hague-based ICJ.

At the start of the crisis last June, Qatar, a gas-rich peninsula nation, found its only land border closed, its state-owned airline barred from using its neighbours’ airspace, and Qatari residents expelled from the boycotting countries.

– ‘Discrimination’ –

Doha earlier this month dragged the emirates before the Hague-based body — which rules in disputes between countries — accusing it of racism and human rights abuses against its citizens.

The legal moves at the ICJ come after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt severed all ties with Doha on June 5 last year accusing it of supporting terrorism and Iran.

Doha denies the allegations and its lawyers Wednesday told a 16-judge bench that Abu Dhabi has implemented a “series of broad discriminatory measures” against Qataris including expelling them, stopping their access to health care and criminalising any statements that express sympathy with Qatar.

Basing its claim on the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), Qatar also accuses the UAE of shutting down its media networks including Al Jazeera.

Both Doha and Abu Dhabi are signatories to the convention.

Doha is demanding the ICJ urgently intervene and hand down provisional measures to stop further prejudice as well as, over the longer term, order “full reparation, including compensation for the harm suffered as a result of the UAE’s actions in violation of the CERD.”

UAE representative Alnowais however said his country “completely rejects the allegations, all of which are without any merit or basis.”

“Qatar has put forward no credible evidence to substantiate any of these claims,” he said, adding it consisted “only of anecdotal and unverified statements,” he said.

“The UAE’s measures against the Qatari government are carefully measured to have the least possible impact on ordinary people,” Alnowais added.

– Shattered alliances –

Diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis have so far proved fruitless in what was previously one of the most stable regions in the Arab world.

The wrangling has shattered old alliances and rendered the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council practically obsolete, pushing Qatar towards Turkey and Iran.

Qatar maintains the dispute is an attack on its sovereignty and punishment for pursuing an independent foreign policy.

Experts say it could now take the ICJ’s judges weeks or even months to hand down a decision.

Meanwhile in a surprise tit-for-tat move, Saudi Arabia, the UAE announced in state media Wednesday they too planned to file their own case at the UN’s top court against Doha, accusing it of violating their airspace.

The UAE has filed two complaints with the ICAO over what Qatar’s rivals say are airspace violations that threaten civil aviation.

The UAE accuses Qatar of sending fighter jets to intercept passenger flights and a civilian helicopter in Bahraini airspace. These accusations have been denied by Doha.

Doha’s neighbours say the ball is in Qatar’s court to end the crisis. It has been handed a list of 13 demands by its Gulf neighbours, including closing Al Jazeera, removing Turkish troops from the country and scaling back its cooperation with Iran, with which it shares the world’s largest gas field. It has not met any of them.

AFP