Brussels, 23/12/2008 (Agence Europe) - Last week, the Court of Justice of the European Communities refused to interpret its decision to remove the People's Mujahideen of Iran (OMPI) from the European list of terrorist organisations (EUROPE 9798). The Council of Ministers had requested this "interpretation" on 4 December, the very day of ruling in question.
On 17 December, the Court refused to effect this interpretation, as the ruling under fire does not contain any "obscurity or ambiguity which would mar the ruling in principle" (T-284/08 INTP). In doing so, the Court has refused to confirm that the ruling of 4 December concerns an act of regulatory nature. In fact, the ruling "cancels the decision which compiled the list of terrorist organisations, in as much that it concerns OMPI", explains Jean-Pierre Spitzer, the legal representative of the organisation in this case. It is important, the French lawyer stresses, to establish a distinction between: the regulation which defines terrorism; the common position- which specifies the restrictions to be brought to listed terrorists; and the decisions of the Council- which provide a six-monthly update of the list in question. The ruling of 4 December therefore applies only to a decision, and, moreover, only to part of it.
If the Council had succeeded in having the ruling considered as bringing about an effect on the regulation, this would have put it into a position of strength for any appeal. The Council would then have been able to call for the suspension of the effects of the ruling in question until the appeal procedure was concluded. This is provided for in order to prevent the authorities in question from having to change their regulations before having definitively decided on their destiny, in order to spare them an excessive administrative burden. However, this procedure is not available for cases like this one, in which only a few individuals are concerned. The ruling of 4 December, which does no more than to remove OMPI from the European list of terrorist organisations, can therefore not be suspended if the Council appeals. The next version of the list is due to be published in January- if OMPI is to be included on it, there must be a proposal by a Member State, unanimously supported by all the others. A number of observers and experts close to the dossier feel that this scenario is unlikely. (C.D./trans.fl)