header-logo header-logo

16 September 2020 / Marc Weller
Issue: 7902 / Categories: Features , International justice , Profession
printer mail-detail

International law: Lethal weapon(s)

27516
Marc Weller outlines why & how he believes the US bungled the Iran sanctions snapback

In brief

  • Non-compliance: an increasingly serious pattern.
  • Ongoing debate: US withdrawal from the deal, Iranian compliance or non-compliance and a possible US attempt to trigger the snapback.
  • Legal disputes: tense relations between governments.

In August, the US Administration attempted to trigger the Iranian sanctions snapback. Broad UN sanctions against Iran had been removed in the wake of the Iran nuclear deal of 2015. The deal committed Tehran to abandoning its reputed nuclear weapons programme. The snapback allows the parties to the deal to bring the sanctions back into operation through a unilateral claim of significant non-compliance—an important safeguard in view of the feared break-out from the international nuclear non-proliferation regime by Iran.

However, when the US sought to exercise its claimed right to bring the full range of UN sanctions back into operation through a unilateral application to the Security Council, this request was simply ignored. If this position is maintained, this would represent an unprecedented

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll