DOCSLIB.ORG

Iran Sanctions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iran Sanctions Iran Sanctions Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Updated November 15, 2019 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RS20871 SUMMARY RS20871 Iran Sanctions November 15, 2019 Successive Administrations have used economic sanctions to try to change Iran’s behavior. U.S. sanctions, including “secondary sanctions” on firms that conduct certain Kenneth Katzman transactions with Iran, have adversely affected Iran’s economy but have had little Specialist in Middle observable effect on Iran’s pursuit of core strategic objectives such as its support for Eastern Affairs regional armed factions and its development of ballistic and cruise missiles. [email protected] For a copy of the full report, During 2012-2015, when the global community was relatively united in pressuring Iran, please call 7-.... or visit Iran’s economy shrank as its crude oil exports fell by more than 50%, and Iran had www.crs.gov. limited ability to utilize its $120 billion in assets held abroad. Iran accepted the 2015 multilateral nuclear accord (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA), which provided Iran broad relief through the waiving of relevant sanctions, revocation of relevant executive orders (E.O.s), and the lifting of U.N. and EU sanctions. Remaining in place were a general ban on U.S. trade with Iran and U.S. sanctions on Iran’s support for regional governments and armed factions, its human rights abuses, its efforts to acquire missile and advanced conventional weapons capabilities, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Under U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which enshrined the JCPOA, nonbinding U.N. restrictions on Iran’s development of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles and a binding ban on its importation or exportation of arms remain in place for several years. The sanctions relief enabled Iran to increase its oil exports to nearly pre- sanctions levels, regain access to foreign exchange reserve funds and reintegrate into the international financial system, achieve about 7% yearly economic growth (2016-17), attract foreign investment, and buy new passenger aircraft. Sanctions are at the core of Trump Administration policy to apply “maximum pressure” on Iran, with the stated purpose of compelling Iran to negotiate a revised JCPOA that takes into account U.S. concerns beyond Iran’s nuclear program. On May 8, 2018, President Trump announced that the United States would no longer participate in the JCPOA and U.S. secondary sanctions were reimposed as of November 6, 2018. The reinstatement of U.S. sanctions has driven Iran’s economy into recession as major companies have exited the Iranian economy and Iran’s oil exports have decreased dramatically—particularly after the Administration in May 2019 ended sanctions exceptions for the purchase of Iranian oil. The value of Iran’s currency has declined sharply, and there has been some unrest. Since the summer of 2019, the Administration has sanctioned numerous entities that are supporting Iran’s remaining oil trade, added sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank, and sanctioned a number of high-ranking Iranian officials. On May 3, 2019, the Administration ended two waivers for foreign governments to provide technical assistance to some JCPOA-permitted aspects of Iran’s nuclear program, but it extended five other civilian nuclear waivers in August 2019. The European Union and other countries have sought to keep the economic benefits of the JCPOA flowing to Iran in order to persuade Iran to remain in the accord. In January 2019, the European countries created a trading mechanism (Special Purpose Vehicle) that circumvents U.S. secondary sanctions, and the EU countries are contemplating providing Iran with $15 billion in credits, secured by future oil deliveries, to facilitate the use of that mechanism. The economic difficulties and other U.S. pressure measures have prompted Iran to respond by decreasing its compliance with some of the nuclear commitments of the JCPOA, and have contributed to Iranian leaders’ apparent decision to attack and interfere with some commercial shipping in the Persian Gulf. For now, Iran is refusing to begin talks with the United States on a revised JCPOA. See also CRS Report R43333, Iran Nuclear Agreement and U.S. Exit, by Paul K. Kerr and Kenneth Katzman; and CRS Report R43311, Iran: U.S. Economic Sanctions and the Authority to Lift Restrictions, by Dianne E. Rennack. Congressional Research Service Iran Sanctions Contents Overview and Objectives ................................................................................................................ 1 Blocked Iranian Property and Assets ............................................................................................... 1 Executive Order 13599 Impounding Iran-Owned Assets .......................................................... 3 Sanctions for Iran’s Support for Armed Factions and Terrorist Groups .......................................... 4 Sanctions Triggered by Terrorism List Designation .................................................................. 4 Exception for U.S. Humanitarian Aid ................................................................................. 5 Sanctions on States “Not Cooperating” Against Terrorism ...................................................... 6 Executive Order 13224 Sanctioning Terrorism-Supporting Entities ......................................... 6 Use of the Order to Target Iranian Arms Exports ............................................................... 6 Application of CAATSA to the Revolutionary Guard ........................................................ 7 Implementation of E.O. 13224 ............................................................................................ 7 Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) Designations ................................................................. 7 Other Sanctions on Iran’s “Malign” Regional Activities .......................................................... 8 Executive Order 13438 on Threats to Iraq’s Stability ........................................................ 8 Executive Order 13572 on Repression of the Syrian People. ............................................. 8 The Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act (P.L. 114-102) and Hizballah International Financing Prevention Amendments Act of 2018 (S. 1595, P.L. 115-272). ......................................................................................................... 8 Ban on U.S. Trade and Investment with Iran .................................................................................. 8 JCPOA-Related Easing and Reversal ................................................................................. 9 What U.S.-Iran Trade Is Allowed or Prohibited? ...................................................................... 9 Application to Foreign Subsidiaries of U.S. Firms ................................................................. 12 Sanctions on Iran’s Energy Sector................................................................................................. 12 The Iran Sanctions Act ............................................................................................................ 13 Key Sanctions “Triggers” Under ISA ............................................................................... 13 Mandate and Time Frame to Investigate ISA Violations .................................................. 16 Interpretations of ISA and Related Laws .......................................................................... 18 Implementation of Energy-Related Iran Sanctions ........................................................... 19 Iran Oil Export Reduction Sanctions: Section 1245 of the FY2012 NDAA Sanctioning Transactions with Iran’s Central Bank ............................................................. 21 Implementation/SREs Issued and Ended .......................................................................... 22 Iran Foreign Account “Restriction” Provision .................................................................. 23 Sanctions on Auto Production and Minerals Sectors..................................................................... 24 Executive Order 13645/13846: Iran’s Automotive Sector, Rial Trading, and Precious Stones ................................................................................................................................... 24 Executive Order 13871 on Iran’s Minerals and Metals Sectors .............................................. 25 Sanctions on Weapons of Mass Destruction, Missiles, and Conventional Arms Transfers ........... 25 Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act and Iraq Sanctions Act ................................................. 26 Implementation ................................................................................................................. 26 Banning Aid to Countries that Aid or Arm Terrorism List States: Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 .................................................................................... 27 Implementation ................................................................................................................. 27 Proliferation-Related Provision of the Iran Sanctions Act ...................................................... 27 Iran-North Korea-Syria Nonproliferation Act ......................................................................... 27 Implementation ................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iranian Psps Among Global Acquirers
    !"#$ % & ' ( # Login $ Register Search ... % & SUBSCRIBE TUESDAY October, 08 2019 " NATIONAL ENERGY ECONOMY BUSINESS & MARKETS AUTO Time TRAVEL SCI-TECH ! Business And Markets ! October 07, 2019 19:21 11 Iranian PSPs Among Global Acquirers The 11 acquirers from Iran handled only debit card payments for the domestic market. Credit cards are not issued in Iran and are very rare Today`s Top Stories 11 Iranian PSPs Among Global Acquirers !. ". #. $ '.. leven Iranian payment service provider companies are among the world’s top 150 E acquirers, according to the latest report by Nilson Report Magazine, a journal specializing in $ payment industry news and statistics. SCI Report: Behpardakht Mellat, affiliated to Bank Mellat, ranked Spendin 1 15th on the list with over 4.3 billion transactions in g 2018. The company improved one notch over its 16th Inequali place in 2017. ty With 3.6 billion transactions, Saman Bank’s E-Payment Widens Company ranked 19th in 2018, improving 4 places over Between its position in 2017. Rich and Asan Pardakht Persian ranked 22th, rising 3 places Poor compared with its previous standing at 25 in 2017. Parsian E-Commerce Company, an affiliate of Parsian 11 Iranian PSPs Bank, currently on 27th position rose from 28th in Among Global 2 Acquirers 2018. The payment company processed 2.9 billion transactions in the year. $ Iran's Q2 Iran Kish Credit Card Company handled 1.8 billion Unemploymen 3 t Drops 1.8% to transactions and took 33th spot in the new ranking. The 10.5% company registered a dramatic improvement, up 9 slots from 42 in 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Iran's Nuclear Program
    Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs Volume 2 Issue 2 November 2013 The Prohibition on the Use of Force for Arms Control: The Case of Iran’s Nuclear Program Mary Ellen O'Connell University of Notre Dame Law School Reyam El Molla Follow this and additional works at: https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/jlia Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, International and Area Studies Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Political Science Commons, Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, Rule of Law Commons, Social History Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons ISSN: 2168-7951 Custom Citation The Prohibition on the Use of Force for Arms Control: The Case of Iran’s Nuclear Program, 2 Penn. St. J.L. & Int’l Aff. 315 (2013). The Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs is a joint publication of Penn State’s School of Law and School of International Affairs. Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs 2013 VOLUME 2 NO. 2 THE PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FORCE FOR ARMS CONTROL: THE CASE OF IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAM Mary Ellen O’Connell and Reyam El Molla* In many discussions of Iran’s nuclear program, there seems to be an implicit assumption that states have a right to use military force to end the program. For example, the Institute for National Security Studies,1 an Israeli think tank, in an article titled, The Legality of an Attack against Iranian Nuclear Facilities, places emphasis on proving the necessity of an attack as a last resort but fails to indicate any accepted legal basis for resort to military force as an initial matter.2 In fact, international law does not permit the use of military force without United Nations Security Council authorization for arms control of any kind, whether to end a nuclear program, to end a chemical weapons program, or to prevent missile shipments.
    [Show full text]
  • The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi: Decision-Making and Factionalism in Iran’S Revolutionary Guard
    The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi: Decision-Making and Factionalism in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard SAEID GOLKAR AUGUST 2021 KASRA AARABI Contents Executive Summary 4 The Raisi Administration, the IRGC and the Creation of a New Islamic Government 6 The IRGC as the Foundation of Raisi’s Islamic Government The Clergy and the Guard: An Inseparable Bond 16 No Coup in Sight Upholding Clerical Superiority and Preserving Religious Legitimacy The Importance of Understanding the Guard 21 Shortcomings of Existing Approaches to the IRGC A New Model for Understanding the IRGC’s Intra-elite Factionalism 25 The Economic Vertex The Political Vertex The Security-Intelligence Vertex Charting IRGC Commanders’ Positions on the New Model Shades of Islamism: The Ideological Spectrum in the IRGC Conclusion 32 About the Authors 33 Saeid Golkar Kasra Aarabi Endnotes 34 4 The IRGC in the Age of Ebrahim Raisi Executive Summary “The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC] has excelled in every field it has entered both internationally and domestically, including security, defence, service provision and construction,” declared Ayatollah Ebrahim Raisi, then chief justice of Iran, in a speech to IRGC commanders on 17 March 2021.1 Four months on, Raisi, who assumes Iran’s presidency on 5 August after the country’s June 2021 election, has set his eyes on further empowering the IRGC with key ministerial and bureaucratic positions likely to be awarded to guardsmen under his new government. There is a clear reason for this ambition. Expanding the power of the IRGC serves the interests of both Raisi and his 82-year-old mentor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Focus On: Sanctions Against Iran, Libya and Syria July 2011
    Focus on: sanctions against Iran, Libya and Syria July 2011 The worsening situation in Libya and Syria and the need to prevent sanction busting by Iran have provoked further tight- ening of international sanctions. The main measures approved by the EU, UN and US in recent months will have im- pacts on the economies and diplomatic relations of the above-mentioned countries. Iran . Iran’s efforts to bypass international sanctions by using foreign companies and other countries (a practice known as sanction busting) have resulted in the EU and US tightening sanctions and adding more institutions and indi- viduals to their blacklists. The aim of the sanctions, which target Iran’s finances, is to force Tehran to re-open ne- gotiations on its nuclear development programme and resolve the stalemate. Having adopted Regulation 961/2010 in October 2010, in May 2011 the European Council approved Council Im- plementing Regulation (EU) No. 503/2011 adding more people and entities to its blacklist. Among theme is the Iranian Europäisch-Iranisch Handelsbank (EIH) bank based in Hamburg, Germany, accused of breaching EC regulations and UN Security Council resolutions. In a move to raise pressure on Iran, at the beginning of June the US also decided to apply the principle of extra- territoriality. Having imposed sanctions against seven foreign companies (including the PDVSA and an Israeli group) for supplying fuel to Iranian companies, the US has continued to revise its blacklist, which includes the Iranian state-owned Bank of Industry and Mine accused of providing services to Bank Mellat and EIH already subject to US sanctions.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 83, No. 221/Thursday, November 15, 2018
    Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 221 / Thursday, November 15, 2018 / Notices 57529 (dba Ameron Missouri) for use as sub- placed on OFAC’s Specially Designated Street 8th, Ghaem Magham Farahari Ave., station. On October 22, 2018, the FAA Nationals and Blocked Persons List (the Tehran 1586868513, Iran; website determined that the request to release ‘‘SDN List’’) based on OFAC’s www.calcimin.com; Additional Sanctions property at the St. Louis Lambert determination that one or more Information—Subject to Secondary Sanctions [SDGT] [IFSR] (Linked To: IRAN ZINC International Airport (STL) submitted applicable legal criteria were satisfied. MINES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY). by the Sponsor meets the procedural All property and interests in property Designated pursuant to section 1(c) of E.O. requirements of the Federal Aviation subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these 13224 for being owned or controlled by IRAN Administration and the release of the persons are blocked, and U.S. persons ZINC MINES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a property does not and will not impact are generally prohibited from engaging person determined to be subject to E.O. future aviation needs at the airport. The in transactions with them. 13224. 4. QESHM ZINC SMELTING AND FAA may approve the request, in whole DATES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION or in part, no sooner than thirty days REDUCTION COMPANY (a.k.a. QESHM section for applicable date(s). ZINC SMELTING AND REDUCTION after the publication of this Notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: COMPLEX), 20 Km Dargahan-to-Loft Road, The following is a brief overview of OFAC: Associate Director for Global Qeshm Island, Hormozgan, Iran; website the request: Targeting, tel.: 202–622–2420; Assistant www.gzsc.ir; Additional Sanctions St.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran Case File (April 2021)
    IRAN CASE FILE April 2021 RASANAH International Institute for Iranian Studies, Al-Takhassusi St. Sahafah, Riyadh Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. P.O. Box: 12275 | Zip code: 11473 Contact us [email protected] +966112166696 Executive Summary .....................................................................................4 Internal Affairs ........................................................................................... 7 The Ideological File .............................................................................................8 1. Women and the “Political Man” ............................................................................... 8 2. Khatami and the Position of Women ......................................................................10 The Political File ............................................................................................... 12 1. The Most Notable Highlights of the Leaked Interview .............................................12 2. Consequences and Reactions .................................................................................13 3. The Position of the Iranian President and Foreign Ministry on the Interview ..........14 4. The Implications of Leaking the Interview at This Time..........................................15 The Economic File ............................................................................................. 16 1. Bitcoin’s Genesis Globally and the Start of Its Use in Iran ........................................16 2. The Importance of Bitcoin for Iran
    [Show full text]
  • COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Iran and Repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ L 88, 24.3.2012, P
    02012R0267 — EN — 09.07.2019 — 026.002 — 1 This text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. The Union's institutions do not assume any liability for its contents. The authentic versions of the relevant acts, including their preambles, are those published in the Official Journal of the European Union and available in EUR-Lex. Those official texts are directly accessible through the links embedded in this document ►B COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ L 88, 24.3.2012, p. 1) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 350/2012 of 23 April 2012 L 110 17 24.4.2012 ►M2 Council Regulation (EU) No 708/2012 of 2 August 2012 L 208 1 3.8.2012 ►M3 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 709/2012 of 2 August 2012 L 208 2 3.8.2012 ►M4 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 945/2012 of 15 October L 282 16 16.10.2012 2012 ►M5 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1016/2012 of 6 November L 307 5 7.11.2012 2012 ►M6 Council Regulation (EU) No 1067/2012 of 14 November 2012 L 318 1 15.11.2012 ►M7 Council Regulation (EU) No 1263/2012 of 21 December 2012 L 356 34 22.12.2012 ►M8 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1264/2012 of 21 December L 356 55 22.12.2012 2012 ►M9 Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 522/2013 of 6 June 2013 L 156 3 8.6.2013 ►M10 Council Regulation (EU) No 517/2013 of 13 May 2013 L 158 1 10.6.2013 ►M11 Council Regulation (EU) No 971/2013 of 10 October 2013
    [Show full text]
  • IRAN COUNTRY of ORIGIN INFORMATION (COI) REPORT COI Service
    IRAN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION (COI) REPORT COI Service Date 28 June 2011 IRAN JUNE 2011 Contents Preface Latest News EVENTS IN IRAN FROM 14 MAY TO 21 JUNE Useful news sources for further information REPORTS ON IRAN PUBLISHED OR ACCESSED BETWEEN 14 MAY AND 21 JUNE Paragraphs Background Information 1. GEOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 1.01 Maps ...................................................................................................................... 1.04 Iran ..................................................................................................................... 1.04 Tehran ................................................................................................................ 1.05 Calendar ................................................................................................................ 1.06 Public holidays ................................................................................................... 1.07 2. ECONOMY ................................................................................................................ 2.01 3. HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 3.01 Pre 1979: Rule of the Shah .................................................................................. 3.01 From 1979 to 1999: Islamic Revolution to first local government elections ... 3.04 From 2000 to 2008: Parliamentary elections
    [Show full text]
  • Biden, Congress Should Defend Terrorism Sanctions Imposed on Iran
    Research memo Biden, Congress Should Defend Terrorism Sanctions Imposed on Iran By Richard Goldberg, Saeed Ghasseminejad, Behnam Ben Taleblu, Matthew Zweig, and Mark Dubowitz January 25, 2021 During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing to consider Antony Blinken’s nomination for secretary of state, Blinken was asked whether he believed it is in America’s national security interest to lift terrorism sanctions currently imposed on Iran, including sanctions targeting Iran’s central bank, national oil company, financial sector, and energy sector. “I do not,” Blinken responded. “And I think there is nothing, as I see it, inconsistent with making sure that we are doing everything possible – including the toughest possible sanctions, to deal with Iranian support for terrorism.”1 Bipartisan support for terrorism sanctions targeting Iran goes back to 1984, when the United States first designated the Islamic Republic as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. Since then, every U.S. president2 – Republican or Democrat – and Congress have taken steps to reaffirm U.S. policy opposing Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and tying sanctions relief to Iran’s cessation of terror-related activities. President Joe Biden has pledged to rejoin the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), if Iran returns to “strict compliance” with the agreement.3 Terrorism sanctions on Iran, however, should not be lifted, even if the Biden administration opts to return to the deal, unless and until Iran verifiably halts its sponsorship of terrorism. This memorandum provides an overview of Iran’s past and ongoing involvement in terrorism-related activities, a review of longstanding bipartisan congressional support for terrorism sanctions on Iran, and a list of terrorism sanctions currently imposed on Iran that should not be lifted.
    [Show full text]
  • Verifying European Union Arms Embargoes
    Verification Research, Training and Information Centre Verifying European Union arms embargoes Paper submitted to the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) for the European Commission project on ‘European Action on Small Arms, Light Weapons and Explosive Remnants of War’ Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views or opinion of the United Nations, UNIDIR, its members or sponsors. 18 April 2005 1 Verifying European Union arms embargoes Introduction 1. Analysis of the current situation 1.1 What is the role of monitoring and verification in making arms embargoes effective? 1.2 EU arms embargoes and UN arms embargoes 1.3 The link between EU arms embargoes and UN arms embargoes 1.4 How EU member states currently implement EU and UN arms embargoes 1.5 Monitoring and enforcing EU and UN embargoes 2. Recommendations 2.1 Drafting EU arms embargoes 2.2 Monitoring and enforcement 2.3 Additional recommendations Annex 1: Table of current EU and UN arms embargoes Introduction1 There are many reasons why sanctions—coercive measures undertaken by a group of nations in an effort to influence another nation into following international law or submitting to a judgment—may be adopted against a state. One of the most common is to improve the human rights situation in the sanctioned state by targeting the perpetrators of human rights abuses, who may be individuals, non-state actors, government elites or the military. They are also used to change the behaviour of a state which is undermining democracy or the rule of law, or which has threatened the security of a particular region.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Conventional Arms Control in the Context of United Nations Arms Embargoes
    Applying conventional arms control in the context of United Nations arms embargoes Acknowledgements Support from UNIDIR core funders provides the foundation for all of the Institute’s activities. This project is supported by the Governments of Germany and Switzerland. This report was made possible through the facilitation and cooperation of former and current members of the Security Council. UNIDIR would like to express its appreciation to the United Nations partners, namely the United Nations Department of Political Affairs, United Nations Mine Action Service and the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, which all contributed to this study. Additionally, UNIDIR would like to thank former and current members of the Panel of Experts for their valuable inputs and feedback on this report. This report would not have been possible without the support and close cooperation of all partners mentioned above. Savannah de Tessières drafted this report, with support from Himayu Shiotani, Jonah Leff, Franziska Seethaler and Sebastian Wilkin. Himayu Shiotani edited this report, with support from Sebastian Wilkin and John Borrie. At UNIDIR, Himayu Shiotani managed this project. About UNIDIR The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR)—an autonomous institute within the United Nations—conducts research on disarmament and security. UNIDIR is based in Geneva, Switzerland, the centre for bilateral and multilateral disarmament and non-proliferation negotiations, and home of the Conference on Disarmament. The Institute explores current issues pertaining to a variety of existing and future armaments, as well as global diplomacy and local tensions and conflicts. Working with researchers, diplomats, government officials, NGOs and other institutions since 1980, UNIDIR acts as a bridge between the research community and Governments.
    [Show full text]
  • B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/235/CFSP of 12 April 2011 Concerning Restrictive Measures Directed Against Certain Persons and Entities in View of the Situation in Iran
    2011D0235 — EN — 12.03.2013 — 003.001 — 1 This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents ►B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/235/CFSP of 12 April 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran (OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 51) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Council Implementing Decision 2011/670/CFSP of 10 October 2011 L 267 13 12.10.2011 ►M2 Council Decision 2012/168/CFSP of 23 March 2012 L 87 85 24.3.2012 ►M3 Council Decision 2012/810/CFSP of 20 December 2012 L 352 49 21.12.2012 ►M4 Council Decision 2013/124/CFSP of 11 March 2013 L 68 57 12.3.2013 2011D0235 — EN — 12.03.2013 — 003.001 — 2 ▼B COUNCIL DECISION 2011/235/CFSP of 12 April 2011 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Iran THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof, Whereas: (1) On 21 March 2011, the Council reiterated its deep concern about the deterioration of the human rights situation in Iran. (2) The Council underlined in particular the dramatic increase in executions in recent months and the systematic repression of Iranian citizens, who face harassment and arrests for exercising their legitimate rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. The Union also reiterated its strong condemnation of the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
    [Show full text]