MEK Iran: Former UN Official States Iranian Diplomat-Terrorist Assadi Has no Diplomatic Immunity
Since his arrest, Assadollah Assadi, the Iranian diplomat terrorist, has tried to maintain his ‘diplomatic immunity’ in an attempt to escape justice. Assadi, alongside three accomplices, are currently on trial for attempting to bomb an Iranian resistance rally near Paris, on 30 June 2018, held by the Iranian regime’s democratic opposition, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a branch of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI / MEK Iran). The lawyer representing the NCRI in the trial, Georges-Henri Beauthier, has stated that: “We are looking at a clear case of state terrorism.”
Tahar Boumedra, a former official of the United Nations, stated on the 3 December that: “For [Assadollah Assadi] to claim protection or diplomatic protection in Belgium, this is a false claim and, in my view, should be rejected by the courts out of hand,” in an interview with Simay-e Azadi, an Iranian opposition (PMOI / MEK Iran) TV channel.
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) December 7, 2020
This was confirmed by a prosecutor during the first session of the trial in Antwerp, who added that based on Belgium’s 2002 legalization, the Belgian authorities have the right to arrest Assadi, despite diplomatic immunity. The scale of Assadi’s crimes, to commit mass murder in an act of terrorism, as well as being part of a terrorist group organized by the Iranian regime, mean that the authorities have the power to remove Assadi’s diplomatic immunity in order to arrest him.
Boumedra expanded upon this issue and gave a further explanation in his interview on 3 December:
“The court started its proceedings and the Iranian diplomat, Assadollah Assadi, claimed diplomatic immunity and did not respond to the court, so he did not attend the proceedings.
Basically, the diplomatic protection is offered by the receiving state, to the diplomats or members of the staff of the diplomatic mission of the sending state. Let us call the send in the state, country A, receiving state, country B. So, country A sends its diplomatic staff to Country B, and that is done for the specific purpose of conducting diplomatic relations with the receiving state.
This situation does not extend to a third party, to a third state. Meaning that diplomatic protection is offered by the receiving state. Not a third state. And there is a very, very narrow exception to this, where a third state could extend diplomatic protection to the diplomats of the Senate in the state in case of need of transit. So, when they are on transit to join their mission, they could enjoy protection according to the visa granted to them, if necessary.
Assadollah Assadi was on some business that has nothing to do with his diplomatic mission, and he was on a territory that does not grant him diplomatic protection.
So, the conclusion is in the case of Assadi, he belongs to a diplomatic mission accredited in Vienna in Austria. But he was arrested, outside Austria, in a third country, and he was prosecuted in Belgium, which is the third state.
Had the attack against #MEK gone ahead, the consequences could have been devastating. After the 2018 uprising in #Iran, the regime considered the threat of the opposition significant enough to plan a terror attack on European soil https://t.co/3SocRkTUUa pic.twitter.com/AcCg0mC2wf
— MEK Iran (Mujahedin-e Khalq) (@MEK_Iran) December 8, 2020
Without a firm action by the European Union leadership against the Mullah regime, the Iranian regime is getting more and more emboldened that will commit more and more action not only against the Iranian opposition (PMOI / MEK Iran) but it will victimize many other Europeans as well. And the attempt of 2018 in Villepinte, is proof that the Iranian regime is ready to commit heinous crimes against not only the opposition leadership (Mrs. Maryam Rajavi) and the opposition in general, that’s also against many European, American, Canadian, Arab, Members of Parliaments and members of civil society.”