Skip to content

DeList MEK

MEK strives for a democratic, secular republic in Iran

Menu
  • Home
  • Designation & Timeline
    • MEK Designation
    • Timeline
    • Grounds for MEK Delisting
    • FTO Designation Harms
  • Court Rulings
    • US Courts
      • 2010 Ruling by U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
      • 2012 Ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
    • UK Courts
      • UK Court of Appeal
      • UK’s POAC 2008 Ruling
    • EU Courts
      • 2008 Ruling by EU Court of First Instance
      • 2006 Ruling by EU Court of First Instance
    • French Court
  • US Congress
    • US Congress Resolutions
      • H.RES. 60 Urges Delisting of MEK from FTO List
      • H. RES. 1431 Calls for Release of Political Prisoners in Iran
      • H.Res. 231 Calls for Protection of Camp Ashraf Residents
      • H.Res. 332 Calls for Investigation of Camp Ashraf Massacre
      • H. RES. 704 Condemns Violence Against Camp Ashraf Residents
    • In News
  • US Leaders & Experts
    • US Policy Figures
    • US Military Figures
    • Subject Matter Experts
  • Reports & Research
    • Think Tanks
  • About
    • About MEK
    • About NCRI
    • About DelistMEK.com
Menu

2006 Ruling by EU Court of First Instance

EU Court Ruling: A Testament of the Iranian Resistance’s Legitimacy

On December 12, 2006, the European Court of First Instance issued EU Court 2006 Ruling annulling the decision by the European Union to freeze the funds of the main Iranian opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). Europe’s second-highest court called into question the EU’s designation of the PMOI as a terrorist organization.

The European court ruled that the European Union had not provided adequate reasons or a fair hearing in deciding to freeze the organization’s assets in 2002, and that the decision so far as it concerns the PMOI “must be annulled since it “does not contain a sufficient statement of reasons and that it was adopted in the course of a procedure during which the right of the party concerned to a fair hearing was not observed, and that it is not in a position to review the lawfulness of that position.”

See the official EU Court 2006 Ruling and the New York Times report on the Court ruling.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

©2026 DeList MEK | Design: Newspaperly WordPress Theme