Court justifies Maryam Rajavi’s exclusion from the UK on grounds foreign policy

Supreme Court of United Kingdom – In one of the most controversial case, the Court upheld the exclusion of Maryam Rajavi, a dissident Iranian politician having close links with  Mujahedin e-Khalq   which was justified on the grounds of foreign policy  including concerns about the welfare of British personnel and interests overseas. The Court also held that Home Secretary’s decision for exclusion was proportionate to any limited interference with either her own or the relevant Parliamentarians’ human rights or right to freedom of expression.

Appeals were filed by  Lord Carlile of Berriew, along with two other members of the House of Lords alleging the violation of their human rights and right to freedom of expression expressly provided in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights as they were not given permission by the Home Secretary to allow Mrs Rajavi to give lecture in United Kingdom.It was argued by the petitioner side that as she was now residing in Paris and no other European country has debarred her from visiting , it was unjust and unreasonable not allow her in United Kingdom.  Maryam Rajavi is known to have close relations with Mujahedin e-Khalq, which was formerly a proscribed terrorist organisation but has now been declared a non-violent organization. In 1997, the Home Secretary excluded Mrs Rajavi from the UK on the ground that her presence “would not be conducive to the public good for reasons of foreign policy and in light of the need to take a firm stance against terrorism”.

The Court rejected these arguments citing restraining effect on foreign policy if they allowed her in UK. Moreover, the Court also said that it was the domain of executive to decide on these matters and the Constitution also mandates the executive to have certain and limited interference with the rights provided in Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. R v. Secretary of State,. 2014 UKSC 60 , Decided on 12/11/2014

One comment

  • Um, Article 10 of the “British Constitution”…? You lost me there. The fact that there is no one document called the “British Constitution” is the first thing anyone knows about the UK’s constitutional arrangements, and your ignorance of that translates into a total loss of credibility for this blog.

    Perhaps you meant Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 + ten =