Iran's UN representative Ali Mousavi told the International Maritime Organisation this week that vessels belonging to or linked to 'aggressor parties' forfeit the right of innocent passage through the strait of Hormuz.1 PressTV, Iran's official state broadcaster, confirmed the statement as Iran's official legal position. Permitted countries under the vetting system are India, China, Russia, Iraq, and Pakistan.
The IMO statement is the formal legal scaffolding for the parliamentary toll bill being drafted simultaneously. Iran is constructing a two-layer legal architecture: domestic statute (the Majlis bill) combined with formal international notification (the IMO submission) that pre-empts claims that Iran is acting without legal notice. The IMO notification mirrors Egypt's communication to the Suez Canal Users Association in 1956 after nationalisation.
Trump had claimed Iran offered Hormuz concessions, and Pakistan confirmed the 15-point US proposal. The IMO statement directly contradicts the framing that Iran is moving toward reopening the strait: Iran is doing the opposite, establishing formal legal grounds for continued selective passage that would survive any ceasefire under the pending domestic legislation. Pentagon planning for a Kharg Island assault continues; the IMO statement is Iran's legal counter-move to that planning, establishing that any forcible passage would constitute a violation of Iran's defined legal framework rather than merely a military confrontation.
