BRUSSELS: Protests against the Iranian government were held in Brussels on Wednesday ahead of a meeting between European powers and Iran on the nuclear deal.
The meeting on Thursday with Iran foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif comes on the eve of a deadline for the US president to decide whether to reimpose oil sanctions lifted under the agreement.
Iran, Britain, France, and Germany are expected to reaffirm their support for the deal that Donald Trump has rejected, EU diplomats told Reuters.
The deal aimed to curb Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons in return for an end to some sanctions placed upon it.
Donald Trump has sworn to tear up the deal in a tougher stance against Iran than his predecessor. He also strongly supported recent anti-government protests held across Iran that were sparked by economic hardship and corruption but spiralled into calls for the downfall of the clerical leadership.
Members of the Iranian community in Belgium, supporters of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran and the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) protested in Brussels against Mr.Zarif’s visit.
The protest was held outside the European Commission and European Council buildings, where the meetings will take place.
The protesters called on the European Union to cancel the meeting and for the EU to support the ongoing protests and regime change in Iran and condemn the killings of demonstrators.
During the meeting convened by the EU’s top diplomat Federica Mogherini, the European powers that helped negotiate the 2015 accord will reassure Tehran they remain committed to it, the diplomats said.
They will also urge Iran to continue to comply with international inspectors.
“The aim is to send a message to Washington that Iran is complying and that it is better to have the nuclear agreement than to isolate Tehran,” one diplomat said.
A spokesman for Iran’s atomic energy agency said on Wednesday that a reimposition of sanctions by the United States would be a violation of the nuclear deal and added that the Islamic Republic had the capacity to greatly increase its enrichment of uranium.
In October Trump decided not to certify that Tehran is meeting the terms of the pact.
The US president must decide by mid-January whether to continue waiving US sanctions on Iran’s oil exports under the terms of the deal. The State Department said on Tuesday the Trump administration was expected to decide on Friday.
Protests in Brussels ahead of Iran nuclear meeting
Protests in Brussels ahead of Iran nuclear meeting
London police using withdrawn powers to clamp down on pro-Palestine rallies: Probe
- ‘Cumulative disruption’ cited to ban, reroute rallies but power granted by concept withdrawn by Court of Appeal in May
- Network for Police Monitoring: This demonstrates ‘ongoing crackdown on protest’ that has reached ‘alarming point’
LONDON: London’s Metropolitan Police have used powers that have been withdrawn to clamp down on pro-Palestine rallies in the capital, legal experts have said.
The Guardian and Liberty Investigates obtained evidence that police officers had imposed restrictions on at least two protests based on the principle of “cumulative disruption.” But that power was withdrawn by the Court of Appeal in May, according to legal experts.
All references to cumulative disruption have been removed from relevant legislation, yet the Home Office and the Met continue to insist that police officers retain the power to consider the concept when suppressing protests.
On May 7, five days after the powers were withdrawn, the Met banned a Jewish pro-Palestine group from holding its weekly rally in north London, citing the cumulative impact on the neighborhood’s Jewish community.
Last month, the Met forced the Palestine Coalition to change the route of its rally on three days’ notice, highlighting the cumulative impact on businesses during Black Friday weekend.
Raj Chada, a partner at Hodge, Jones & Allen and a leading criminal lawyer, said: “There is no reference to cumulative disruption in the original (legislation). The regulations that introduced this concept were quashed in May 2025, so I fail to see how this can still be the approach taken by police. There is no legal basis for this whatsoever.”
The Met appeared “not to care” if it was acting within the law, the Network for Police Monitoring said, adding that the revelation surrounding “cumulative disruption” demonstrated an “ongoing crackdown on protest” that had reached an “alarming point” by police in London.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced plans in October to reintroduce the power to consider cumulative impact in toughened form.
But Nick Glynn, a retired senior officer from Leicestershire Police, said: “The police have too many protest powers already and they definitely don’t need any more. If they are provided with them, they not only use them (but) as in this case, they stretch them.
“They go beyond what was intended. The right to protest is sacrosanct and more stifling of protest makes democracy worth less.”
Cumulative disruption was regularly considered and employed in regulations if protests met the threshold of causing “serious disruption to the life of the community.”
The Court of Appeal withdrew the power following a legal challenge by human rights group Liberty.
Ben Jamal, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’s director, was reportedly told by Alison Heydari, the Met’s deputy assistant commissioner, that her decision on imposing protest regulations “will be purely around the cumulative effect of your protests.”
She reportedly added that “this is not just about Saturday’s protest but it’s a combination of all the impacts of all the processions so far,” referencing “serious disruption” to the business community.
“You’ve used this route in November 2024, and you’ve used it a few times before then as well. So, there is an impact.”
The repeated disruption to PSC-hosted marches, the largest pro-Palestine events in London, was a “demobilizer,” Jamal said.
It also caused confusion about march starting points and led to protesters being harassed by police officers who accused them of violating protest conditions, he added.
A Met spokesperson told The Guardian: “The outcome of the judicial review does not prevent senior officers from considering the cumulative impact of protest on the life of communities.
“To determine the extent of disruption that may result from a particular protest, it is, of course, important to consider the circumstances in which that protest is to be held, including any existing disruption an affected community is already experiencing.
“We recognise the importance of the right to protest. We also recognise our responsibility to use our powers to ensure that protest does not result in serious disorder or serious disruption. We use those powers lawfully and will continue to do so.”
