Iran Parliament Moves to Codify Hormuz Claim as IRGC Warns Vessels

Iran is moving to convert its diplomatic position on the Strait of Hormuz into binding domestic law. Alaeddin Salimi, a member of the presiding board of Iran’s parliament, announced Saturday that the body is set to vote on a bill formalizing Iranian sovereign management of the strait, according to Middle East Monitor. The announcement came in the same window as a fresh operational warning from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that commercial and military vessels transiting the strait must follow Iranian procedures, and hours after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters the American blockade of Hormuz remains in place.

The three statements, issued within roughly three hours of one another, mark a sharp hardening of Iran’s posture as the Trump administration moves toward a final determination on the proposed framework deal with Tehran.

The parliament bill

Salimi’s announcement, carried by Iranian state-aligned outlets and reported by Middle East Monitor at 16:02 GMT, said the management bill would establish a domestic legal framework asserting Iranian authority over transit through the strait. Salimi did not release the bill’s full text and did not give a precise vote date, but his confirmation that the measure is on the parliamentary docket is itself a signal: Tehran is preparing to defend its Hormuz claim not only through diplomacy and IRGC posture, but through statute.

Codification matters because it changes the negotiation surface. A framework concession granted by Iran’s executive branch can be reversed by the same branch. A management law passed by parliament becomes a constraint Tehran can point to in talks — and a domestic obligation any future Iranian government would have to repeal before changing course.

The IRGC operational warning

At 15:54 GMT, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Construction Headquarters — the IRGC engineering arm with deep ties to Iran’s maritime infrastructure and naval operations — issued a warning that all commercial and military vessels using the Strait of Hormuz must comply with Iranian transit procedures, Middle East Eye reported.

The Khatam al-Anbiya warning lands in the same operational register as previous IRGC statements during past tanker incidents, when the Guard has used compliance language to justify boardings, seizures, and forced course changes. Coming alongside the parliament bill announcement, it functions as a notice to shipping operators and foreign navies that Iran intends to enforce a transit regime regardless of the diplomatic state of play.

Iranian negotiator pushback

The third statement came at 16:51 GMT from Saeed Ajorlou, a member of the media committee of Iran’s negotiating team. Ajorlou said Tehran has not yet approved the final draft of the proposed US deal and warned that Iran could withdraw from the agreement if Washington violates its terms, according to Middle East Monitor.

Ajorlou’s framing — that the deal is not finalized and is conditional on US compliance — aligns with the parliament’s move. If Tehran’s legal architecture treats Hormuz management as a matter of Iranian domestic law, then any US action read in Iran as interference with that management becomes, by Tehran’s reading, a treaty violation that triggers withdrawal rights.

The US position

Hegseth, speaking to reporters earlier Saturday, said the US blockade of the Strait of Hormuz remains in place and warned that Washington will resume military action if diplomacy fails, Middle East Monitor reported. The Pentagon chief’s remark followed his Shangri-La Dialogue address, where he framed Iran as “more than capable” of disrupting the region and tied the administration’s $1.5 trillion defense posture to the cycle, as americastrikes.com reported earlier today.

The blockade-in-place statement is the operational counterweight to Iran’s codification push. Tehran is asserting domestic legal authority over the strait; Washington is asserting a present military posture inside it. Those two positions cannot both be enforced simultaneously without a confrontation, and the next several days will test which side blinks first — or whether the framework deal absorbs the contradiction.

The Gulf-state angle

The Gulf states are positioning around the gap. Qatar opened the door Saturday to temporary transit charges through the Strait of Hormuz but rejected any permanent fee structure, Middle East Eye reported at 15:43 GMT. Doha’s position is narrower than Tehran’s: a charge for transit is one thing; sovereign legal management of the waterway is another. If the parliament bill passes in its expected form, Qatar and other littoral states will face pressure to either acquiesce to an Iranian-administered regime or back the US posture.

From leaked position to codified position

Saturday’s events trace an arc that has played out in a single news day. The morning began with Tasnim’s leak indicating that the proposed framework would leave Hormuz under Iranian authority — a diplomatic position attributed to negotiating sources. By the afternoon, that position has moved into three concrete tracks: a parliamentary bill, an IRGC operational warning, and a negotiator’s explicit reservation of withdrawal rights. In parallel, the US Navy’s mariner advisory warning of a mine threat in the strait remains active, contradicting the framework’s implied stability assumption.

The compression matters. What was a leaked talking point at sunrise is, by evening Tehran time, a multi-pillar position spanning Iran’s legislature, military, and negotiating team.

What to watch

Three near-term markers will indicate where this is heading. First, the text of the parliament bill — whether it defines management narrowly (transit fees, inspection procedures) or broadly (sovereign legal authority over the waterway). Second, the vote timing; a fast vote would signal Tehran wants the bill on the books before any final US determination. Third, the administration’s response — whether Hegseth’s blockade-in-place language hardens into rules of engagement changes for the Fifth Fleet, or whether the framework process absorbs the codification and moves to signature.

The Trump final determination, the trigger that began this week’s escalation cycle, remains pending.