Mohamad Setayeshpur; Saeed Mokhtari
Abstract
رأی دادگاه بینالمللی ویژه لبنان که طی توافق کشور با شورای امنیت سازمان ملل متحد تأسیس شده است پس از انجام 15 سال دادرسی در 18 آگوست 2020 اعلام شد و بر اساس آن یک نفر از چهار ...
Read More
رأی دادگاه بینالمللی ویژه لبنان که طی توافق کشور با شورای امنیت سازمان ملل متحد تأسیس شده است پس از انجام 15 سال دادرسی در 18 آگوست 2020 اعلام شد و بر اساس آن یک نفر از چهار متهم پرونده یعنی آقای سلیم جمیل عیاش محکوم شناخته شده و متعاقباً با رأی 11 دسامبر 2020 علیه وی مجازات تعیین گردید و سه نفر دیگر از متهمین از اتهامات وارده تبرئه شدند. در جستار حاضر به تأثیر فضای سیاسی لبنان و بازیگران منطقهای در متن رأی و لوایح دادستانی اشاره شده و رأی مجازات آقای عیاش از منظر اصول حقوق بینالمللی کیفری تحلیل شده است و این نتیجه حاصل گردیده که با وجود فشار جو سیاسی برای ارتباط دادن پرونده ترور به حزبالله لبنان و دولت سوریه چه در تأسیس دادگاه ویژه و تعیین صلاحیتهای آن و چه در روند دادرسیها، این دادگاه نتوانست به شواهد محکم و مستدلی در این خصوص دست یابد و متهم مرتکبِ این واقعه را تحت عنوان مسئولیت کیفری فردی محکوم دانسته و علیه وی مجازات تعیین کرده است.
Gholam Ali Ghasemi; Mohamad Setayeshpur
Abstract
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Islamic Republic of Iran’s(IRI) missile operation against military base of United States of America (USA) called, Ain al-Assad, following the US drone strike and martyrdom of Genaral Haj Qasem Soleimani and some of other islam defendants, has raised various ...
Read More
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Islamic Republic of Iran’s(IRI) missile operation against military base of United States of America (USA) called, Ain al-Assad, following the US drone strike and martyrdom of Genaral Haj Qasem Soleimani and some of other islam defendants, has raised various opinions considering the legitimacy of the action in question. Countermeasure, self-defence and consent are three circumstances that have been raised in legal teachings and doctrines regarding the said issue. Pursuant to customary international law and article 20 of International law commission’s draft articles on international responsibility of states for international wrongful act (ARSIWA 2001), Iraq’s consent authorizes that the islamic republic of iran’s operation in iraq’s territory, does not violate territorial integrity of Iraq and does not consider as intervention in its internal affairs. Countermeasures can not affect state obligation not to use of force and demand of Islamic community of IRI for hard revenge, does not mean that the missile action is a reprisal, as in some doctrines has been said. Regarding the seriality of US internationally wrongful acts in this regard and the evidences that show the commitment of more similar wrongs, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s action is the legitimate self-defence as the inherent right has been explicited in article 51 of the UN charter. This should not be regarded as pre-emptive (anticipatory) or preventive defence but as a chain of infringements by the US makes that the IRI act would be considered self-defence which is legitimate and legal in international law.
Mohamad Setayeshpur; Mostafa Fazaeli
Abstract
Succession of states to international responsibility has been considered as one of the most controversial issues in international law, must be scrutinized regardless of the way the related succession has been occurred. Being controversial, united nations international law commission (ILC), as the scientific ...
Read More
Succession of states to international responsibility has been considered as one of the most controversial issues in international law, must be scrutinized regardless of the way the related succession has been occurred. Being controversial, united nations international law commission (ILC), as the scientific institution of codification and progressive development of international law, has also repeatedly refused to deal with the issue in question. While United States of America and Great Britain Arbitral Commission (US-Britain Arbitral Commission) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), as two legal bodies for the peaceful settlement of international disputes, via their decisions and the arguments advanced, clarified the above mentioned conception, which re-affirms the role of international tribunals in the progressive development of international law, beside their main function, i.e. the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Scutinizing the decisions of these two international legal tribunals, clearly, indicates the conceptual evolution of the succession of states in respect of international responsibility. None-succession of state to international responsibility, which explicity was considered as a principle in two arbitral awards of US-Britain arbitral commission, has gone down in the ICJ, gradually. The present paper, through the comparative study of the decisions of these two international legal tribunals, addresses the conceptual evolution of the state succession to international responsibility and its scope as the international legal conception.
gholamali ghasemi; mohamad setayeshpur
Abstract
Abstract
Piracy has damaged Islamic Republic of Iran in a few past decades. The United Nations Security Council as the main entity to maintain international peace and security, several times (including the issuance of two resolutions in November 2016) has reiterated and emphasized on the need for confronting ...
Read More
Abstract
Piracy has damaged Islamic Republic of Iran in a few past decades. The United Nations Security Council as the main entity to maintain international peace and security, several times (including the issuance of two resolutions in November 2016) has reiterated and emphasized on the need for confronting modern piracy. Although being in the framework of recommendation, the resolutions issued by the UNSC contains momentous points including identification of modern piracy as a threat to international peace and security, the need for international cooperation and manifestation of cooperative law, the need for contact group, applying all necessary means and measures and the need to indication of various provision. scrutinizing elements of the evolution in the crime of piracy and current mechanisms of contemporary international law and specifically Iran in light of means has been recommended in Security Council resolutions, it would be said applying current capacities, specially universal jurisdiction is more appropriate than waiting for establishing a special court. Although the council stipulates the establishment of a special court, the works and phrases of this entity, especially in comparing to its previous works indicates a lack of serious determination of it. It should be noted that strengthening Somalia government in exercising authority over sovereignty is the essential way to prevent the said piracy. Implementing these works by regional institutions, including the African union would be more effective.
