seyed mehdi seyyedzadeh sani; mohammad tahan toroqi
Abstract
US opposition to the Court culminated in the prosecution of Afghanistan situation. Many US soldiers were prosecuted by the ICC prosecutor, and the US therefore placed additional pressure on the Court. The pressure went so far that the Pre-Trial chamber did not consider continuing the prosecution of international ...
Read More
US opposition to the Court culminated in the prosecution of Afghanistan situation. Many US soldiers were prosecuted by the ICC prosecutor, and the US therefore placed additional pressure on the Court. The pressure went so far that the Pre-Trial chamber did not consider continuing the prosecution of international crimes in Afghanistan in the interests of justice and ordered the investigation to be suspended. The ICC Prosecutor appealed against this issue. On 5 March 2020, the Appeals chamber of the ICC decided unanimously to authorize the Prosecutor to commence an investigation into crimes committed in Afghanistan. The present study, with a descriptive-analytical method, will first make a brief reference to the course of US actions against the ICC; Then, by reviewing and analyzing the verdict issued by the Preliminary chamber of the Court regarding the case of Afghanistan, the issue of whether the actions of the United State had an impact on the performance of the Court or not; Finally, the latest developments in Afghanistan situation will be reviewed in the ICC, and in particular in the Appeals chamber. eventually, according to recent rulings, the Court is currently in a high position in the confrontation between the Court and the United States, and the investigation into the alleged crimes has been authorized by US officials and forces, but this legal battle is still ongoing. Its fate is uncertain; Because, assuming that the investigation is completed by the prosecutor, the presence of US officials in the trial process is a matter of serious doubt, and on the other hand, a trial in absentia is not conceivable, and this will be another major challenge in this confrontation.
mohsen mohebi; Vahid Bazzar
Abstract
In accordance with article 94(2) of the charter of United Nations, If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide ...
Read More
In accordance with article 94(2) of the charter of United Nations, If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it under a judgment rendered by the Court, the other party may have recourse to the Security Council, which may, if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment. The Council has the full authority in response to the request of the beneficiary of judgment. However, if it accepts the request, it should not review The Court's judgment in merit. Also, the Council is not required to take into account threats to peace, violations of peace or aggression (article 39) for action according to article 94(2), and has the full authority in the type of recommendations it propose or measures it adopt. Permanent members of the Council shall not have any prohibition to veto. However, there are disagreements about whether a member of the Council that is a party to the dispute and the judgment of the Court can participate in voting in the Security Council. In practice, although the issue of the implementation of the judgment of the Court in the Council has been raised four times, no significant efforts have been made by the United Nations political organ in the implementation of judgments of the UN's judicial organ. The Council's passive approach to ensuring the implementation of the Court's judgment, which is undoubtedly one of the most important ways to resolve peaceful dispute settlement in interstate relations, is contrary to the Council's primary function, the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and it is required for Council to use the capacities of Article 94(2) of the Charter to implement appropriately its primary duty.
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.
enayatollah yazdani; zahra aghamohammadi; ehsan fallahi
Abstract
In the post-bipolar period, the nature of international conflicts has changed and peacekeeping missions increased in Critical parts of the world such as Africa. Sudan crisis can be nominated as the greatest humanitarian catastrophe in the world that has provoked the reaction of countries and the United ...
Read More
In the post-bipolar period, the nature of international conflicts has changed and peacekeeping missions increased in Critical parts of the world such as Africa. Sudan crisis can be nominated as the greatest humanitarian catastrophe in the world that has provoked the reaction of countries and the United Nations. The UN Security Council through prescription of multiple resolutions play vital role as the main operator of keeping the international peace and security. Current article evaluates peacekeeping missions in Africa and seeks to answer why the Security Council’s peacekeeping missions have not been successful in South Sudan, Darfur and Abyei? Failure to follow the effective components in peacekeeping operations caused to fizzle the UN in these missions. The mentioned elements include consent and goodwill of the two parties, impartiality, collaboration and participation of key foreign players, sense of security for the parties involved, transparency in the functions and powers of the mission, timely and rapid deployment of peacekeeping operations, domestic and international coordination and cooperation, competent leadership of the peacekeeping mission, and considering the causes and reasons of war.
