Document Type : Original Article
Author
Visiting professor of University of Tehran (Farabi College)
Abstract
In recent years, unilateral act of States has expanded for a variety of reasons. In parallel with this development, international case law and doctrine have increasingly become confronted with the conceptual and practical challenges of these acts. One of these challenges is the base of State’s commitment to their unilateral acts. In this context, the question arises that unlike the bilateral or multilateral acts, which are crystallized in the form of international treaties and in which the commitment of each state is based on the commitment of the other party, in the absence of either party, on what basis is the obligation arising from unilateral act made and with what justification is it recognized as binding. This paper, while examining all the theories presented to response the above questions, shed light on disagreement between the ICJ and the ILC, has tried to adapt these theories to the existing case law and state practices. The findings of this paper confirm that among these multiple theories, the theory of the will of the state is the most defensible theory due to the transcendental position of the state in the structure of international law.
Keywords
)
Send comment about this article