مقالات رزومه دکتر محمد ستایش پور

The European Court of Human Rights, which is also referred to as the Strasbourg Court, as a court that has international jurisdiction in the field of human rights on a regional scale, has repeatedly faced the issue of "Hijab" in its rulings. The approach of that court is that governments have the right to limit the hijab in public institutions, especially schools. The following article tries to criticize the performance of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the restriction of the hijab in public institutions from the perspective of the international human rights system. Ragham's hypothesis is that the European Court of Human Rights, influenced by the supremacy of state hegemony, by issuing a ruling to restrict the hijab, not only did not guarantee human rights, but violated them. In order to verify its hypothesis, the upcoming research has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method based on the collection of information in a library form. The following article has proven that this action of the European Court of Human Rights violates the principle of freedom that the first generation of human rights goes back to. By adopting this approach, the aforesaid court violated the principle of religious freedom which is accepted in the International Bill of Rights and also has a customary dress, and also violated Article 9 of the European Charter of Human Rights, which according to a mission For which the court is drawn, it is considered a violation of the purpose.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon, as an international court that is considered among the third generation of international criminal courts and has the authority to issue judgments in absentia, in 2020 in the case of Salim Jamil Ayash and others, has issued a sentence of conviction and punishment. In the following article, the analysis of the performance of the Lebanese special court in issuing a sentence of conviction and sentence of punishment has been discussed. hypothesis in the following lines is that the said court did not follow the legal rules as it should be for an international court. In order to verify the proposed hypothesis, the present research has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method and with regard to collecting mostly qualitative information in a library method. The following article, through the analysis of the court's performance in the abovementioned case, has validated its hypothesis and shown that the special Tribunal for Lebanon acted weakly and without providing legal and reasonable arguments, with a superficial look at the events and not rules and with a selective approach, it has issued a sentence for conviction and similarly, it has acted very narrowly in issuing a sentence for punishment. This has never happened before in other decisions of international criminal courts. Criticism of this court procedure is the topic of the upcoming article.

The International Court of Justice, in the case of Certain Iranian Assets, by considering the scope of international obligations of the United States, including and in partcular the head of Article 3 of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights, has confirmed that the fundamental dispute between the parties is about the recognition of the legal status of foreign companies. The present essay by applying a descriptive-analytical method and through observing the precedents of the international judicial and arbitration tribunals and the Draft Articles of the International Law Commission on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, has proven that the actions of the United States Section 201(a) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Law and Section 601(g)(1) of the Foreign Government Immunities Act in particular and their enforcement by their national courts are according to the customary internatonal law attributable to the United States and consequently this country has violated its treaty obligations. Thus, both elements required to establish the existence of an internationally wrongful act have been met and accordingly the responsibility of the United States has been . The Court, in line with the request of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has ordered compensation in favour of Iran as a result of such responsibility.

Background and theoretical foundations of the research:

 Geographical conditions, especially the conditions related to coastal geography, are very important in determining the boundaries of the maritime borders at a distance of 200 miles from the coastlines of the parties. Geographical conditions, especially those related to the natural rise of the flanking landmasses, are important in determining the maritime boundaries on the outer continental shelf for more than 200 miles. The most salient geographical circumstance relating to the delimitation of the maritime boundary at 200 miles is the fact that Bangladesh lies within a distinct depression at the northeastern extremity of the Bay of Bengal. The Bay of Bengal and much of its coastline contain a second and even deeper depression within the general depression formed by its coastline as a whole. Due to its concave coastline, Bangladesh is heavily influenced by the equilateral lines claimed by Myanmar and India from their respective land border terminals with Bangladesh, which cut well within 200 miles of Bangladesh's coast, denying its access to the EEZ. It cuts off 200 miles. The present article describes the geographical, geological and geomorphological conditions related to the demarcation of the maritime border between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal and has reviewed it in a library method by examining conventions and judicial procedures. In the following, it deals with the proposals and methods for delimiting the maritime boundaries that have been presented by the International Court of Law of the Sea.

Our method in compiling and compiling this research is a descriptive analytical study and by using books, documents, articles and legal documents related to the investigation of the delimitation of the maritime border between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal. It has been investigated and studied and what can be used and reflected in this field, it is taken and then it is analyzed and finally it is presented.

If Myanmar does not have the right to an external continental shelf according to Article 76 of the 1982 Convention, then Myanmar's existing claims regarding the bilateral area claimed by Bangladesh and the trilateral area claimed by Bangladesh and India are also invalid. Because both regions are more than 200 miles from the coast of each of these three states. Since Bangladesh, in contrast, can demonstrate a legal and scientific basis for a natural extension of its coast, it should be entitled to an outer continental shelf under the Convention. Any boundary between that shelf and Myanmar shall not be further from the coast of Myanmar than the legal shelf of 200 miles provided for in Article 76. Therefore there is no overlapping plateau beyond 200 miles from Myanmar, and therefore Bangladesh is entitled to its own claimed outer continental shelf adjacent to Myanmar's 200 mile range.

It should be noted that there is a small wedge-shaped area immediately beyond the EEZ of Bangladesh, located 200 miles from the Myanmar mainland. So, in theory, there is a small area of the Bangladeshi continental shelf covered by waters that Myanmar claims as its EEZ. This is not a one-time event. It occurs wherever two conditions are present: (a) a maritime delimitation line which is not an exact equidistant line reaches a point 200 miles from the nearer of the two coasts and consequently the limits of the exclusive economic zone attributable to that coast) and (b) there is an underlying physical continental shelf beyond that point

Maintaining international peace and security is considered to be the mission or at least one of the primary missions of the United Nations. As such, the rules and principles of the United Nations, as reflected in the UN Charter, are directly and indirectly tied to international peace and security. This contribution will study the role of the International Court of Justice in fulfilling this mission. After examining the conceptual evolution of international peace and security, the paper will examine the capacity and performance of the ICJ, as a court with international jurisdiction on a global scale and a pillar of the United Nations. As the main judicial organ of the United Nations, the ICJ plays an important role in maintaining international peace and security by way of its judgements and advisory opinions. It will be argued that due to the ICJ’s effect on the development of international law, the court plays an indirect but crucial role in maintaining international peace and security. It will also be argued that the court can play an even more active role in maintaining international peace and security through so-called normative supplementary jurisdiction.

Citizenship is considered as one of the legal issues that affects various legal and even extra-legal and extra-legal categories. Learning the citizenship of a child through the mother is one of the challenging issues raised in legal circles. The following article seeks an analytical answer to the question, what is the approach of Islamic Arab countries regarding the acquisition of citizenship of a child through the mother? Rakhman's hypothesis for the next few lines is that Arab Muslim countries are more inclined towards recognizing the citizenship of a child through the mother. In order to verify its hypothesis, the following article has used the descriptive-analytical method and has shown that in Arab Muslim countries, some of them believe in non-recognition, some believe in absolute recognition, and others believe in Conditional recognition of the citizenship education of the child through the mother. The present article has reached the conclusion that the course of the legislative process of Arab Muslim countries regarding the acquisition of citizenship of a child through the mother shows that the legislation in this area has moved towards more tolerance and this means that gradually The direction of moving away from the classical approach of absolute non-recognition of the child's acquisition of citizenship through the mother has moved. In fact, from the absolute lack of identification (thesis) and from the approach of absolute identification (antithesis), it is moving towards conditional identification as a synthesis.

following the seizure of the oil tanker of the Islamic Republic of Iran by Greece, which took place on the orders of the US Department of Justice, international responsibility is realized. The two elements of attribution and breach of obligation, which are elements of creating international responsibility, are evident in relation to the actions of two states. On the other hand, the retaliatory action of the Islamic Republic of Iran can be justified according to the provisions of the international law of the seas and also based on the assumption of the claims made by the Greek government in the context of the retaliatory action. The consequences of the international wrongful act carried out by Greece and the U.S.A. should also be stopped and compensation for the damages should be paid in full to Iran.

The present research was carried out using a descriptive-analytical method.

In the case of the seizure of the oil tanker known as Lana, which used to operate under the name of Pegas and was carrying an oil cargo belonging to Iran, the Greek government illegally seized the ship while it docked in the coastal waters of Greece and then transferred its cargo to the American ship at the request of the US Department of Justice. The international wrongful act is considers as a breach of international obligation of Greece and the United States of America which causes the international responsibility of both states.

Independence in responsibility is considered as requisite by reason and justice; hence, it has been identified by many legal systems under different titles. Of course, its existence in the legal systems, does not mean the sameness of its extension in all of them. Independence in responsibility implies that each person is responsible for the action he has committed. In the absence of international criminal responsibility for the states, independent international legal responsibility is based on its own requirements. The study investigates independent responsibility by “vizr rule” in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and independent responsibility in the International Law Commission of the United Nations, as a scientific body for the gradual development of international law that it makes the teachings and ideas of Islamic law play a far greater role in the development of international law. This way, not only would it contribute to the enrichment of international law and make the international legal system more efficient, it would also help the spread of Islamic countries profits, specially, Iran.

Drones, also referred to as UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles), are considered the achievement of technological progress. Technological progress and, as a result, the quantitative and equipment expansion of drones has led to an increase in the use of these artificial birds in the two arenas of international peace and armed conflict; Because new technologies are not always positive, but in addition to violating privacy, they may be harmful. The upcoming research is trying to answer the question, what is the approach of international law of human rights and international humanitarian law regarding using drones as a new technology? The current research hypothesises that the principles and rules of international law of human rights and international humanitarian law apply to drones. The present study has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method based on collecting information using a library method to verify its hypothesis. The current analytical research has proved that drones with informational functions have violated human rights, including the breach of privacy and the violation of personal security. In armed conflict, all principles of international humanitarian law apply to drones, including discrimination, proportionality, caution, necessity and prohibition of suffering.

The extradition of criminals requires cooperation between the two governments requesting extradition and the sender. It should be noted that the topic of extradition of criminals can be examined from different legal aspects. In the legal literature, it is mostly focused on the aspect of criminal law and international criminal law and international criminal law. However, since this issue implies an obligation for governments (countries), it can also be examined from the point of view of international (non-criminal) liability law. In the meantime, attention and consideration of the rights of the person to be extradited is also something that should be taken into consideration by the requesting and sending governments; A matter that has not been paid attention to as it should and perhaps in international law. The following article tries to comment on the realization of the joint international responsibility of governments in the field of extradition of criminals.   

The present research is analytical-descriptive in terms of its nature and method, and the collection of information was done through document review and data collection.

If during the process of extradition, damages and injuries, which are sometimes irreparable, are caused to the extradited person, it implies the international responsibility of both the sending and requesting countries. The situation of extradition of criminals can imply the simultaneous responsibility of more than one country. This means that every country has international responsibility for the wrongful act it has committed in this regard. According to the 2001 collection of articles of the United Nations International Law Commission in the field of international responsibility of states for international wrongful acts, this can be joint responsibility.

Yemen ' s maritime blockade began with the presence of Saudi Arabia led coalition naval forces in 2 0 1 5 in the waters of Yemen and continues to these days . The prohibition of arriving the humanitarian aid, the lack of medicines and medical facilities , the lack of fuel, the severe starvation , the spread of illnesses , including cholera, and finally the destruction of thousands of Yemeni civilians as a consequence of this naval blockade , need to investigate the legality or illegality of the blockade under international law . The present topic has sought by descriptive-analytical method and with regard to collecting mainly qualitative research information by library method and in the form of using documents, books, authoritative articles and related websites. The legal studies state that armed conflict between the Yemeni government or the coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia with the Ansarallah Movement People's Committees and parts of the Yemeni army is non-international armed conflict and so, the blockade is illegal. In addition to the blockade breaches the international humanitarian law, such as the San Remo instruction and the Second Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1949.

Following the request from the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission (SRFC) for an advisory opinion, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) addressed its advisory jurisdiction. This paper aims to examine this aspect of the ITLOS Advisory Opinion of 2 April 2015. The research method is  descriptive – analytical and the information has been collected through library sources. The paper will explain that with a functionalist approach and an evolutionary interpretation of Article 21 of the ITLOS Statute and Article 138 of the Rules of the Tribunal, ITLOS established that the full Tribunal has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the SRFC and this authority is not merely for the Seabed Disputes Chamber. This advisory opinion paves the way for other bodies to obtain an advisory opinion from the Tribunal as regards the international law of the sea. It can rightly be considered a new way for the Tribunal and lead to the development the law of the sea.

Breastfeeding is not explicitly recognized as either the right of the child or as the right of the mother in all legally binding documents. Feminist views have also been another challenge over the past decades. As a feminist, for example, Van Strylek has claimed that breastfeeding empowers women and contributes to gender equality in various ways. First, it confirms a woman's ability to control her body and choose how to use it; second, breastfeeding challenges the prevailing theory of breasts as primary sexual goals and the development of a gender perspective toward women. Breastfeeding is a right because it is a natural biological process that occurs after childbirth and is a maternal right.

Targeting and assassinating individuals is one of the actions that deprives people of the right to life and has caused much criticism in the international community, This action is contrary to the commitment to respect and guarantee fundamental human rights, including the right to life. As well as the basic rules of humanitarian law, it is known that the right to life and the prohibition of its deprivation are accepted in Islam and international human rights instruments, such criminal acts in the assassination of an official and government official of the Islamic Republic of Iran have been a complete and obvious example of state terrorism, organized terrorism and a clear violation of human rights and international law contrary to the UN Charter and other documents of internationally accepted principles and rules. The pretext for the assassination of Martyr Fakhrizadeh is premeditated murder, which is not in line with the principles of human rights and humanitarian law, it has enunciated in Art.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Art.6 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. it is an international rule that was violated in the assassination of Dr. Fakhrizadeh. Since the assassination of Martyr Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, as a military and nuclear figure, has become one of the most important international legal issues in the world and the region. Accordingly, the present article seeks to examine the issue of targeted assassination from the perspective of international human rights, especially the rule of the right to life andPersonal security.

Judicial independence is one of the fundamental issues of public law, because public trust in the government, the fulfillment of the rule of law and fair trial in every society is largely dependent on the degree of judicial independence. Through the study of judicial independence in Islam and international law, the writers of the present article are intended to take a look at the aforementioned proposition in the Islamic legal system and international law, and also the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a system that is based on teachings of Islam will be addressed as much as possible. The hypothesis of this research is that Islam has richer teachings in the field of judicial independence and there is a more comprehensive view in it. The research method is descriptive-analytical, and the sources have been collected by using a library method through note taking. After studying the afore-mentioned topic, the authors of the present lines, have proved the hypothesis and indicated that Islam contains richer teachings, that it is necessary for Islamic countries to play more roles in the gradual development of international law by relying on Islamic teachings.

Nuclear-weapon states are under obligation to cooperate with non-nuclear-weapon states to transfer peaceful nuclear technology and have equal access to this technology for all states parties to NPT. The present paper has sought to deal with international collective responsibility of nuclear weapon states for omission and has scrutinized ILC articles in respect of responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts 2001 (ARSIWA) and NPT. It has sought to have a comprehensive study on the issue by addressing the primary and secondary obligations. The library method was used in this research for collecting data through reviewing documents, books, papers, and sites related to the topic. Scrutinizing ILC articles 2001 as scientific entity for codification and progressive development of international law and NPT, the present paper has found that nuclear-weapon states has a few obligations such as the obligation regarding the transfer of peaceful nuclear technology. The paper has concluded that nuclear-weapon states have breached the obligation collectively which has been extended in time, although the obligations of non-nuclear-weapon states are more. The commission of internationally wrongful act of nuclear weapon states has not been limited to NPT obligations and some of them, such as the U.S., have continued this action regarding other obligations such as the obligations enunciated in JCPOA. Breach of the obligation in question may lead to the termination or suspension of the operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach. Collective and continuous character of the internationally wrongful act affects the content of international responsibility, causes its cessation and non-repetition, and makes the responsible state to restitute and reparate the material and moral damages.

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.

Since most types of violations in international liability law are caused by continuous violations, and addressing this issue in terms of the inherent characteristics of this type of violation has very important consequences in the field of international liability law. Considering the important mission of the International Law Commission in the formulation and development of customary norms, the present research is based on the valuable studies of the commission, looking for the concept of continuous violation and matching it with the opinions of other thinkers in this field.

The research method in this research is descriptive-analytical, which was done by studying books, authoritative articles and reviewing some international documents.

Considering the continuity in violation of international obligations as reflected in the collection of articles of 2001, it can be known that, contrary to the opposite view, regardless of the time element regarding the existence of a continuous violation made a decision, in this division, a decision can only be made by considering the time factor in relation to the existence of a violation. The agency of time plays a role in this method in two ways. The first method is the time period that is considered outside of the time period of committing the violation; the continuation of the violation begins when this time period has passed and the second method is the time period that is considered with the time period of committing the act. Violation is one; the continuation of the violation begins with the commission of the violation.

AbstractSome countries of West Asia and North Africa, sometimes, through concluding an agreement with the Zionist regime, have publicly tried to establish normal relations with this regime. The following lines examine the normalization of relations with the Zionist regime from the perspective of international law. The research method is descriptive-analytical and the sources have been collected by the library method. This article has argued through the analysis of international legal propositions that considering the fact that these countries are members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, any action they take to normalize relations with the Zionist regime is contrary to the mission of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and in addition to the responsibility of those countries, it includes the responsibility of the mentioned international organization. The following article has presented a proposal with a functionalist perspective, and that is that in a situation where the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has not been able to achieve its goals, including the rights of the Palestinians, the International Conference of Islamic Unity is a suitable platform for the development and realization of international rights. It has provided customary international law among Islamic countries.

Violations of the human rights of the Shia community in Bahrain, which makes up the majority of Bahrain’s population, have been systematic and widespread for many years. These violations have been committed not only by the Al Khalifa regime as the government of Bahrain, but also by the Saudi regime as a neighbor of Bahrain. Investigating human rights violations of the Shia in Bahrain is very important from the perspective of the law of state responsibility as the basic rights of the Shia including the right to life and personal security and the right to citizenship, have been violated. Indeed, since heartbreaking and tragic acts have been committed in Bahrain, mechanisms under international law are necessary to hold the Bahraini and Saudi regimes accountable. The present paper will scrutinize the law of state responsibility in terms of establishing the international responsibility of the said states. It will be argued that the international responsibility of one state, does not preclude the international responsibility of another one. Each one could be held responsible for its internationally wrongful act and in case of overlapping, joint responsibility will occur.

One of the important issues is respecting the rights of women and mothers. One of these rights is the right to maternity leave for working mothers, which has been assigned limited laws and regulations in the international human rights system. The following lines have decided to study the right to maternity leave for mothers with a comparative study. The results of the research show that although the international community, governments and human rights institutions always emphasize women's rights and call them effective regardless of any discrimination for women, this type of right, whether as a child's right And as mother's right, as it should be, it does not have binding power in the international human rights system. This is despite the fact that the religion of Islam has addressed various dimensions of the mother's right, and in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in accordance with Islam, the right to maternity leave has been addressed for mothers.

One of the most important principles and criteria of a fair trial is the right to a hearing by an independent and impartial court, which leads to the vindication of rights and the provision of citizens' rights. This principle is considered a general principle of rights, which most international and regional human rights documents pay great attention to. Independence and impartiality are important principles in proceedings. These two terms overlap a lot. However, these two expressions do not have the same meaning. The right to trial in an independent and impartial court is one of the most important rights of the citizens of the society, which is provided in the domestic laws and international documents, which ensures a fair trial. Independence in international proceedings means that the court and proceedings are not influenced by external factors and pressures such as governments, international organizations and powerful people. This concept in the internal system originates from Montesquieu's theory of separation of powers, and it means that the executive branch does not influence the judicial branch. In other words, independence is an external factor, but impartiality is considered an internal factor, which means that the judge does not favor one of the parties during the proceedings. Basically, one of the factors that ensure impartiality is independence. In proceedings and proceedings, the principle is on the impartiality and independence of the judges and members of the court, which guarantees a just and fair trial.

The use of chemical weapons has a special place among the crimes of Saddam Hussein's regime due to the extensive damage it caused to the victims. The relentless and repeated use of chemical weapons by the Baath regime in the 1980s is an international crime that will never be wiped out from the memory of history. There are still many chemical victims who are struggling with death as a result of the crimes committed by the Baath regime. In this regard, we should never neglect the actions of governments and individuals who have played a role in the chemical weapons of the Baath regime. In addition, it should not be forgotten that there is a close relationship between the aggressive act of the Baath regime in the military attack to The Islamic Republic of Iran and the use of chemical weapons by this regime. In fact, the lack of proper reaction of the Security Council to the Baath regime's military aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran has played an undeniable role in persuading other individuals and governments to chemically equip this regime and incite it to use such deadly weapons. According to international conventions and customs, there is no doubt about the prohibition of the use of chemical weapons in the 1980s.For this purpose, either it must be proven that the private company was trying to exercise government authority or it must be proven that the company has acted under the control and by the order of the relevant. In addition to these cases, the commitment of governments to guarantee human rights rules makes governments responsible for the actions of private companies.

The principle of judicial independence is mainly defined in such a way that the judiciary and judges declare their votes freely and independently from outside influence and influences and issue judgments based on the law and reality; Observance of the principle of independence of judges in international documents and the Constitution of Iran in the judicial system is specified by the judicial system as a Citizens' complaint authority against violations that threaten their rights. The independence of the judiciary is the main condition for the correct performance of the duties of the judges and not deviating from the method of fair proceedings. The basic condition for achieving judicial independence is the independence of the judiciary from other government institutions, observing the principle of separation of powers. Now, we will explain the concept of independence, the individual independence of judges and the structural independence of the judiciary, and examine the status of independence in international documents and the legal system of Iran. In this article, according to the nature of the subject, with analytical-descriptive method, an attempt has been made to examine the status of this principle in Iran's legal system by looking at international documents and Islamic religion, and to the questions in this regard, including what is the concept of independence, Jurisprudence, foundations and scope of this principle should be answered.