ebrahim beigzadeh

Children are very vulnerable in asylum procedures. This vulnerable situation requires the inclusion of effective rights for them in asylum procedures. For this purpose, the right to participate can strengthen the legal position of these children and transform them from passive objects to active agents and rights holders. However, the question that arises is, what are the sences of the child’s rights to participate and how should the right of participation be applied so that it can fulfill the rights of the child? It seems that the rights of the child in asylum procedures are fully satisfied only when the child has the right to participate correctly; in this regard, legal documents related to the child’s right to participate in asylum procedure are analyzed; After that, and since the child has not yet reached maturity to be able to use the right to participate in all asylum procedures, the relationship between this right and the principle of the his/her best interests is examined. Finally, it is clear that the right to participate only acts in the direction of fulfilling the rights of the child when all its elements are correctly applied, and if this happens, the child's right to participate will work in the direction of the best interests.

Cyber aggression is one of the crimes that has been discussed in the international legal regime due to the late progress of technology. This qualitative research was conducted in terms of purpose, practical and in terms of gathering information in a documentary way and through laws, international documents, the obtained information was analyzed in a descriptive-analytical form in order to answer this question: if the Jurisdiction of confirmation the cyber aggression by the Security Council is not exclusive, what is the function and influence of the United Nations Security Council on the development of jurisdiction of other authorities such as the International Criminal Court? The findings of the research show that Article 8 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court does not include the actions of private individuals, only if a cyber attack can be considered as an aggression if it is an "armed attack". Law 12 of the Tallinn guidelines is also clear in this regard. The competence of the Security Council in the matter of verifying cyber aggression has precedence and priority, this precedence does not constitute exclusive jurisdiction. The jurisdictional regime of the court in recognizing the crime of aggression in the case of government referrals and appropriate investigations can be applied only after approval or acceptance by each of two aggressor and the alleged victim member state. The Security Council can refer a situation to the International Criminal Court or suspend the prosecution and investigation of the Court temporarily, extendable and obliged for one years.

International crimes in the human fields have the nature of violating the international standards of human rights and humanitarian rights which the international community is unanimous about them. This violation by ignoring the international standards in the cyberspace will cause a threat to international cyber peace and security. The threat created in the mentioned areas with cyber war crime and cyber crime against humanity will be imaginable. This article, with an analytical-descriptive approach, aims to state that according to Article 7 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, in case of violation of humanitarian rights, crimes against humanity can be committed in cyber space. Also, according to Article 8 of the aforementioned reference statute, in case of violation of human rights, a war crime will appear in the cyber environment of countries and in the international arena. Finally, considering the existence of individual criminal responsibility inferred from Article 23 of the Statute of the Court, as well as the necessity of impunity for crimes committed in the international law system, it will be possible and possible to deal with crimes committed without any immunity in the International Criminal Court.

On July 17, 2018, two decades after the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court activated its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. This crime was defined in 2010 by the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute (ASP) as a material element of state conduct. "crime of aggression" in a position to effectively control or direct the political or military actions of a State and is in flagrant violation of the Charter of Nations It is considered united. The purpose of this research is to examine the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice in dealing with the crime of aggression, with an emphasis on cyber aggression.

This research was analyzed in descriptive-analytical .

Cyber aggression means aggression that has been committed by computer-centered networks. In order to attribute cyber attacks to the government, it is necessary to consider the criterion of effective control. What is meant by effective control is that the government in question has exercised authority to form cyber aggression. The International Criminal Court has two jurisdictional regimes regarding the crime of cyber aggression. The first case is initiated by government referrals or due investigations by the prosecutor, and the second case is initiated by the Security Council referrals. another result of the research shows that the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in dealing with cyber aggression is superior to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

The issue of referring the crimes of non-governmental groups to the International Criminal Court is a new and innovative issue and its dimensions have not been considered by the doctrine so far. In this article, with the aim of assessing the feasibility of referring the crimes of non-governmental groups to the International Criminal Court, relying on the crimes of the ISIL group, answer what is the jurisdiction of the court in referring the crimes of non-governmental groups to the International Criminal Court? In conclusion, it can be stated that ISIL's actions are based on existing international evidence, such as the Statute of the Court, as well as criminal law, a perfect example, and crimes against humanity and war crimes. According to the provisions of the Statute of the Court, it seems that this Court has a total of five methods of exercising jurisdiction over crimes: 1) Referral from the Security Council to the Court; 2) committing a violation in the relevant government domain; 3) acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Court by countries that are not members of the Court in the case of specific crimes; 4) Accepting the membership of new countries in the International Criminal Court; 5) The commission of a crime by the nationals of the Member States while they themselves are non-member States.

Various expressions are used in international law for reflecting different types and levels of normativity, such as rules, guidelines, statements, codes of conduct, standards, etc. Although some of them have clear meaning and obligatory scope the others such as “standards” are vague and uncertain. Standards are set by states and non-state actors but in both cases they create some kind of commitment. Some standards are reflected in obligatory international law structures especially in regard to environmental protection. This paper will illustrate the status of international standards and especially private standards, their normativity power and the capacity of standard setters in international law sphere. In this paper, analytical method and social phenomenology have been used. To conclude, the result of assessments shows that private standards practically have binding powers to some extent.

The judicial policy of the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the Court) towards human rights has often oscillated between judicial activism and judicial restraint. The cause of the ICJ’s oscillation is mainly rooted in the structure of international law, which is in the stage of transition from sovereignty (raison d’Etat) to international community (raison d’humanité). The question raised is that in which range of legal issues the Court has often displayed a judicial activism or judicial restraint vis-à-vis human rights. This article will endeavour to respond to this question from a critical perspective. In doing so, we will first examine a range of legal issues such as diplomatic protection and international humanitarian law in which the Court has often displayed a judicial activism. We will then analyze a range of legal issues such as jurisdictional immunities of states as well as the Court’s jurisdiction where it has often displayed a judicial restraint.

Paying attention to friendly relations and the necessity of resolving disputes in a way that prohibits governments from interfering in the affairs of other countries is an inevitable issue. Peace and cyber security with the development of cyber activity is an essential principle that is violated by resorting to cyber force. The principle of prohibiting the use of force is used to determine the breach or non-breach of Article (4)2 of the United Nations Charter and its prohibition in customary international law. Legal intervention by the Security Council of the International Community in contrast to the use of force by a hostile side in order to establish international peace and security can be done by referring the matter to the International Criminal Court. Breach of international peace and cyber security by committing cybercrimes can be recognized as a “crime of invasion” in the form of a “moral perpetration” (agent) if they reach the appropriate action. In accordance with the rule 13 of Tallinn 1’s Manual in 2013, as well as paragraph 6 of Article 69 of in the Manual of Tallinn 2 in 2017, the beginning for the crime of invasion should be considered as an “armed conflict” based on the effect, domain and severity of cybercrime, which has the nature of a breach of international lawand prohibition of use of force, and criminal liability will be extended to informed non-governmental activists in addition to the hostile person.

Referral by a State Party is one of the methods set forth in Article 13 of the Statute of the ICC. The State Party may refer the situation to a prosecutor who has appeared to have committed one or more crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court. It should be noted, however, that the initiation of the investigation by the relevant government is a high priority, and therefore the drafters of the Divine Statute sought to prevent the perpetrators of international crimes from being included. The referral of the situation by the State party to the Court Prosecutor is of great merit and will undoubtedly contribute to the efficiency of the Court.The main focus of this research is on state referrals and not other methods of referral. In order to have a comprehensive analysis of government referrals, it is inevitable to examine the formal and substantive issues associated with it. For this purpose, basic issues such as referral, referrer, referral rituals, reference works, and finally the possibility of returning the referenced status will be studied.This research will analyze state's referral of status in the Divine Statute in the light of its practical application. The Court's main approach and priority is to prosecute international crimes by national courts. The foreseeable principle of supplementary jurisdiction in the Divisional Statute implies the validity of such a priority. State statistics on cases referred to the Court indicate that this method is favorable to other methods of referral in the Statute.

The outbreak of coronavirus is an international crisis which is unprecedented in the contemporary world. For the first time, this lethal disease was reported in china in the beginning of December 2019 and spread gradually all over the world. In the current situation, the efficiency of international law in protecting the lives of human beings as well as promoting the right to health is criticized by scholars. Importantly, in the view of the UN high commissioner for Human Rights (Michelle Bachelet), coronavirus is a criterion for testing international community in terms of guarantying Human security. The present article will analyze the reaction of international law to this crisis in three aspects: firstly, the role of WHO in reaction to this widespread disease will be analyzed. Secondly, the international responsibility of States to ensure the right to health will be surveyed. Thirdly, derogations during a state of emergency arising from the outbreak of coronavirus will be examined. In each of the afore-mentioned questions, our analysis will be focused on the efficiency of Westphalia structure of international law for coping with international crisis as well as protecting Human security. Keywords: Corona, Efficiency of international law, WHO, Responsibility of States, Emergency Situation

International Court of Justice can judge an Contentious Claim in his Chamber and with fewer Judges of those of the Court at the Request of the Parties of Dispute. According to Statute and Rules of International Court of Justice, it is possible to Create three types of Chambers in ICJ that Distinctions are Visible between their Functions in spite of Items of Numerous Likeness. so far, this Chambers have Welcomed from Referring States to ICJ. After Explicating and Describing of types of Chamber of ICJ, Relation and Distinction of those with the ICJ and Consideration of Advantages such as Acceleration of Proceedings, Reduction in Costs, Wide Discretion of the Parties of Dispute in relation with the Composition of the Chamber, and Challenges such as Creation of Fragmentation, Activity of non-member Judges of ICJ in Chamber, the Negative Impact of Work Pressure on the Judges that are Simultaneous member of Chamber and ICJ, this Article is to Responses this question whether Resorting of parties of Dispute to Chamber of ICJ have Advantages over Resorting to ICJ for them.

Securing comprehensive compliance to regulations is one of the purposes that all governments are seeking. For this reason, all legislative, executive and judicial systems make all their efforts to achieve this objective. Therefore, each of them will fulfill a part of this task. Some part of this process refers to the basic issues of the existence or absence of a rule that means whether it is derived from social realities as well as the public needs. Also, whether it conforms to the basic values of the society. But adopting an appropriate approach or policies is considered as another prerequisite to ensure comprehensive compliance. When the necessity of a rule is compromised, the second issue which will be raised is the crystalization. Thus, it is common to violate environmental provisions which are so expensive. Some of these problems rooted in the kind of rules which are enacted. Althogh social desirability of Environmental rules as well as their supports from the society, human life and the environment made them (these rules) to be more important, which approaches can be more fruitful to achieve the objective is the major issue to be addressed in the paper. Firms attempt to violate environmental regulations in various ways in order to reduce their costs. By doing so, they can make they own benefits. This will result in social expenses; then different legislative approaches are aimed to reduce such types of costs. The main objective of this paper is to explain these approaches as well as investigate whether traditional approach of "command and control" can establish a sustainable status for comprehensive compliance or not. In summary, “incentive based” approach should be proposed as a complementary role of traditional approach for the regulatory efficiency legislation or, in other words, the enactment of more efficient laws and regulations.

The concept of Humanity is one of the most controversial concepts in the contemporary international law legal literature. Every legal school of thoughts and legal approaches present a different version of the concept and its statues in international law, according to their pre-approved premises. Natural law school along with positivists and normativist are imposing their own stablished readings on this concept, but on the other hand, critical theorist of international law (CIL) have exposed their theoretical deficiencies and flaws. The core of this discourse has been focused on the potentials of the concept of humanity on diverging the trends of evolution in international law, although in a positivistic view, there is not that much controversy. This study will evaluate the concept of humanity based on the diverse criteria of aforementioned schools of thoughts, in order to depict and analyze the diversity of different version of the concept of Humanity in legal theories.

International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first permanent body established in pursuance of implementing criminal justice and fight against impunity and was assigned with the critical function of prosecution and conviction of perpetrators of the most heinous international crimes. Having been enforced in 2002, the Rome Statute is the constitutional document of the Court which was drafted and adopted with the goal of ensuring effectiveness and efficiency of this primary international body. Provisions related to jurisdiction of the Court are among the most important parts of the Statute and were the subject of many controversial issues during the negotiations of the Rome conference, after the establishment of the Court, and even now. One such issue is the preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction the Court and the existence of jurisdictional gaps in the Statute in the confrontation with the international crimes covered in that document. This article tries to, first, appropriately elaborate on the preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction formulated in Article 12 of the Statute, second, to explain the arguments for and against expanding the mentioned preconditions, and finally, to submit an argumentative assessment of different views concerning whether such expansion is possible.

]ICSID’s legitimacy relies to a significant extent on an adequate functioning of its internal control mechanisms. Annulment is the most important of such mechanisms. Further, legitimacy is particularly relevant in investment arbitration, where public interest is by definition involved. Annulment under the ICSID Convention must be distinguished from an appeal remedy. It only proceeds under one of the annulment grounds provided for in Article 52. Yet, the annulment grounds, which are not concerned only with procedural aspects, must be given full effect. Ad hoc committees must engage with the annulment grounds before them, unless they are frivolous.
On the other hand, States continue to consider the creation of appeals facilities, as the recent mega-regional treaties show. With an adequate design, an appeal mechanism would constitute an improvement with respect to the current award review mechanisms. In the meantime, ad hoc committees should be allowed to exercise their judgment in applying the annulment grounds, bearing in mind the limited but important function of the annulment remedy. Appellate Body, we argue in this article that an ICSID appellate system would enhance the legitimacy of investment arbitration, and institute fairness and balance among the various players in investment disputes.

There are different approaches towards the concept of humanity in the ambit of current doctrine of international law; diversity of ideas in these approaches leads to different evaluations of statues and function of the concept of humanity in international law. Meanwhile, International Court of Justice (ICJ) makes a major contribution to clarify hidden and vague features of the concept through analyzing cases by applying legal dogmatic method. To this end, this survey concentrates on ICJ approach toward humanity with furnishing the discussion on content analysis of Corfu Channel case and Legality of Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapon case to acquire positivistic manifestation. Finally, we will indulge on ICJ’s contribution regarding the concept of humanity and its manifestations in international law, as a survey in the sources of law to equality as an international value. All efforts in this study are centered on legal potentials of the concept of humanity in international law that ICJ has strived to clarify while encountering different sets of facts.

Pursuant to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon’s Rules of Evidence and Procedure, on 21 January 2011 Pre-Trial Judge has submitted to the Appeals Chamber some questions of law that require resolution before he can determine whether to confirm the indictment currently before him.
One of the most important questions was about definition of international terrorism. In other word, taking into account the fact that the Statute refers exclusively to the relevant provisions of the Lebanese Criminal Code in order to define the notion of terrorist acts, should the Tribunal also take into account the relevant applicable international law? The Appeals Chamber argued that the narrow interpretation of the “means” element under Lebanese jurisprudence should be interpreted in accordance with the definition of terrorism under international law.
As a first international Tribunal with jurisdiction ratione materiae over the crime of terrorism, STL believes that a customary rule of international law regarding the international crime of terrorism has indeed emerged. This customary rule requires the following three key elements: (i) the perpetration of a criminal act (such as murder, kidnapping, hostage-taking, arson, and so on), or threatening such an act; (ii) the intent to spread fear among the population (which would generally entail the creation of public danger) or directly or indirectly coerce a national or international authority to take some action, or to refrain from taking it; (iii) when the act involves a transnational element.