فهرست مطالب shahriar kazemi azar

Nowadays, in line with the increasing economic power of commercial companies, including multinational and transnational companies, and their commercial acts¢ impacts on human rights, states can no longer be considered the only human rights violators. Therefore, the United Nations Human Rights Council approved a document in 2011 in order to clarify the relationship between "human rights" and "commercial activities" and make commercial companies more accountable. It is called "Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights". The aforementioned principles, in the form of three main parts, while creating an obligation for states to protect human rights and basic freedoms, also make companies responsible for observing the principles of human rights. Also, in cases of human rights violations, it has made it possible for the victim to file a lawsuit and claim damages. Based on this, due to the "soft law" nature of the guiding principles, the Human Rights Council has requested that states try to develop a binding document for commercial companies to comply with human rights obligations in the form of hard law. The Council has also asked the states to strengthen domestic legal systems by presenting a "National Action Plan" and enacting new regulations. A review of state practice since the adoption of the Guiding Principles, particularly the creation of a working group in order to draft a binding document in 2014, shows growing acceptance. Despite this fact, Iran's legal order, adhering to the main documents in the field of human rights, does not have specific and clear rules in the fields of business and human rights. Although it is possible to infer a harmonized approach based on the guiding principles from the perspective of existence laws, it is necessary to provide the grounds for presenting the national action plan and establishing new regulations by clarifying the guiding principles.

The outbreak of COVID-19 has led to shortages of essential medical supplies and equipment, creating significant barriers to the global supply chain. A number of countries have imposed trade restrictions in response to internal challenges posed by COVID-19, including threats to the health of their citizens. Since June 2020, China turned its eyes on trade measures to battle the spread of COVID-19 in its country. Extensive testing of containers and the content of imported food and agricultural products leading to complete import bans of specific products; including poultry products from Tyson Foods Inc., were among these trade restrictions. These measures have been met by harsh criticisms from other World Trade Organization (WTO) members who questioned their legality under the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). The purpose of this article is to examine the legitimacy of the trade restrictions imposed by China in response to COVID-19 pandemic, namely the suspension of imports on Tyson Foods Inc. (Tyson) under the SPS Agreement framework. The SPS Agreement State Parties may, through the implementation of legitimate sanitary and phytosanitary measures, prevent the import of harmful goods that threaten the health of their citizens. Since WTO aims to liberalize trade, the implementation of any trade restrictions is subject to the terms and conditions ignoring which would lead to the international responsibility of the member state.

One of the salient and at the same time problematic features of current normative debates about new and emerging technologies is the lack of clear and reliable data on the characteristics of many expected applications of technology. Despite the tremendous benefits and potential applications of new technologies such as nanotechnology and biotechnology, existing scientific studies have proven that products derived from these technologies, such as transgenic or nanoscale products can have harmful effects on consumers' health and the environment. This necessitates the need to provide standards and pay attention to the safety of these products by supervising organizations. Therefore, the question that arises is, "in case of losses and harm resulting from the use of these products, what are the consequences for the responsible organizations and how can the civil liability of these organizations be analyzed. In the current paper, considering the probable dangers of these products to the safety and health of the consumers, the civil liability of supervising organizations to balance the risks and benefits of these emerging technologies is examined from a jurisprudential perspective based on two principles of Tasbib (causality) and Ghorur (deception). Accordingly, in addition to the pathology principle of Tasbib, through providing a specific mechanism based on the principle of Ghorur, we can figure out the responsibility of organizations supervising the safety of products.

One of the main challenges of innovators in the process of developing nanotechnology is how to turn this technology into products and services that bring positive economic returns to founders and investors. Another important problem in this process is not invention, but its commercialization. Hence, the choice of the commercialization strategy is at the heart of the innovation and commercialization process, pointing to the direction in which the organization intends to profit from an innovation and product from it. Despite recent advances in the field of nanotechnology, Iran has faced barriers to patenting and subsequent commercialization of nanoscale products. Clearly, identifying the factors influencing this choice will have a huge contribution to the commercialization of nanotechnology. In this paper, the author, based on the risk model of commercialization of nanotechnology, has proposed a model based on the support of start-up companies through financing these companies, helping them to research and develop market and sell commercial products and government support for venture capital investment. However, the lack of development of product space, lack of sufficient investment, lack of interaction between relevant organizations and the lack of specific legal rules has become a challenge in benefiting from the commercial benefits of nanotechnology in Iran.