جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « حقوق بین الملل بشردوستانه » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

International law has generally been unable to precisely regulate the rules of cyber operations thus far. This is due to the complexity of cyberspace, the nature of the technology, and the need to adapt existing laws to technological developments. Many previous international rules, such as those related to armed attacks, war, or human rights, do not directly apply to cyber operations. Instead, some general principles and concepts may apply cyber operations. Therefore, there are no precise rules regarding cyber operations, and many existing international concepts and rules may not be readily applicable to cyber operations. This is a significant challenge in the field of international law, which has led to the need to develop new rules and standards for this domain as technology progresses and cyber operations continue to grow. One of these concepts is the conduct of cyber operations and cyber-attacks by one state against another under the principle of legitimate self-defense. This research, while identifying cyber-attacks, examined the question of whether, from the perspective of international law, cyber-attacks against a country in a state of acute self-defense, where the very existence of the state is at risk, are permissible or prohibited. The research conducted is descriptive-analytical, the author hypothesized that states may use this type of attack in self-defense due to the specific characteristics of cyber operations, including high and irreparable destructive power.

Human rights are known as one of the pillars of the international legal system. Compliance with this right has a direct impact on the status of other rights in the international scene. The issue of respecting human rights is the concern of many people in the world. Today, the right to have a healthy environment is considered one of the human rights, because without a healthy environment, there is no possibility of survival, and without a healthy environment, the issue of international peace and security will suffer fundamental crises, but today we see that many countries with Environmental violations pose a problem to the planet. The formation of environmental crises is not confined within borders and can quickly affect other countries, for this reason, environmental crisis cannot be seen only in the domain of sovereigns, and the creation of a crisis by an offender can be seen as Violation of human rights is considered collective, also in the situation of war and conflict, international humanitarian law has paid attention to the issue of the environment and its preservation, in a situation where many requirements are subjected to harsh military conditions, these rights require some lines Red is like protecting the environment, for this reason, the question arises as to how the environmental issues and attention to them are in human rights and international humanitarian law. Accordingly, in this research, environmental crises and their place in human rights and International humanitarian law has been studied with a descriptive and analytical method. The results show that paying attention to basic and fundamental human rights emphasizes the need to protect the environment, but due to the violations of the governments and the lack of strong executive guarantees, this is not achieved.

In the legal arrangements after the UN Charter, the United Nations Security Council has been considered as the only legal authority that is allowed to resort to sanctions or coercive measures, despite the fact that the performance of this Council has been political and unfair in many cases, based on the seventh chapter of the Charter, the sanctions imposed by Article 41 aimed of maintaining international peace and security, they are considered collective and coercive in nature and are binding on all member states. The opposite of collective sanctions of the UN is unilateral sanctions by which, one government tries to force another government to change its policies. In response to the main question that what is the legal position and legitimacy of unilateral sanctions of the United States, this article, which was carried out with a descriptive analytical method, takes into account the hypothesis that the unilateral sanctions of the United States violates universal human rights, international humanitarian law, and the principles and objectives stated in the charter, the principle of equality of governments, the principle of non-interference, food security, the right to health and education, the right to development, the right to life and other fundamental human rights of a sanctioned country.

Zionist settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories which have been maintained since the establishment of the fake Zionist regime are considered as one of the main aspects of gross violations of international criminal law. In this study, by invoking the Four Geneva Conventions(1949) and their additional protocols(1977), the provisions of statutes of International Criminal Court and international case law , the authors seek to determine what are the concrete cases of violations of international criminal law resulting from the Zionist settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The result is that by crimes including the destruction of Palestinian houses and their prohibition from access to their natural recourses , severe deprivation of social and individual rights and the transfer of the civilian Zionist population into the occupied Palestinian territories , the Zionist Regime has committed war crimes under the article 8 of the statute of International Criminal Court. However, in exercising its jurisdiction ,International Criminal Court faces important challenges such as territorial jurisdiction, limiting the Court to exercise its jurisdiction following the 13 June 2014 and how to implement inspection

Drones, like other military tools and equipment, are subject to the rules of international humanitarian law. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the legitimacy or illegality of the use of these aircrafts within the framework of the rules of international humanitarian law and the regulations of armed conflict. In this regard, the principle of separation, the principle of proportionality, and the principle of precaution and their applicability to drones will be examined. A look at the rules of international law, especially humanitarian law, shows that the use of drones is not inherently prohibited in general, and that these aircrafts themselves do not violate the principles and rules of humanitarian law. Because drones are considered as war tools and equipment, not weapons, the provisions governing arms control do not apply to them and they are not considered as prohibited weapons. But as tools and equipment of war and in order to realize the methods of conflict, they must be able to comply with the principles and rules of international humanitarian law, especially the principle of separation. It is not possible to make a general judgment as to whether drones are generally capable of complying with these rules and the do's and don'ts of the law of armed conflict, and whether any use of them complies with these rules. Rather, it is based on the purpose for which the aircraft is operated, with what capabilities and functions, and in what circumstances and under what control methods.

From the use of drones in reconnaissance and surveillance missions to their use as missile carriers in military operations; There have been different views on their use and application, and some have sought to justify its use or criticize its use. The present study is devoted to examining the positions of the parties on the use or non-use of UAVs for human rights reasons and seeks to express the fact that the use of UAVs for human rights reasons is justifiable and possible . This article will show that UAVs have not only violated human rights, but in some cases have supported and protected human rights, and this shows that the UAV is not just a cruise missile, but a tool that can To serve the purposes of war against human rights or to protect human rights.

Zionist settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories which have been maintained since the establishment of the fake Zionist regime are considered one of the main aspects of gross violations of international criminal law. In this study, through invoking the Four Geneva Conventions(1949) and their additional protocols(1977), the provisions of statutes of International Criminal Court and international case law , the authors seek to determine what are the concrete cases of violations of international criminal law resulting from the Zionist settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories. The result is that by crimes including the destruction of Palestinian houses and their prohibition from access to their natural recourses , severe deprivation of social and individual rights and the transfer of the civilian Zionist population into the occupied Palestinian territories , the Zionist Regime has committed war crimes under the article 8 of the statute of International Criminal Court. However, in exercising its jurisdiction ,International Criminal Court faces important challenges such as territorial jurisdiction, limiting the Court to exercise its jurisdiction following the 13 June 2014 and how to implement inspection.

Making of drones and their development in recent decades have brought about legal challenges regarding their transboundary uses, particularly for military purposes. Following the events of September 11, 2001, drones have been used as a mean for targeted killing of suspects during operations called “war on terrorism” and such usage is still continuing. Today, drones are even used outside of battlefields and armed conflict zones. This transformation in using drones, is a major threat to application of the principle of prevention of use of force and also respect for rules of human rights and International humanitarian laws. Based on accepted principles and rules of international law, the uses of drones, in peace or war times, are subject to rules and limitations. The main purpose of this article is analysing rules of international law governing the uses of drones, particularly for military purposes. Results of this study reveals that lack of consensus among states and absence of a comprehensive and binding international convention are among the main obstacles in regulating the use of drones. Accordingly, it is necessary to resolve these obstacles through the United Nations (UN) decisions and actions.

Technology development, internet and computer communications and commerce with traversing around has opened a new era of human activities and this undermine the legitimacy of laws is based on geographical boundaries. The new frontier of cyberspace and the real world phenomena have created a great threat in terms of the lack of full implementation of the law is necessary. Using states of the insecure cyber-ground for many of other states to vandalism, sabotage, assassinations, espionage and other crimes have been paved. Action legislation in some countries, depending on the progress in the technology world, the international community also let to think that this mess in cyberspace, though little action in order to soften the space to do this. Published books in recent years have had a dramatic impact on the world’s attention to this issue. The article seeks to answer the key question of what cyber warfare and cyber whether the country can generate destructive acts of aggression and crimes under international government is force, and consequently international responsibility. Find the answers to these questions should be sought in international documents such as the UN Charter, the convention on the law of war and humanitarian law, as well as international on cyber warfare Tallinn regarding cyber war.
Although latter guidelines, in terms of criminalization and offer some solution to some extent is a copy of the Convention of humanitarian right, but it is to a large extent comprehensive, but its guided nature is a major obstacle to its entry into force. However, examining it as a matter of international law appliance, the only international source of cyber warfare, does not seem unpleasant.

Development of military Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) has led the governments possessing these kinds of technology to go beyond the geographic and legal boundaries such that the employment of those instruments has brought International Humanitarian Law (IHL) procedural and substantive challenges; as the former governs the method of using of those tools and the latter governs the procedure of controlling the UAVs. Obviously, the emergence of procedural and substantive challenges from the development of military UAVs demands the necessity of re-reading of traditional regulations and passing new laws in the field. Although, the current principles and regulations considerably cover various dimensions of modern technologies, including the employment of drones, both in present and future, using advanced technologies might possibly provide grounds for governments to misuse the existing gaps as the regulations of IHL are unable to fully provide a clear answer in handling all of those difficulties. In this regards, it is essential to take crucial steps in developing and drawing new frameworks for using and controlling modern military technologies including military UAVs.

Throughout history human life has changed and improved. Along with this developments and changes the way of the war has also changed. Cyber war is one of the most important transformations. By modifying the type of battles، weapons also have changed. With the development of virtual space، governments have set their eyes on cyberspace. State and non-state actors in cyberspace are working together but with no clear identity. In this context، computer attacks are increasing، however، there are no regulations to investigate cybercrimes. Attacks are increasing in cyberspace and they influence not only political conflicts but also impact negatively on the economy of civilians. As these attacks are capable of hitting civilians، so the application of international humanitarian law is mandatoryin this area.

The increasing growth of private military and security firms and their presence and activities in armed conflicts scene has led to many problems especially in regard to the status of these firms and their personnel and the humanitarian laws and their responsibilities in case of breach of humanitarian laws and regulations. For determining the status of these firms and their personnel, one has to identify each case on its own and take into consideration the criteria of humanitarian international law. Whether they are considered as military personnel or the fall in the category of civilians? In regard the subject of responsibility, in case these firms breach the humanitarian rules, they will be responsible for their performances. But it also should be taken into consideration that besides these firms, the countries that are related to them and the personnel are their citizens and make use of their services and the country which these firms are active and working in their territories will also be responsible in regard to their operations.

The main goal of protecting the environment in the Islamic sources and documents humanitarian avoid damaging natural elements. The Environment is God's gift that benefits and the preservation of its effects on human life and promote human dignity, growing to be. Islamic law and international human rights instruments related to environmental rules aimed at the common good of humanity, especially consider and express the right of the environment has obligations and responsibilities, the environment. Therefore, any action that is inconsistent with the common interests of humanity must be prosecuted. Origins of human rights, human dignity issue. Holy Quran verse 70 of Sura Asra Board “va Laqhad Karramna Bani Adam” focuses on the creation of mankind glorify God. One of the main tasks of human lives, except that it's important to live in a safe environment, not possible. The importance of environmental conservation for human society and the increasing risks due to armed conflict and the advancement of technology, it puts at risk the natural elements, the idea of environmental protection in the international community that the activities of international law, the Many international conventions and multiple sources of data.In a word, it can be concluded that the major sources of Islamic and humanitarian instruments special emphasis on the protection of the environment and the people of the destruction of the environment armed conflicts are discouraged.

The Libya Crisis and issuance of United Nation’s Security Council Resolution 1973 which authorized the military intervention in this country and also authorizing the NATO military intervention in Libya using the motto and purpose of protection of Libyan citizens against Gaddafi Regime, caused significant changes and evolutions in the International Law and in the concept of humanitarian intervention as well as responsibility to protect. In fact, the bond between crime against citizens and the subject of international peace and security, as is obvious in the United Nation’s Security Council Resolution 1973, caused the concept of humanitarian intervention to cover changing the regime in a country and in this regard, not only International Community showed no significant opposition but also somehow protected this matter. However, humanitarian intervention in Libya has different dimensions that studying of them in this article causes a better clarification of the concept of “Humanitarian Intervention” and changes in the International Law.

Recent developments and popular uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa and the approach taken by international community to support or not to support civilians against irresponsible and violent behavior of their rulers have led to renewed attention to humanitarian intervention according to doctrine of “responsibility to protect.” The question is why, in view of similarities between developments in Libya and other regional countries like Bahrain, Yemen, and Syria, the international community is only protecting civilians in Libya and no such approach is seen toward other countries?Analysts believe the doctrine of responsibility to protect is the main ground for international community’s intervention in Libya. This doctrine has been applied in past years to prevent repetition of deadly conflicts and violation of basic human rights as those which took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Congo, Kosovo, Rwanda, Sudan, and Uganda. At least parts of the international community have recognized this doctrine to constitute a norm of international law. The present paper briefly discusses this doctrine in the light of recent regional and international trends and concludes that the doctrine of "Responsibility to Protect" is gradually rising as a concept of customary international law.

The expansion of recruitment and presence of Private military and security companies as emerging private factors in armed conflicts and crimes committed by these individuals have given rise to increasing concern about the challenges arising from this. What will be the necessity, is to establish responsibility of states connected to violator Private military and security companies based on the draft plan the responsibility of states and other rules of international law and explanation and transparent-building of the states’ international obligations, especially protecting and ensuring humanitarian international law during the time of carrying out operations and providing other forms of military and security services by Private military and security companies in order to further limitation of breaches and violation the rules of humanitarian international law