جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « مسئولیت بین المللی » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of humanity. Human activities, notably fossil-fuel combustion, release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus exacerbating climate change. The adverse effects of climate change are already affecting the world, and they may continue to have potentially harmful ramifications at the global level. Despite existing obligations, the efforts made by the world states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have proven ineffective, leading to continued increases in emissions. In this light, the approach to legal obligations of states to mitigate environmental risks associated with the greenhouse gas emission must offer fresh perspectives on environmental harm while fostering the search for sustainable, ethical, and equitable alternatives. Following international treaties, international conventions addressing environmental concerns should enforce punitive measures against environmentally detrimental actions, often perpetrated under the government’s supervision or tacit approval, including those carried out by the private sector. Some governmental actions and the ensuing greenhouse gas emissions result in environmental pollution and global warming, ultimately leading to the total destruction of the Earth’s environment. It is thus necessary to devise an approach towards the obligations of states to control environmental risks associated with greenhouse gas emissions, which could hold the states accountable for any environmentally harmful measure. In this respect, the present study aimed to address the following research questions: What are the obligations of states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in combating global climate change? And to what extent these obligations are legally binding? The study is based on the hypothesis that states, in combating climate change, are indeed burdened with specific obligations to decrease greenhouse gas emissions compared to past, and these obligations are typically of a soft nature.

The realm of international obligations concerning the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been the subject of valuable research. A number of Persian-language studies (e.g., Khadivi et al., 2019; Mashhadi & Rastegar, 2017; Pourhashemi et al. 2021) delved into the crisis of global climate change by focusing on the regulations and principles of international environmental law, as well as the future trajectory of international law in this regard, with an eye to the role of states. Moreover, several English-language articles (e.g., Ekardt et al., 2018; Hulme, 2009; Morine & Patino, 2010; Shahbazi & Pouya Berelian, 2020) examined the obligations of states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in combatting global climate change, often analyzing international agreements and considering future developments in the field.

The present study used a descriptive–analytical method and a library research method to collect and analyze the data sourced from international documents, books, and related articles.

There is a significant likelihood that if actions against international environmental obligations of states are not addressed within a criminological framework, their activities and greenhouse gas emissions will result in environmental pollution and global warming, ultimately leading to the complete destruction of the Earth. The current study highlighted the significant role of the media in elucidating environmental crimes. If environmental destruction and greenhouse gas emissions are criminalized at the international level, states can be held accountable. Consequently, they may use the media to raise awareness of the issue in the national context, informing both the public and private sectors about crimes related to environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions by factories. Given that fulfilling the obligations of states necessitates criminalizing undue interference in climate change, it is necessary to consider criminal laws, in addition to states’ obligations, concerning potential non-compliance. Legal actions may encompass not only the issue of climate change itself but also the costs of combating climate change. Therefore, both financial and non-financial aspects must be included. States must take action in case of violations of the responsibility, aiming to compensate for harmful and destructive actions against the environment. Moreover, both public and private sectors should be subject to strict monitoring for environmentally detrimental behavior. In fact, if the governments are tasked with specific obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with combatting global climate change, it will automatically lead to compliance on part of the private sector. Thus, there should be strict obligations for the world states, with current soft commitments changing into hard, enforceable ones.

Considering environmental meetings, conventions, and even the Paris Agreement, it seems that such agreements—notwithstanding their binding nature—may fail if member states face challenges such as economic problems. In such cases, the countries may continue to produce greenhouse gases in various ways. Even in the face of complaints by environmentalists, governments will justify their actions on the grounds of economic conditions, employment issues, or managerial considerations. Therefore, if anti-environmental actions—which often occur under the government supervision or with government support and knowledge—are not addressed within a criminological framework, they will likely result in environmental pollution and global warming, leading to the potential destruction of the Earth. This research highlighted the relation between the international environmental protection and the need for a new institutional order, which justifies creating an international court dedicated exclusively to environmental issues. Two significant international commitments in 2015 (i.e., the U.N. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 2016 Paris Agreement on Climate Change) underscore the need for specialized environmental courts. The international agreements and obligations, as well as the resulting environmental disputes, have highlighted the importance of having specialized courts to handle such cases. Even before the 2016 Paris Agreement, climate change had already led to numerous lawsuits and judicial decisions. There are two ways to establish an international environmental court: through an international treaty, either within or outside the U.N, or through a U.N. resolution. Moreover, the present study emphasized the crucial role of the media in raising awareness of environmental crimes. As a conclusion, it is necessary to monitor and control both the private and public sectors for environmentally harmful behaviors; however, government obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change will also positively impact the private sector.

Associated gases are by-products of the oil extraction process that can either be commercialized or flared, the latter turning them into environmental pollutants. Opting for the former over the latter depends on several factors, one of which is an appropriate legal framework. A crucial aspect of creating this framework is the anticipation of legal methods for compensating damages incurred by affected communities and the environment. Given that Iran ranks among the top three countries in the world for flaring associated gases, establishing an efficient legal structure in this area seems imperative, with the anticipation of compensation methods being a significant component. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to answer whether the liability system for compensating damages resulting from associated gas emissions is sufficient, and what other methods for compensating these damages might exist. The hypothesis of this article is that the civil liability system is insufficient for compensating environmental damages, including those caused by associated gases, and that reforms are needed in this area. Additionally, the potential of international liability can be utilized, or innovative methods such as creating a compensation fund for local communities using the revenue from fines imposed for associated gas emissions can be employed.

Recognizing the norms and regulations of international law and guarantying the international activists’ commitments necessitate a provisioning of international responsibility system for them. Using the descriptive and analytical methods and library data, the present research studied and explained the Islamic jurisprudential fundamentals of and political challenges for the governments’ and NGOs’ international responsibilities. The research findings showed that despite the lack of discussion on the subject in the Islamic jurisprudence, several jurisprudential regulations – such as the negation of hardship, the rule of prohibition of helping to commit a crime, the prohibition of detriment, as the most important ones - can be used as the fundamentals to justify the governments’ and NGOs’ international responsibilities. Despite this, there are several political challenges – the governments search for profits, their intervention in establishing the international laws, and political considerations effects on the election of judges for the international trials, as the most prominent ones - for the governments’ and NGOs’ international responsibilities.

Increasing the use of marine areas and international waterways in the extraction, production and transportation of oil has led to serious concerns regarding the application of preventive legalenvironmental mechanisms to preserve and maintain the marine environment. In this regard, so far, the international responsibility regarding the environment and possible damage to it has only been towards the commitment of the governments, and this is while the exploitation of the sea and its environment is actually done by multinational companies. Based on this, in this research, which is organized in a descriptive-analytical method, the main question is whether it is possible to transfer responsibility from governments to multinational companies. And how can the "polluter pays" principle help to strengthen the environmental responsibility of multinational companies in the oil industry? In this regard, it was found that the governments have been able to block the financial accounts of companies accused of marine environmental damage through the mechanisms available in the National Treasury Department, and as a result, they have made it possible to apply the principle of paying the polluter in compensation and provide environmental protection in the oil industry.

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.

Violations of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights (1955) by the United States of America has a history almost as old as the life of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is said that violating any international obligation causes the international responsibility of the violating state. Still, it is the affected state that demands the determination of the violations and compensation for the damages caused by the violations from the judicial bodies.
In the judgment of March 30, 2023, in the case of certain Iranian assets, the International Court of Justice confirmed the violations of Articles 3, 4, and 10 of the Treaty of Amity by the US, and determined the international responsibility of the US against Iran., ICJ by not paying attention to the preliminary objections, showed that it does not allow the violating state to mock its obligations with the trick of unilateralism. ICJ's emphasis on the commitment of the US to pay compensation to specify the principle of the rule of law, and to grant a deadline of 24 months to Iran and the US to agree on the amount and method of paying compensation, respecting the agreement of the states.
Regardless of the constitutive aspect of the verdict regarding the payment of compensation, the declaration of the international responsibility of the US in terms of violating various articles of the Treaty has a declarative aspect.

International responsibility, as one of the most basic international legal institutions, creates rights and obligations for members of the international community, especially governments, which provides the basis for the establishment of the rule of law in the international community. In this regard, he first discussed the nature of human rights, the right to access medicine and vaccines, and examined the obligations and role of international community cooperation in dealing with and controlling global diseases, including Covid-19, and then examined the international responsibility of governments towards Violation of obligations related to access to treatment and vaccines for global diseases for people under their sovereign authority has been discussed and subsequently the international responsibility of governments in the field of dealing with newly emerging diseases, including Covid-19, is discussed.

The present research has been scrutinized, analyzed, and investigated using a descriptive and analytical method based on documentary studies with a survey tool.

International Health Regulations (2005) along with some rules of the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (1994), the core of the obligations between international organization of governments to control and deal with global diseases, including covid-19, and on the other hand, paying attention to the importance of the cooperation of governments in dealing with global diseases, commitment It is against the international community and neglect and negligence on the part of the governments in this field, including treatment,

Marine environmental international law is one of the trends in international law that tries to oblige governments to comply with the necessary laws and measures needed to maintain biological resources, organisms and the health of the seas. The presence of rich oil and gas resources in the sensitive and strategic region of the Persian Gulf and its environmental characteristics have recognized this region as one of the most important strategic regions in the world, which is exposed to severe environmental pollution and destruction. . The creation of these pollutions should result in civil responsibility for the polluting country under the title of international responsibility, which was the purpose of establishing an organization called RAPMI. In this article, an attempt has been made to deal with the issue by combining the articles of the Human Rights Commission and the 1978 Kuwait Convention, that if a government causes environmental pollution to enter the Persian Gulf due to oil and gas extraction, its responsibility. How is the country compared to other countries? This responsibility, which can be called the "responsibility of international marine environmental rights, needs to hold more international gatherings and meetings in order for it to become more and more realistic.

The expansion of the range of benefits of self-propelled marine vessels simultaneously with the development of technology and related knowledge has increased the need of governments and actors active in the maritime field to develop and formulate rules and regulations about this maritime tool. On the other hand, the unknown area of responsibility of self-driving vessels for violating international rules has increased the necessity of identifying the legal regime of this instrument in the realm of international law of the seas. Therefore, in this research, which was carried out in a descriptive-analytical method along with a field study, in addition to the legal definition of marine self-propelled vessels, the basic question has been raised that the basis of assigning responsibility to self-propelled marine vessels is based on what element? In this context, it was found that the legal regime of self-propelled marine vessels is different depending on the purpose and operations defined for this tool on the one hand and whether the self-propelled vessels are "under the surface" or "on the surface" on the other hand, and in line with the explanation of this legal structure The role of the International Maritime Safety Organization is very key. It was also found that the international responsibility for compensating the possible damages resulting from the activity of this category of vessels is of the type of "responsibility for internationally prohibited actions" and is based on the level of control and autonomy of this tool from the ability to be extended to the operator, owner or controller of this tool. It looks distinct.

The immunity of the state has a strong basis in customary international law. But the nature of these rules is not exactly obvious. Lawyers have different points of view on determining immunity as procedural or substantive rule. Twice the International Court of Justice had the chance to evaluate the nature of state immunity and its probable conflict with substantive rules. The first time, in the case concerning Yerodia arrest warrant (Congo v. Belgium) in 2002 and the second time, in the case concerning the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening) in 2012. The question of this paper is whether the distinction between the procedural rule of immunity and a substantive jus cogens rule as is used by ICJ has a legal basis or can it be legally challenged? It will be argued that the ICJ approach in using the distinction can cause problems like descending the position of jus cogens and impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes. Thus, the ICJ should be more cautious in using such a reasoning.

On Tuesday, 19 April 2022, the Greek Coast Guard seized a Russian-owned oil tanker named Pegasus in the waters off the Euboea Island.  It had adopted the Iranian flag and changed its name to Lana just before the Greek action. The seizure of the ship was initially carried out under European Union sanctions against Russia in connection with the attack on Ukraine. However, pursuant to a request by the US Department of Justice - which claimed the tanker’s oil cargo was Iranian and subject to US sanctions- the seizure was continued and a part of the cargo was delivered to the United States. After the seizure of Luna/Pegasus, Iran tried to release the ship through diplomatic and legal measures, but these measures were unsuccessful due to Greece’s refusal. Thereupon, on 27 May, Iran seized two Greek oil tankers in the Persian Gulf called Prudent Warrior and Delta Poseidon. The purpose of this paper is to examine the legality of Iran's seizure of the Greek oil tankers from the point of view of international law, specifically in terms of the law of countermeasures. Using a descriptive-analytical method and collecting information from library and documentary sources, the paper finds that in response to the actions by Greece and the United States, Iran had the right to take countermeasures within the framework of international law, and its seizure and detention of the two Greek tankers did not entail international responsibility.

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.

Consecutive droughts of the last three decades and the role of government's economic and social policies in harvesting or making artificial changes to natural resources and their misuse. It has caused the destruction of vegetation and as a result the destruction of the earths texture and finally the scattering of dust particles in the sky. In the hot and dry regions of the earth, especially in large areas of the Middle East, has created an acute environmental crisis that has caused numerous damages to the effected communities. Since the last half century, especially since the early 1970s, there have been positive developments in the field of International Environmental Law due to the holding of numerous public conferences which has led to the non-binding declarations but common statements, that have Erga-Omnes and Jus-Cogens rules. In this article, we have decided to examine these rules in a library manner and the basic question of whether it is possible to create a process for governments to commit to some environmental rules based on the responsibility of governments in order to reduce the harmful effects of this phenomenon in the Middle East, the participation of regional governments. The Middle East, especially its southeastern countries, should be explored in order to hold a conference and approve the "Regional Convention to Combat the Dust Crisis in the Middle East".

On the one hand, this article aims at analyzing Herbert Hart's approach to the legal system and his attitude to international law, and on the other hand, it seeks to find the roots of the separation of primary and secondary rules in international responsibility law and presents criticisms towards this separation. The theory of international law is mixed with the criticism of the rule of law in this system. This separation was caused by an incomplete understanding of analytical law philosophy. The issue of rules in international law is not enough for this separation, and it is not clear exactly where the position of other rules is in this system. The context of rule-making in the international community is so complicated that it is not possible to simply differentiate between rules in this order. This distinction can be drawn in the best case in a positivist tradition. This article, based on the mainstream critical approach in international law, aims to investigate the relationship between the demarcation of primary and secondary rules in international responsibility law with theories of rules demarcation in the theories of Herbert Hart and Hans Kelsen.

One of the inalienable effects of international responsibility of States is the full reparation of the consequences of wrongdoing. Unlike restitution and compensation, which are mainly used to compensate material damage, satisfaction has been considered as an appropriate method of compensating non-pecuniary damage by State practice, case law and especially the ILC. The study of these procedures shows that satisfaction is generally obtained through processes such as apologizing, declaring the act as a wrongful act, punishing the perpetrators, and so on. On the other hand, financially satisfaction faces serious challenges, but the studies of this article show that it is exceptionally accepted in case of severe and systematic moral damage to non-State entities. The February 9, 2022 judgment of the ICJ in the case of Congo v. Uganda was an opportunity for the Court to resolve the ambiguities of satisfaction. However, as this article will show, this ruling has deepened these doubts, and the Court has reached findings for which no record is available.

Aviation cyber security is becoming a very serious subject. The air industry is a complex, advanced, multidimensional with an international scope industry is distinguished became its complexity among industries. One of the most important and vital issues of aviation is to ensure the accuracy of navigation systems and air traffic control, which has a direct impact on flight safety. The article is prepared to explain and evaluate the rules of cyber security regime in the field of international aviation law and the responsibility of governments and international organizations in sight of the existing rules of international responsibility plan and through this to examine the conditions and effects of each.

This article was written by descriptive-analytical method in terms of collecting library data and reviewing documents.

The International Cyber Security Regime is a mechanism for cooperation between governments and cause trust and security, and the protection of aviation infrastructure is a top priority for governments. The aviation industry is facing novel threats, and there are various cyber security concerns at airports and in-flight aircraft, and the need to "smarten up" airports is being seriously felt due to increased connectivity of systems and processes and protection of navigation systems. The development of security rules and regulations is one of the strategic goals of the International Civil Aviation Organization and its member countries, in order to ensure sustainable aviation security measures.

The outbreak of the Corona Virus in China has led to a global pandemic which caused adverse effects on economic, social and humanitarian aspects of the international community. The statute of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Health Regulations (IHR) approved in 2005 are two main legal instruments aimed at preventing, responding and controlling widespread infectious diseases. These instruments oblige WHO members to notify and inform the organization about the outbreak of infectious diseases without delay and in the most efficient way. Since the right to health and the right to life, two fundamental human rights, are endangered by a pandemic, it seems that timely notification by the origin country has become a customary rule, which is reflected in United Nations Security Council resolutions. The Chinese government as a party to the above-mentioned instruments has violated its treaty and non-treaty obligations by not informing the WHO of the outbreak, as well as threatening those who tried to do so. Therefore, its international responsibility can be invoked, which will be examined in this paper. The possibility of filing a lawsuit with the International Court of Justice will also be analyzed.

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.