جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « resolution » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

The development of international cyber law has always been accompanied by difficulties. Although security and fighting crimes arising from this space require collective efforts of governments, and the indivisibility of security in this space is one of its most important features but,  little progress has been made to regularize the cyberspace. The center of gravity and the focal point of international activities to systematize activities in the cyber field is the United Nations. In the meantime, the resolution proposed by the Russian Federation to the First Committee of the General Assembly has been one of the most important efforts to regularize this space in the last two decades which, indeed, is subject of the present article. In this resolution, the role of science and technology in the context of international security and the dual military and civilian use of cyber space are stipulated. The normative approach of this resolution and the legal performance of the main actors towards this resolution is the opinion of the article. This article is considered to be exploratory-developmental in terms of its central goal, which aims at producing and developing knowledge by examining the subject and analyzing the content of all resolutions and monitoring the process of these documents. The approach followed by this research is inductive. In terms of methodology, this research follows the documentary and evidence-based research methodology based on the documents of the United Nations. The findings of this research confirm that the dominance of the company-centric approach instead of the governance-centric approach to the cyberspace on the one hand and the minimalist outlook of the big cyber powers to the role of the United Nations to regularize the cyber space as well as the lack of effective role of the UN are among the main reasons for the functional weakness of the United Nations to regularize the cyberspace.

The ICC jurisdiction in pursuit of Omar Al-Bashir, deposed President, and cooperation necessity of new Sudanese state in this regard are preceded by a record issue in the Security Council Resolution. The Resolution on the new Sudanese state after Al-Bashir’s depose is still binding to surrender him to the ICC instead of being tried in domestic courts. The comparative feasibility study of this theory, considering the situation of Al-Bashir’s removal from power and the non-membership of the Sudan in the ICC is one of the aims and topics of this paper. The study method is descriptive-analytical and relies on requirements of the Resolution and the ICC Statute. The main question of the research is what the effect of the Resolution components and the Statute on obligation of the new Sudanese state to hand over the deposed president instead of domestic trials are.  The findings of research show that Omar Al-Bashir’s removal from power does not only affect the requirements of the Resolution and the provisions of the Statute, but it also facilitates the handing over and initiation of his trials in the ICC. Therefore, the new Sudanese state, as a successor continues to address the requirements of the Resolution and the Statute to hand over Al-Bashir to the ICC

The Security Council is essentially a specific or status-oriented pillar under the Charter, in other words, the member states have asked that pillar to respond to a particular situation or dispute.However, in the aftermath of the Cold War, the Council occasionally issued resolutions aimed not at resolving disputes between two or more members or in a situation that endangered international peace and security, but at preventing threats to peace or diplomacy. Peace building is preventive. In fact, these resolutions have a specific audience, such as women and children.

The present article tries to explain the mentioned resolutions in a descriptive-analytical way.

Determining that these resolutions do not seek to resolve an issue related to a particular situation, but rather to resolve an issue and problem that is spreading in the international community and its repetition or increase in number can lead to peace and security. Be internationally influential.

United Nations Security Council, which is responsible for maintaining international peace and security, has issued a number of resolutions following the widespread and re-active piracy on important international waterways, particularly off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden, which pose a serious threat to international peace and security. (Twenty-three resolutions). Since Security Council resolutions are a binding source of international law and states are obliged to comply with them, as well as other obligations under the conventions to which they are party, in this descriptive-analytical study The "limitations" of Security Council resolutions on piracy, which have led to many developments and innovations in the international community's response to the phenomenon, have been discussed. In general, although Security Council resolutions have proposed a variety of strategies to effectively combat piracy, which in the short term have been able to influence the spread of piracy and, with the cooperation of various countries, establish security on some international waterways, this security has been temporary and fragile. And the security of international maritime trade requires other long-term solutions, including the allocation of courts to prevent the impunity of perpetrators of piracy, in addition to the existing methods used, such as patrols, and so on.

Nowadays, Iran monetary and financial market encounter a new concept, named “Resolution” that is going to be technically replaced with “Bankruptcy” system for facing failed or likely to fail banks and credit institutions. Dissatisfaction of policy and decision makers from bankruptcy system toward banks and credit institutions highlights the importance of “Resolution” in their eyes. Among all of the tools utilized under “Resolution” system, “Bail-in” is counted as one of the most challenging on the one hand, and the most useful tool on the other hands which is not only does open a new window in the realm of facing bank failure, but also comprehensively stands against “Bail-out”. This tool can be analyzed in two perspectives; an independent tool and the complementary one. “Bail-in” means “the mechanism for affecting the exercise by a resolution authority of the write-down and conversion powers in relation to liabilities of an institution under resolution”. As it is crystal clear, “Bail-in” includes two steps: loss absorption for “Write-down” and “Conversion” of liabilities to equity. Initially Considering “Bail-in” tool versus the rules of private law, most of the countries have carefully eliminates the impediments before applying this tool. In Iran legal system, originating from Shiite jurisprudence, this tool is not flawless. Islamic banking principles, Shiite jurisprudence rules, i.e. particularly “debt forgiveness” and “novation”, and lack of economic infrastructures are the major barriers before “Bail-in” tool, for which the authors have attempted to resolve them, in addition to explaining and clearing the issues, through descriptive-analyzing method.

The making of differences in international trade relations is not unusual; Therefore, in order to resolve disputes, "alternative dispute resolution methods"(ADRs) such as "Conciliation" should be considered before dealing with solutions that are in difficulty. For this reason, "International Commercial Conciliation Model Law" came into force in 2002 in "UNCITRAL". On the other hand, in Iran's law there is also an institution called "compromise" which is responsible for resolving disputes between the parties to the dispute. The question that arises in this regard is: "To what extent are the rules on Conciliation in international trade law consistent with the provisions on compromise in Iranian law?" Considering what has been discussed in this paper, the compromise institution in Iranian law and international trade law are largely in line with each other; and the only difference in its form can be seen in the need for a conciliator in international trade law. The research method of this research is descriptive-analytical using library studies and has been studied through books and articles available and related to the subject matter.

Iranian Legislature has recognized the rule of darʼ (not enforcing punishments (ḥudūd) in cases of doubt) in articles 120, 121 of the Islamic penal code (1392) and has removed any criminality, responsibility and punishment due to this rule in doubtful cases. However, the legislature in other articles of this code, especially the articles 307, 308, 311, 114 ,115 has passed regulations on the basis of istiṣḥāb principle (legal presumption of continuity of the status quo in doubtful cases), some of which contrast with the necessities of darʼ rule, such as considering the crime intentional at the time of doubt about the perpetrator’s not having free will while committing the crime, providing retaliation for the perpetrator at the time of doubt about his insanity while committing the crime and considering the criminal entitled to punishment at the time of doubt about his repentance before the crime is proved. This article analyses these contradictory regulations and their resolutions.