Legal Analysis of Opinions Issued by the International Court of Justice Regarding Lawsuits Related to Iran

The experiences gained after dealing with an international case are beneficial, what legal basis the lawsuit starts with and how long it will continue is only a part of these perceptions. By carefully examining the legal aspects of each case and their strengths and weaknesses, a deep understanding can be reached in this regard. In the case of the employees of the United States Embassy in Tehran, the goal of the United States in filing a lawsuit against Iran was not necessarily to secure the immediate release of the hostages, but to receive a ruling that would establish the legal legitimacy of its lawsuit and thereby increase the possibility of satisfying its final demand in the lawsuit. However, the International Court of Justice did not recognize the US attacks on Iran's oil platforms from the point of view of paragraph 1 of Article 20 of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights sand in the light of the rules of international law regarding the use of force as a justified measure to protect the interests of the United States and as a kind of illegal use. Considered a law of force. Withdrawing from the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights Treaty in order to remove the legal liability will not effect on the United States. This article, with the analytical-descriptive method, aims to examine all the cases in which the Islamic Republic of Iran was a party and examine their strengths and weaknesses.