Human beings’ communication with each other and with the peripheral environment has been continuously changed. Hence, transformation is an indispensable feature of human life. These developments lead to the creation and elimination of various social phenomena and their relationships as the subject of science of law. By understanding this, legal scholars are committed to formulate ideas and theories that best fit these phenomena and by designing and resorting to the best techniques, in the best way, to describe and guide the order among them or, in the absence of such an order, to help regulate the relationships of these phenomena and at the same time direct them to the desired horizons ahead.
The theoretical issues of international law as the battlefield for encountering of different views, require more intelligence and coherency. Tools, methods and techniques of these characteristics should be followed in the content and method of studying international law. Accordingly, in this paper, the four concepts of theory, meta-theory, method and methodology with the aim of taking a small step towards the consciousness of scholarship in the field of research in international law will be studied, and thus the importance of theoretical and methods of legal theorization in the field of international law, with emphasis on the usefulness and necessity of studying multi-methods in the field, are redefined with the help of technique of legal meta-theory.

One of the most important epistemological challenges of international law to answer the question: Is international law really a Science? It is an issue that has never been addressed in jurisprudence and has been neglected, in view of the fact that law philosophers efforts have basically been made to prove legal aspects of International Law. Current vacancy has made the writer analyze the theoretical and scientific structures of International Law in light of philosophy of science developments. By describing demarcation standards of science from non science has been referred to logic of causal based. Meaning based and reason based explanations; in so that empirical international law uses the same causal explanation patterns that a science such as physics and analytic methodology is usable in the same proportion that International Law is loyal to experiment. Nevertheless, similarity of explanation patterns and methodology styles shouldn’t be ignored from the epistemological differences of International Law. In addition to causal explanation logic, reason based explanation pattern is needed to justify and obtain optimum understanding of legal phenomena. These different explanation patterns proposes a methodological variety that we don’t suffice verifiable and falsifiable methodologies in the format of unity of methodology, nevertheless methodological pluralistic is a must that progressive and developing science of international law is intensive need of it.

International Instruments on Family can be studied within various fields including Private law, Public International law, Private International law and International Human Rights Law. Although, at the first glance, it seems family instruments are just related to privacy of citizens, it covers different themes associated with public order, security, morals and well being of community which have effective outcomes at national and international level. The Persian Gulf countries have interactions with international human rights mechanisms. The main question of this paper is whether the approach of Persian Gulf Countries toward international family instruments is similar and cohesive or they have adopted different and contradictory approaches and what is the impact of their united or divergent approach on regional peace and security. The methodology of this paper is to analyze International family Instruments from public international law and international human rights law perspectives. The paper will be concluded with some theoretical and practical suggestions and recommendations for the policy makers and related authorities of Islamic Republic of Iran.

Severe breaches of humanitarian law are one of the jurisdictional of  international criminal tribunals ratione materiae. On the other hand, although the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols do not explicitly refer to human rights because refer to the situation of armed conflicts, but in the statutes of the international criminal tribunals, whether the International Criminal Court or ICTY or ICTR, The multiple effects of human rights and international humanitarian law are dealt with each other. In cases such as Prosecutor v. Kronjlak (2002) in the International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia, the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights has been pointed out. The main question that has been done in this research in a descriptive-analytical methodology , according to the practice of international criminal courts, what is the mutual influence of international humanitarian law and international human rights? The result of the current research is that the rules of human rights, such as the right to a fair trial for perpetrators of international crimes, witnesses and victims, and not considering the immunity of accused government have penetrated into officials in international criminal proceedings. On the other hand, human rights and international humanitarian law collide with each other in one point “ humanity “ .

Legislation forms the bedrock of all legal systems, and each system operates according to its distinct structure, characteristics, and conditions. International law, unlike domestic legal systems, does not exhibit the same degree of systematic operation in this regard; non-legal issues e.g. political factors may significantly infiltrate the process of international regulation. Broadly construed, not only states but all actors within the international community engage in international law-making, utilizing both hard and soft law sources. Among these, the traditional sources of international law, custom and treaty, occupy a distinct and unique role. The central question of this study is how these sources have actively participated in the international law-making process from historical times to the present day. According to the hypothesis of this research, employing a descriptive-analytical methodology, these two sources, in a voluntary and non-coercive yet divergent manner, fulfill the needs of their creators. This study finds that while customary international law, as a collective endeavor, evolves spontaneously, implicitly, gradually, and sometimes even inadvertently, the formulation of legal norms through treaties, representing a form of individualism or particularism within the international community, transpires abruptly, explicitly, uniformly, and with deliberate intent.

Disciplined Survey of Multidimensional Phenomena Such As World-Wide Legal Phenomena, Calls for The Extension of Conceptual framework and To overcomes Epistemological /Methodological Dogmatism of International Law and Its Analytic /Imperative Logic, Prevails On Ontological / Epistemological Aspects of The Progressive Science of International Law and Its Pluralistic Methodology that has Reduced to the Collection of Non Sanction rules, and So It has Modified To Phenomenology of States Will. Regardless of The Fact, The Application of Systemic Approach to Untested International Law Domain, Per se, Is Faced To Various Epistemological / Ontological Controversies and Methodological Challenges, However Epistemological Prerequisites Calls for In Regard to Rethinking Capacities of Systemic Explanation of International Law, Its Status and Its Place Draws In The General System of Science So That Publicists Can Distinguish Its Analytic And Imperative Logic of International Law From Homogeneous / Heterogeneous Sciences. To This Purpose, It Supposes That International Law Is Organic Totality (Wholeness) and On The basis of Systemic Analysis, International Law Is Analytic and Interactive System. In the First Level of Analysis That Concerning To Theoretical and Scientific structures of International Legal Science Will be Explained And Analyzed The Methodology, Patterns of Explanation, Legal Language, Making Theory Process, testing Theory, and In The Second Level of Analysis That Its Aim To Explain The Ontological Dimension of International Law It Will Be Analyzed Interactive Modes Of International legal System Which Is constituent Synthesis of Legal Institutions, Norms, Styles, Procedures and Mechanisms That Will Be Studied In External – Internal /Boundary Patterns of Interaction

War as an inevitable fact in international relations that has always imposed itself without limitation to governments in conflict, has its own consequences, and by occurring war, valid regulations in the time of peace may lose their legitimacy and rights of war has been replaced with it, except regulations which are considered as jus cogens simultaneously in peacetime and wartime. Therefore, since international law cannot prevent the outbreak of war, it strives to establish a safe world by formulating regulations. Meanwhile, environment protection in war and peace is one of the issues that has been noticed in international law, because human understand that human life depends on environment and planet earth is the only habitable planet. Hence, international community considers the importance of environment, and considers war as an inevitable fact and tries to decrease damages that are inflicted to environment among wars by law regulation. The research methodology adopted is descriptive – analytic method and data gathering procedure is library research in legal principles and practices based on the extraction of resources from international documents, conclusions and legal analysis of international conflicts, in particular regional conflicts, which provides to reach to accurate results about Persian Gulf. The international community terrible ordeals in wars have promoted the place of environment in the law of armed conflicts, in a way that its norms can be placed in customary international law and jus cogens with erga omnes effects. Therefore, because governments duties are recognized in environment protection in armed conflicts in the frame of customary international law and jus cogens with erga omnes, we hope if a war happens in Persian Gulf region or in other place, the negative environment effects of war is reduced by following the mentioned regulations. With regard to the strategic status of the Persian Gulf and previous experiences of two wars in the region, in particular, the Second Gulf War (1990-1991), and its environmental effects, and evaluation of the current regulations in the course of the Second War, this study attempts to reach a new legal approach to reduce environmental damages of armed war in Persian Gulf region and in other regions. By developing environmental issues in recent years beside of the necessity of having healthy and immune environment (Principle 1 of Stockholm Declaration, 1972) which is expounded as one of the principles in third-generation human rights and which is in the frame of jus cogens the necessity of protecting environment in war time has been emphasized.

The challenge between international law and the Iranian legal system has always been a controversial issue, either at domestic or international level. These challenges not only are related to the ideological and theoretical differences, but also the incorporation and implementation of international obligations (from the practical perspective) have always been faced with various difficulties. An analysis of the rules on the incorporation of international law in the Iranian law, along with the status of international law within the Iranian law show that only a limited direct use can be made of international law in Iran. Consequently, this issue has influenced the practical impact of international conventions at domestic level. This is the case, particularly, when the human rights treaties deal with issues such as the rights of women, sexual crimes, etc. While to date, much research has been conducted to criticize the human rights instruments, very limited research has addressed this issue from the international legal perspective. To provide a proper basis for dialogue and discussion and in order to minimize the gap between the both systems, it is necessary to analyze these challenges from the perspective of international law as well. To hold a fair discussion, it is crucial to know how the international community perceives Iran’s incorporation of international treaties or Iran’s violation of international obligations. It also brings great opportunity for Iranian researchers to convey appropriate responses and reasonable arguments for the international community regarding Iran’s international obligations. Therefore, by applying descriptive and analytical methodology and thorough analyzing international treaties, reports of monitoring bodies of the UN and other relative sources, this paper categorizes and analyzes the different challenges between the Iranian legal system and international law regarding this issue. In doing so, this paper discusses that the reservation is one of the solutions of the international community to provide the maximum countries contribution in international law. However, based on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), an appropriate reservation should fulfill some requirements which maintain the identity of treaties itself and also preserve the international order as well. In addition, the international community, when making international treaties, has to consider the cultural, political and religious context leading to the localization of human rights and consequently practical implementation of treaties at domestic level. Therefore, while maintaining the principle of sovereignty of each country, it assures the participation of the majority of countries with different cultural and religious backgrounds in international law.

Legal methodology is formal and has nothing to do with the substance. Legal methodology devotes as much to the practical methods implemented in the legislative assemblies as to those specific to administrative authorities. It devotes itself to all that is useful to the solution of legal problems. So, it pays no attention to problems and solutions; but focuses on ways to identify problems and to find solutions. Never more than this time of complex, ephemeral and often contradictory overregulation, of technical and social upheavals arising out of interpretation of various legal systems, national and international, the identification and the application of the methods of law appear to be so essential. They are indispensable to the determination and resolution of disputes, to the arguments of the parties to the trial, to the negotiation and the conclusion of contracts by the practitioners. Even more, in international law there has been some legislative inflation: more and more social areas are governed by the law, more and more rules are issued, judgments, commentaries and scientific studies are multiplying.
Ihering, Portalis, Geny, Demogue were the great precursors of legal methodology recent works by Castberg, Bergel, Maarten, Bos, Corten, testify to the development of this particular discipline. In our country, Iran, this branch of legal research is not sufficiently studied. It seems to us that the work of Prof. Hedayatollah Falsafi, written in seven chapters has to some extent filled this gap.
In this article we will try to briefly analyze this work.

International law contains many tensions based on diverse theoretical approaches that make international law their home. The way in which these approaches respond to specific legal questions create further tensions.
In this context there are two basic schools in international law that make different ways of cognition about international facts, the novel theory of post modernism and the traditional legal-positivism theory. The consequences of adopting each theory can have influences over the answers for different questions. Postmodernism is based on cognition whereas legal positivism is based on some kind of experience which pertains to state will and “GRUND NORM”. Each school has its own methodology so that it is very fruitful to understand the effects of each school on an international law decisions. These two approaches can also interfere with each other.