A holistic view of classical international law presents an image of a collection of scattered consensual rules, where coordination as a cohesive and integrated whole is not necessarily observed among these rules. Such a collection cannot benefit from a normative order that includes a hierarchy of rules and guarantees fundamental rights. Nevertheless, later legal scholars have described international law as a "system" of law. This research, employing a descriptive method, seeks to validate this claim and demonstrates that, firstly, the prevalent objectivism in all components of international law, alongside the multitude of active and passive interest-driven actors in the international community, seemingly hinders the acceptance of a structural system; secondly, newer approaches inevitably embrace subjective values, resulting in a goal-oriented convergence within the international community. The outcome of this thesis and its antithesis is that international law is still evolving, and a normative reading utilizing existing capacities enhances its structuring.
Mankind's effort to not extend the scope of militarism to outer space on one hand and the fear of great powers from the superiority of competitors in space activities on the other hand caused the necessity of peaceful use of space to be repeated in almost all existing instruments about the activities of states in outer space, which has turned this necessity into a binding rule. The necessity of using this principle in media communication is even greater due to the numerous examples of using the media to promote war and the like. In addition, the use of media is closely related to human rights and states sovereignty. The question is whether the principle of peaceful use of space in media communication is valid and enforceable. The hypothesis that we seek to prove is the principle of the necessity of peaceful use of space in media communication to play the role of a filter in not turning the media into a means of harming the rights of individuals or the sovereignty of states.
The concept of sexual crimes in times of armed conflicts has provoked a very serious debate in international criminal law. At the same time, the jurisprudence of ICTY and ICTR on issues such as victim’s consent has led to more progressive definitions of rape and other forms of sexual violence in the context of armed conflict. Nevertheless, the diversity of opinions delivered by the different branches of the two tribunals has foreshadowed further development in formulating coherent definitions of war-time sexual crimes. This study aims to address the developments underscoring sexual crimes in the jurisprudence of ICTY and ICTR. Employing an analytical descriptive approach, the paper argues that the silence of the tribunals' statutes on the question of sexual crimes has caused a qualification of these offenses under such headings as war crimes or crimes against humanity. Whether this is a welcome development or not, will be further discussed in this paper.
Maghami, A., Mirzadeh koohshahi, N., Amirshakarami, M.
مطالعات حقوق عمومی (24238120)(3)pp. 1379-1400
As “work” is a creative, productive and transformative act, leisure activities are also an individual’s relatively spontaneous and free activity to self-recreation, self-expression and self-recovery. Several components such as reasonable working time, a specific time for rest, periodic leave, and vacations and holidays will enable workers to leisure from working and as well as guarantee their health, safety and efficiency. International human rights law focuses on this issue and recognizes rest and leisure as a human right as provided in some universal and regional instruments. Article 24 of universal declaration of human rights and article 7 of International Covenant on Economic, Social And Cultural Rights are seen as the most important sources for this purpose. This right of the worker and the obligation of states to guarantee this right for workers ensures their human dignity. This paper analyzes the requirements of the right to rest and leisure and examines the obligations of states to realize and ensure this right for workers.
Slavery is one of the oldest forms of violation of human dignity. According to the definition given in the 1926 Slavery Convention, slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, and a "slave" is a person who is subject to this condition. Despite the legal prohibition of slavery, today we witness a new form of slavery, called sexual slavery. The statute of the International Criminal Court has recognized sexual slavery as a crime against humanity as well as a war crime. The purpose of this paper is to review the jurisprudence of the Special Court for Sierra Leon in identifying and developing the definition and elements of the crime of sexual slavery. With a descriptive-analytical method, this study will overview the criminalization of sexual slavery, and examine the approach of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in identifying sexual slavery as a crime against humanity.
When rights are recognized for people, but the simultaneous application of two rights causes damage to one or both rights, we face the problem of conflict of rights. There are three main approaches to solve such conflict: The first approach is to create meta-rules such as conflict resolution rules, which provide indicators to the public and finally to the judge to clearly understand the priority of one right over another. The three main forms of meta-rules are balancing, equilibrium and hierarchy. The second approach is to accept six criteria to resolve human rights conflicts, which have been used repeatedly by the European Court of Human Rights. From these six criteria, one or more criteria can be used depending on the situation governing the conflicting rights. The third approach is to apply the minimum restriction criterion. This means that any method that imposes the least amount of restrictions on two rights is the best method of conflict resolution. This article evaluates the possible solutions with a descriptive-analytical method by explaining the theories and relying on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.
Unilateral US sanctions against Iran aimed at changing the behavior or change of the political system of the Islamic Republic of Iran have directly and indirectly led to the violation of Iranian human rights, and in particular to the challenge of economic rights. It does. The present descriptive-analytical study seeks to answer the question of on what grounds the US government can be committed to respecting the human rights of Iranians in the face of unilateral sanctions. It is necessary to prove this commitment because the international responsibility of the state depends on conditions such as proving the existence of the obligation and then violating it. The findings show that in the case of Iranians living in Iran, these commitments are extraterrestrial in nature and in particular involve a breach of commitment to respect and international cooperation. In the case of Iranians residing in the United States, the US government is committed to respecting and respecting these rights in its territory, and in relation to Iranians residing in third countries, there is a mix of US extraterritorial commitments and territorial commitments.
