International Law
Alireza Ebrahimgol; Hasan Khosroshahi
Abstract
The International Court of Justice is empowered, under Article 41 of its Statute, to order provisional or interim measures of protection to preserve the respective rights of the party-states pending final judgment on the merits. Through interpreting Article 41, the Court has developed in ...
Read More
The International Court of Justice is empowered, under Article 41 of its Statute, to order provisional or interim measures of protection to preserve the respective rights of the party-states pending final judgment on the merits. Through interpreting Article 41, the Court has developed in its case-law certain requirements for granting requested interim measures. The plausibility of claims is the sixth requirement recently added to the said requirements. The present research assesses the role of plausibility requirement in preservation of international human rights in light of evolution of this requirement in the court’s case law as well as the existing legal doctrine. The study indicates that an inconsistent approach to satisfaction of the plausibility requirement and prejudgment of the substance of the case could harm the transparency and predictability of the procedure governing provisional measures, and undermine such measures as one of the most effective legal mechanisms in preventing the breach of international law.
Alireza Ebrahimgol; Seyed Ahmad Tabatabaei Lotfi; Hasan Khosroshahi
Abstract
UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies play an essential role in the promotion of State parties’ compliance with international human rights treaties, through examination of complaints filed pursuant to individual communications procedure. These bodies, despite of their quasi-judicial function, are ...
Read More
UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies play an essential role in the promotion of State parties’ compliance with international human rights treaties, through examination of complaints filed pursuant to individual communications procedure. These bodies, despite of their quasi-judicial function, are allowed to request interim measures in order to preserve the rights of the individuals claiming of being violated until the final views on the relevant communications are adopted. Whereas, final views adopted by Treaty Bodies are not per se binding and considering the lacuna in their founding instruments and rules of procedure, it is to be seen whether or not interim measures requested by these Bodies could be considered as having a binding force. In the present article, the legal nature of interim measures issued by the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies is reviewed in light of legal doctrine and the jurisprudence of the said Bodies.
Mashhadi Ali; Hasan Khosroshahi; Maryam Separdar
Abstract
Iran, as the holder of world’s fourth largest oil reserves and world’s largest gas reserves, is sensibly exposed to pollutions resulting from oil and gas industry which is its most important economy sector. A significant portion of these pollutions is caused by the upstream oil and gas industry ...
Read More
Iran, as the holder of world’s fourth largest oil reserves and world’s largest gas reserves, is sensibly exposed to pollutions resulting from oil and gas industry which is its most important economy sector. A significant portion of these pollutions is caused by the upstream oil and gas industry and the remaining portion is resulted from the downstream oil and gas industry. The present research is dedicated to the legal requirements stipulated in Islamic Republic of Iran’s Fundamental Legal Instruments. These instruments include the Constitution, Five-year Development Plan, the Twenty-year Perspective Law, General Policies and similar documents. The central assumption of this study is founded on the idea that fundamental instrument of the Iranian Legal System have a solid general approach with regard to the issue of environmental protection in upstream oil and gas related activities. This approach is specifically evident in Principle 50 of the Constitution.
