Public Law
Mahdi Shahabi
Abstract
The history of the evolution of legal thought indicates the contentious process of the interaction between metaphysics and reality. Meanwhile, notions such as law and justice, and in general, natural law, being the criterion for evaluating justice in the legal structure, have a more complicated situation. ...
Read More
The history of the evolution of legal thought indicates the contentious process of the interaction between metaphysics and reality. Meanwhile, notions such as law and justice, and in general, natural law, being the criterion for evaluating justice in the legal structure, have a more complicated situation. Petrazyski's idea on intuitive law should be considered as a new framework for the mentioned interaction; as modern natural law is based on the preeminence of metaphysical rule over reality, and classical natural law also seeks static metaphysics to provide the ground for its interaction with reality. Thus, they could not be admissible. Petrazycki endeavors to seek a dynamic metaphysics which he finds it in dynamic subjectivism. Individual intuition is another expression of this type of subjectivism which leads to the intuitive right and intuitive justice. However, one may ask whether this type of metaphysics be the foundation and even superior and evolutionary framework of law? In fact, Petraziski does not believe in such a foundation, and as a result, his metaphysical interaction with reality cannot be maintained in the framework of idealism.
Masoud Alborzi Verki; Mustafa Khorrami
Abstract
Distinction between airspace and outer space, despite its theoretical benefits and practical effects, has been controversial. The legal system of airspace is based upon sovereignty principle of territorial state; contrary to that of outer space which is based upon freedom to use. Where does ...
Read More
Distinction between airspace and outer space, despite its theoretical benefits and practical effects, has been controversial. The legal system of airspace is based upon sovereignty principle of territorial state; contrary to that of outer space which is based upon freedom to use. Where does space begin or at what altitude does airspace end, determines the domain of states powers in exercising sovereignty over the space. The present study examines with a critical approach the criteria of this distinction, the status of outer space ownership; comparison of airspace with sea area. By resorting to general principles of law, due to absence of an accepted legal rule, reliance must be made on incontrovertible criterion under which, the lowest point of an orbital flight to be considered as the beginning of outer space, and, the maximum altitude of a plane capable of flying as the airspace located in the air territory. Given the rules governing outer space are specific regime, where there is doubt as to state sovereignty, its existence should be presumed. Therefore, the area between airspace and outer space is governed by air law.
