International Law
Morteza Ahmadifard; Mehdi Hatami
Abstract
On January 20, 2018, Turkey launched Operation "Olive Branch" and on October 9, 2019, Operation "Spring of Peace" in northern Syria, violating its territorial integrity and military entry into the country. Also, these attacks continue in a scattered manner. According to Turkish officials, the operation ...
Read More
On January 20, 2018, Turkey launched Operation "Olive Branch" and on October 9, 2019, Operation "Spring of Peace" in northern Syria, violating its territorial integrity and military entry into the country. Also, these attacks continue in a scattered manner. According to Turkish officials, the operation was carried out to eliminate the terror of terrorism and self-defense, given that the use of force in international relations today is prohibited by international law and the UN Charter, this article examines the legitimacy of the use of force by Turkey and examines the behavior, goals and feedback resulting from its actions by citing the principles and rules of International law as well as some international jurisprudence, determines that Turkish government has violated the important principle of the prohibition of the use of force which is explicitly stated in paragraph 4 of Article 2 of the Charter, and the reasons given by the authorities of that government, including the fight against terrorism and legitimate defense, cannot justify a violation of this fundamental rule.
Public Law
Morvarid Ahouri; Mohammad Hashemi; Maghsood Ranjbar
Abstract
The approach of liberal and Marxist thinkers, as the two dominant ideas in the twentieth century on freedom, shows their worldview on the issue of freedom and fundamental rights of individuals. The question is, which theories liberals and Marxists hold on the concept of freedom which was gained based ...
Read More
The approach of liberal and Marxist thinkers, as the two dominant ideas in the twentieth century on freedom, shows their worldview on the issue of freedom and fundamental rights of individuals. The question is, which theories liberals and Marxists hold on the concept of freedom which was gained based on historical experience over the past century? Also, to what extent, are their views towards individual rights and freedoms of their citizens and recognition of these rights and freedoms in practice different from each other?! In Berlin's view, Liberals conception of freedom is negative as opposed to Marxists which is a positive conception. Having considered the historical experiences and Marxists and liberals’ views in the last century, it seems that what guarantees the free will and constitutional liberties of individuals is the negative conception of freedom while the positive conception of freedom could lead to denial of free will and ultimately tyranny. Therefore, the main purpose of this article is to study, compare and determine the status of freedom (especially the common interpretation such as negative freedom and positive freedom) in comparison with the principles and rules governing the two political ideas of liberalism and Marxism.
elham amiri; seied mohamad hashemi; vali rostami; bijan abbasi
Abstract
The issue of pension payments is a serious challenge for governments in today's world. As the main institution, which is faced with a large number of new pensioners every year, governments seek to create pension systems in line with the political-economic structure of the country. The pension payment ...
Read More
The issue of pension payments is a serious challenge for governments in today's world. As the main institution, which is faced with a large number of new pensioners every year, governments seek to create pension systems in line with the political-economic structure of the country. The pension payment system in European-American countries is older than the domestic situation, and for this reason, in order to organize and reform the pension payment system in Iran, it is necessary to refer to successful cases in this regard. In this regard, Norway is one of the countries whose pension system has created the highest level of welfare for retirees, and this has led to a relatively high level of social satisfaction with the government. Compared to Norway, the pension system in Iran is facing many weaknesses and problems, so much so that this issue is named as the third major problem in the country. The defective structure of pensions in Iran is moving in the direction that providing pensions is one of the most important challenges of the government. It can be a way to model and reform the pension system in Iran.
Nasrin Tabataba'i Hesari
Abstract
The sovereign nature of the registration system has included them in the public domain and run by the public sector and through civil servant. The idea of "shrinking the state" and "increasing the regulatory role of governments" has led to the idea of privatizing registries, one of the proposed ways ...
Read More
The sovereign nature of the registration system has included them in the public domain and run by the public sector and through civil servant. The idea of "shrinking the state" and "increasing the regulatory role of governments" has led to the idea of privatizing registries, one of the proposed ways of privatizing is to do the registrar's work with non-governmental experts: notaries. what is the nature of notaries (public, private, privately public), and with what legal bases can they delegate this state sovereignty task? This article, with a comparative and historical overview, concludes that, on the one hand, it is necessary to distinguish between the "notary profession" which is a private profession and the "notary role" which is a public role, based on this role, that is the public authority acting in the name of the state and it has a sovereign nature. On the other hand, although registration affairs are regarded as sovereign affairs, but based on the foreseeability of doing of sovereign affairs by attracting "people's participation" in laws, it is possible to extend the doing of registrar taskes by notary offices in accordance with the general policies of Article 44 of the Constitutional law.
Abolghasem Shahbazian; Sadegh Salimi
Abstract
Measures taken by governments during armed conflict to safeguard their essential interests sometimes cause damages to foreign investors. The investors thus affected seek remedies in the arbitration tribunals invoking breach of host government obligations to protect investments. The host government also ...
Read More
Measures taken by governments during armed conflict to safeguard their essential interests sometimes cause damages to foreign investors. The investors thus affected seek remedies in the arbitration tribunals invoking breach of host government obligations to protect investments. The host government also usually attempts to assert as defense non-precluded measures to prove its irresponsibility, or if it proves responsible, justify it by resorting to circumstances precluding wrongfulness in the customary international law. But since different courts do not consider the same requirements to invoke these rules, there is no certainty that the parties to the lawsuit will be able to invoke them and, as a result, the scope of government's obligations to protect the foreign investor during the armed conflict is obscure. To clarify the scope of the host government's obligations to protect the foreign investor during armed conflicts and balance the interests of the investor and the host government during the investment disputes arising from the armed conflict, this article explores the possibility and requirements of invoking circumstances precluding wrongfulness and non-precluded measures and the relationship between them.