بررسی اهمیت جایگاه محیطزیست و اصل انصاف در تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی (با تأکید بر رویهی قضایی دیوان بینالمللی دادگستری)
محورهای موضوعی :
حقوق محیط زیست
میر حسن ریاضی
1
,
علی فقیه حبیبی
2
,
علی مشهدی
3
,
منصور پورنوری
4
1 - دکترای، رشته حقوق محیط زیست، دانشکده منابع طبیعی و محیط زیست، واحد علوم وتحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاداسلامی،تهران،ایران.
2 - دانشیارگروه حقوق عمومی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی (واحد تهران جنوب)، تهران، ایران. *(مسوول مکاتبات)
3 - دکترای حقوق بین الملل، دانشیار وعضو هیات علمی، حقوق دانشگاه قم، ایران.
4 - دکترای حقوق بین الملل، استادیار وعضو هیات علمی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی(واحد تهران مرکز)، تهران، ایران.
تاریخ دریافت : 1400/04/01
تاریخ پذیرش : 1400/05/18
تاریخ انتشار : 1401/02/01
کلید واژه:
محیطزیست,
رویهی قضایی,
دیوان بینالمللی دادگستری,
اصل انصاف,
مرز زمینی,
چکیده مقاله :
محدوده ها و خطوط مرزی بین المللی، قلمروهای تحت حاکمیت دولت ها را معین می کنند. این محدوده ها که حدود حاکمیت کشورها را معین می کنند وسعتی متفاوت دارند و کشورها با حساسیت زیاد به آن می نگرند و خواهان تعیین حدود دقیق آنها هستند. دیوان بینالمللی دادگستری به عنوان رکن قضایی سازمان ملل متحد، نقشی بی بدیل در تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی میان کشورها دارد. دیوان این کار را با ابزارهای در دست، یعنی با احترام به ثبات معاهدات مرزی و ارضی، اصل تصرف حقوقی و سلطه مؤثر انجام میدهد و در این مسیر، ابزارهای کمکی او اصولی چون استاپل، رضایت، عملکردبعدی کشورهاوانصاف و ... هستند. باید گفت؛ اگر در گذشته، عامل زور و قدرت باعث تعیین حدود مرزها می شد، امروزه، توافق، عامل تعیین کننده ی حدود مرزها است. اصولی هم چون انصاف و... همگی، منعکس کننده ی عامل توافق برای تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی هستند. در این میان در برخی موارد، برخی توجیهات، توسط طرف های دعاوی ارضی و مرزی در مقابل دیوان بین المللی دادگستری مطرح شده اند، اما دیوان این توجیهات را مستند رأی خود قرار نداده و گرچه در برخی موارد، همچون محیطزیست، توجه خود را به این مستندات معطوف داشته، ولی هرگز آنها را به عنوان عاملی جهت تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی در نظر نگرفته است و مسأله محیطزیست از جمله توجیهات غیر قابل قبول تحصیل مالکیت سرزمین از سوی دیوان بین المللی دادگستری است. در این پژوهش به روش توصیفی- تحلیلی سعی در بررسی اهمیت جایگاه محیطزیست و اصل انصاف در تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی (با تأکید بر رویه ی قضایی دیوان بین المللی دادگستری) شده است. سئوال اساسی این است که محیط زیست و اصل انصاف چه جایگاهی در تعیین حدود مرزهای زمینی دارند. در نهایت نتیجه حاصله حاکی از این است که بر اساس رویه قضایی دیوان بین المللی دادگستری اصل انصاف نقش نهایی و مکمل دراین زمینه دارد.
چکیده انگلیسی:
Investigating the importance of the position of the environment and the principle of equity in determining the boundaries of land borders (Emphasis on the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice)
The International Court of Justice, as the judicial body of the United Nations, has an irreplaceable role in determining the boundaries of land borders between countries. The Court does this with the tools at hand, that is, with respect for the stability of border and territorial treaties, the principle of legal possession and effective domination, and in this regard, its auxiliary tools are principles such as fairness and so on. It must be said; if in the past, the factor of force and power determined the boundaries, but today, the agreement determines the boundaries. Principles such as fairness, etc., all reflect the factor of agreement to determine the boundaries of land borders. In some cases; Some justifications have been raised by the parties to territorial and border disputes before the International Court of Justice, but the Court has not substantiated these justifications, and although in some cases, such as the environment, it has turned its attention to these documents, He has never considered them as a factor in determining the boundaries of land, and the issue of the environment is one of the unacceptable justifications for the acquisition of land ownership by the International Court of Justice. In this descriptive-analytical study, an attempt has been made to examine the importance of the status of the environment and the principle of fairness in determining the boundaries of land borders (with emphasis on the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice).
منابع و مأخذ:
Prescott, Victor, & Gillian D Triggs. (2008) International Frontiers and Boundaries: Law, Politics and Geography, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers / Brill Academic Public.
Kaiyan Homi Kaikobad. (2007) Interpretation and Revision of International Boundary Decisions (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, Series Number 49), Cambridge University Press.
Grant, Thomas. (2015) Aggression against Ukraine: Territory, Responsibility, and International Law Hardcover, Palgrave Macmillan; 2015th edition.
Saberrad, Mohammad (2016), Rules for Determining Land Boundaries in International Judicial Opinions, PhD Research Project in Public International Law, Imam Reza University. (In Persian)
Agean Sea Continental Shelf Case, (Greece V. Turkey), Judgment of 19 December 1978.
Jafarivaldani, Asghar. (2000). Iran and International Law, Tehran: Pazineh Publications. (In Persian)
Drissdell, Alasdair; H. Blake, Gerald (1995), Political Geography of the Middle East and North Africa, Darreh (Mohajerani), Mir Haidar, Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publications
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases, (Federal Republic of Germany / Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany / Netherlands), Judgment of 20 February 1969.
Case Concerning the Continental Shelf, (Tunisia / Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment of 24 February 1982.
Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, (Qatar V. Bahrain), Judgment of 16 March 2001.
Case Concerning the land and maritime boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, JUDGMENT OF 11 JUNE 1998
Case Concerning the land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, (Cameroon V. Nigeria), Judgment of 10 October 2002.
Case Concerning Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea, (Nicaragua V. Honduras), Judgment of 8 October 2007
Tanaka, Yoshifumi. (2013) Reflections on the Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia before the International Court of Justice, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 26, Issue. 4.
Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, (Eritrea /Yemen), 9 October 1998, RIAA, Vol. XXII.
Case Concerning the Continental Shelf, (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya / Malta), Judgment of 3 June 1985.
Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, (Denmark V. Norway), Judgment of 14 June 1993.
Territorial and Maritime Dispute, (Nicaragua V. Colombia), Judgment of 19 November 2012.
Case Concerning the Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute, (El Salvador / Honduras),11 September 1992.
Shaw, Malcolm. N. (1996) The Herritage of States: The Principle of uti Possidetis Juris Today, British Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 67.
Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, (Argentina V. Uruguay), Judgment of 20 April 2010.
Case Concerning Kasikili / Sedudu Island, (Botswana / Namibia), Judgment of 13 December 1999.
Karimi Niya, MohammadMahdi. (2000). The Position of Fairness in International Trade Law, Journal of Knowledge, No. 49. (In Persian)
The Honduras Borders Case, (Guatemala / Honduras), 23 January 1933, RIAA, Vol. 2.
Case Concerning the Frontier Dispute, (Burkina Faso / Republic of Mali), Judgment of 22 December 1986.
Case Concerning Sovereignty Over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, (Indonesia / Malaysia), Judgment of 17 December 2002.
_||_
Prescott, Victor, & Gillian D Triggs. (2008) International Frontiers and Boundaries: Law, Politics and Geography, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers / Brill Academic Public.
Kaiyan Homi Kaikobad. (2007) Interpretation and Revision of International Boundary Decisions (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law, Series Number 49), Cambridge University Press.
Grant, Thomas. (2015) Aggression against Ukraine: Territory, Responsibility, and International Law Hardcover, Palgrave Macmillan; 2015th edition.
Saberrad, Mohammad (2016), Rules for Determining Land Boundaries in International Judicial Opinions, PhD Research Project in Public International Law, Imam Reza University. (In Persian)
Agean Sea Continental Shelf Case, (Greece V. Turkey), Judgment of 19 December 1978.
Jafarivaldani, Asghar. (2000). Iran and International Law, Tehran: Pazineh Publications. (In Persian)
Drissdell, Alasdair; H. Blake, Gerald (1995), Political Geography of the Middle East and North Africa, Darreh (Mohajerani), Mir Haidar, Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publications
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases, (Federal Republic of Germany / Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany / Netherlands), Judgment of 20 February 1969.
Case Concerning the Continental Shelf, (Tunisia / Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment of 24 February 1982.
Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, (Qatar V. Bahrain), Judgment of 16 March 2001.
Case Concerning the land and maritime boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, JUDGMENT OF 11 JUNE 1998
Case Concerning the land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, (Cameroon V. Nigeria), Judgment of 10 October 2002.
Case Concerning Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea, (Nicaragua V. Honduras), Judgment of 8 October 2007
Tanaka, Yoshifumi. (2013) Reflections on the Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Colombia before the International Court of Justice, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 26, Issue. 4.
Territorial Sovereignty and Scope of the Dispute, (Eritrea /Yemen), 9 October 1998, RIAA, Vol. XXII.
Case Concerning the Continental Shelf, (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya / Malta), Judgment of 3 June 1985.
Case Concerning Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Greenland and Jan Mayen, (Denmark V. Norway), Judgment of 14 June 1993.
Territorial and Maritime Dispute, (Nicaragua V. Colombia), Judgment of 19 November 2012.
Case Concerning the Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute, (El Salvador / Honduras),11 September 1992.
Shaw, Malcolm. N. (1996) The Herritage of States: The Principle of uti Possidetis Juris Today, British Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 67.
Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, (Argentina V. Uruguay), Judgment of 20 April 2010.
Case Concerning Kasikili / Sedudu Island, (Botswana / Namibia), Judgment of 13 December 1999.
Karimi Niya, MohammadMahdi. (2000). The Position of Fairness in International Trade Law, Journal of Knowledge, No. 49. (In Persian)
The Honduras Borders Case, (Guatemala / Honduras), 23 January 1933, RIAA, Vol. 2.
Case Concerning the Frontier Dispute, (Burkina Faso / Republic of Mali), Judgment of 22 December 1986.
Case Concerning Sovereignty Over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan, (Indonesia / Malaysia), Judgment of 17 December 2002.