ماهیت حقوقی و ضمانت اجرای قرارهای دستور موقت دیوان بین المللی دادگستری در پرتو رویه دیوان و عملکرد کشورها

محورهای موضوعی : تحقیقات حقوقی بین المللی

مهدیه اردشیر مقدم ¹ , هیبت الله نژندی منش ² , محمدعلی صلح چی ³

1 - گروه حقوق، واحد بین المللی کیش، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، جزیره کیش، ایران. رایانامه: [e-mail]
2 - گروه حقوق، واحد بین المللی کیش، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، جزیره کیش، ایران. استادیار دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. (نویسنده مسئول). رایانامه: [e-mail]
3 - گروه حقوق، واحد بین المللی کیش، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، جزیره کیش، ایران. دانشیار حقوق بین الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. رایانامه: [e-mail]

تاریخ دریافت : 1400/10/29 تاریخ پذیرش : 1401/06/12 تاریخ انتشار : 1402/01/01

کلید واژه: دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری, ضمانت اجرا, قرار اقدامات موقتی, پرونده لاگراند, رویه دولت‌ها,

چکیده مقاله :

زمینه و هدف: دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری به‌موجب اساسنامه خود از این اختیار برخوردار است تا به‌منظور حفظ حقوق طرف‌های اختلاف و همچنین جلوگیری از گسترش و وخامت اختلاف، قرار اقدامات موقتی را صادر نماید. این قرارها از همان ابتدا با تفسیر مختلف کشورهای مرتبط با اختلاف مواجه بوده‌اند. برخی از کشورها این قرارها را غیرالزام‌آور می‌دانستند؛ درحالی‌که برخی دیگر آن‌ها را الزام‌آور می‌دانستند. در دکترین نیز تا حدودی این اختلاف‌نظر وجود داشت. در نوشتار حاضر ضمن بررسی ماهیت حقوقی قرار اقدامات موقتی، این مسئله بحث شده است که آیا در حقوق بین‌الملل ضمانت اجرایی برای عملی کردن قرار اقدامات موقتی وجود دارد یا خیر؟ به‌علاوه در این خصوص رویه کشورها چگونه است؟روش: پژوهش حاضر با روش توصیفی- تحلیلی انجام‌شده است.یافته‌ها و نتایج: بنابر رویه دیوان، به‌ویژه در پرونده لاگراند، قرارهای اقدامات موقت دیوان الزام‌آور می‌باشند. ازاین‌رو، کشورهای مخاطب این قرارها ازنظر حقوقی ملزم به اجرای آن‌ها می‌باشند قرار اقدامات موقتی ازجمله تصمیمات الزام‌آور دیوان می‌باشد و کشورها برای اجرای آن روش‌های مختلفی ازجمله اقدامات یک‌جانبه، مراجعه به شورای امنیت، مراجعه به محاکم داخلی و اقدامات متقابل را بکار می‌برند. ضمانت اجرای قرارهای اقدامات موقتی همان ضمانت اجرای حقوق بین‌المللی می‌باشد.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Field and Aims: According to its statute, the International Court of Justice has the authority to issue temporary measures in order to protect the rights of the parties to the dispute and also to prevent the spread and deterioration of the dispute. From the beginning, these appointments have been faced with different interpretations of the related countries. Some countries considered these appointments non-binding; while others considered them binding. There was some disagreement in doctrine as well. In this article, while examining the legal nature of temporary measures, it has been discussed whether there is an enforceable guarantee in international law for the implementation of temporary measures or not? In addition, what is the procedure of countries in this regard?Method: The present research was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method.Findings and Conclusions: According to the court's procedure, especially in the Lagrand case, the orders of temporary measures of the court are binding. Therefore, the addressee countries of these agreements are legally required to implement them. The agreement is a temporary measure, including the binding decisions of the court, and the countries use different methods to implement it, including unilateral measures, referring to the Security Council, referring to domestic courts, and countermeasures. The guarantee of the implementation of temporary measures is the same as the guarantee of the implementation of international law.

منابع و مأخذ:

- خرم پی، ارسلان. (1388). رابطه شورای امنیت و دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری با تأکید بر موضوع استفاده از زور در حقوق بین‌الملل. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تهران مرکزی.

- محبی، محسن و بذار، وحید. (1399). مراجعه به شورای امنیت سازمان ملل متحد برای اجرای آراء دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری. پژوهشنامه ایرانی سیاست بین‌الملل، 8(2)، 292-273.

https://irlip.um.ac.ir/article_30414.html

- نجفی اسفاد، مرتضی و هادی، مهدی. (1384). ضمانت اجرایی آرای دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری. نامه مفید، 9(52)، 48-25.

https://law.mofidu.ac.ir/article_46816.html

 

- Al-Qahtani, MM. (2002). The role of the International Court of Justice in the enforcement of its judicial decisions. Leiden Journal of International Law, 15(4), 781 – 804.

https://journals.scholarsportal.info/details/09221565/v15i0004/781_troticteoijd.xml&sub=all

- Arbour, JM. (1975). Quelques réflexions sur les mesures conservatoires indiquées par la Cour internationale de Justice. Les Cahiers de droit, 16(3), 531–573.

https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/cd1/1975-v16-n3-cd3728/042036ar.pdf

- Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. (1993). Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/91

- Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey)- Request for the Indication of Interim Measures of Protection. (1976). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/62/provisional-measures

 - Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (United Kingdom v. Iran), Interim measures, ICJ Reports. (1951). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icjcij.org/case/16#:~:text=By%20an%20Order%20of%205,had%20ceased%20to%20be%20operative

- Application of the International Convention It the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), Provisional Measures. ( 2008). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/140

 - Application of the Genocide Convention (Provisional Measures). (1993). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/91

- Armed Activities It the Territory of the Congo, New (Democratic Republic of the Congo, New v. Uganda). (2005). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/116

- Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America). (2003). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/128

- Ben Hammadi, Y. (2001). La question du caractère obligatoire des mesures conservatoires devant la Cour Internationale de Justice – L’arrêt LaGrand (Allemagne c. États-Unis d’Amérique) du 27 juin 2001. Revue québecoise de droit international, 14(2), 81 – 53.

https://www.sqdi.org/wp-content/uploads/14.2_-_hammadi.pdf

- Benvenisti, E. (1994). Judges and foreign affairs: A comment on the Institut de droit international’s resolution on the activities of national courts and the international relations of their State. European Journal of International Law, 5(1), 126 – 155.

https://academic.oup.com/book/3116/chapter-abstract/143946507?redirectedFrom=fulltext

- Bernhard, Kempen and Zan, He. (2009). The Practice of the International Court of Justice on Provisional Measures: The Recent Development. Cambridge University Press

- Brown, Ch. (2007). A Common Law of International Adjudication. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

- Brown, C. (2014). Inherent powers in international adjudication. In: Romano C et al. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

- Brownlie, I. (1994). The Decisions of Political Organs of the United Nations and the Rule of Law. Essays in Honour of Wang Tieya.

- Cassese, A. (2012). Towards a moderate Monism: Could international rules eventually acquire the force to invalidate inconsistent national laws?. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

- Cowling, M. (2005). The relationship between the Security Council and the General Assembly with particular reference to the ICJ Advisory Opinion on the ‘Israeli Wall’ Case. South African Yearbook of International Law, 30(1), 1 – 60.

https://journals.co.za/doi/abs/10.10520/EJC100024

- Crawford, J. (2013). Crawford, James, “Chance, Order, Change: The Course Of International Law General Course On Public International Law. Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law.

- Del Mar, K. (2013). The effect of framing international legal norms as rules or exceptions: State immunity from civil jurisdiction. International Community Law Review, 15, 143 – 170.

https://books.google.com/books?id=zzHLDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA487&lpg=PA487&dq=Del+Mar,+K.+(2013)

- Fitzmaurice, G. (1958). The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice. British Yearbook of International Law.

- Fisheries Jurisdiction case, ICJ Reports. (1972).

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/55

- Gray, C. (2008). International law and the use of force. 3^rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

- Guggenheim, P. (1932). Les mesures conservatoires dans la procédure arbitrale et judiciaire. Recueil des Cours.

- Guggenheim, P. (1932). Les mesures conservatoires dans la procédure arbitrale et judiciaire. Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law.

- Herdegen, I. (1994). The Constitutionalisation of the UN Security System. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 32(3), 242 – 262.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26567178

- ICJ. (1993). Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Provisional Measures, Order of 13 September 1993. International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/91

- ICJ. (1999). LaGrand case (Germany v. United States of America), Request for the Indication of Provisional Measures, Order of 3 March 1999. International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/104

- ICJ. (2005). Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment of 19 December 2005. International Court of Justice.

https://www.icjcij.org/case/116#:~:text=The%20Court%20also%20found%20that,the%20principle%20of%20non%2Dintervention

- ICJ. (1962). Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (Cambodia v. Thailand). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/151

- ICJ. (2011). Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Provisional Measures, Order of 8 March 2011. International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/150

- ICJ. (2014). Questions relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor Leste v. Australia). International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/156

- ICJ. (2016). Immunities and Criminal Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/163

- ICJ. (1997). Gabˇcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/92

- Jennings, R. (1987). The judicial enforcement of international obligations. Zeitschrift fur auslandisches offentliches Recht und Volkerrecht, (47), 3 – 16. https://www.zaoerv.de/47_1987/47_1987_1_a_3_16.pdf

- Kamto, M. (2007). Considerations actuelles sur l’inexecution des decisions de la Cour International de Justice. Law of the Sea, Environmental Law and Settlement of Disputes, 215 – 233.

https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004161566.i-1188.72

- Kovács, P. (2021). Interim Measures in the Practice of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. in Fulvio Maria Palombino, Roberto Virzo, Giovanni Zarra (ed.). Provisional Measures Issued by International Courts and Tribunals, Springer.

- Kritsiotis, D. (2012). International law and the relatives of enforcement. In: Crawford J, Koskenniemi M (eds). The Cambridge companion to international law Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

- Lauterpacht, H. (1958). The Development of International Law by the International Court. Stevens & Sons, London.

- Lando, M. (2017). Compliance with provisional measures indicated by the International Court of Justice. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 8(1), 22– 55.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idv029

- LaGrand (Germany) v United States of America), Judgment, ICJ Reports. (2001). International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/104/judgments

- LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America), Provisional Measures, ICJ Reports. (1999). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/104

- Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons (Advisory opinion), ICJ Reports. (1996). International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/95

- Mendelson, M. (2004). State responsibility for breach of interim protection orders of the International Court of Justice. Hart, Oxford.

- Merrills, J.G. (1995). Interim Measures of Protection in the recent jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. International and Comparative Law Review, 44(1), 90 – 146.

https://doi.org/10.1093/iclqaj/44.1.90

- Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Jurisdiction and Admissibility) case, ICJ Rep. (1984). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/70

- Nuclear Tests case, ICJ Reports. (1973). International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/58

- Naldi, G.J. (2002). International Court of Justice declares provisional measures of protection binding. The Law Quarterly Review, 18(95), 91 – 115.    https://www.ghazavat.org/article_216274.html?lang=en

- O’Connell, M.E. (2008). The power and purpose of international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

- Reisman, M. (1993).The Constitutional Crisis in the United Nations. The American Journal of International Law, 87(1), 83 – 100.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2203853

- Rosenne, S. (2006). The Law and Practice of the International Court, 1920–2005. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.

- Rolin, H. (1954). Observations des membres de la vingt-deuxième Commission en réponse à la circulaire de Max Huber du 18 juillet 1952. Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International, 45(1), 275 – 386.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Annuaire_de_l_Institut_de_droit_internat.html?id=rUxLAAAAMAAJ

- Roscini, M. (2007). Threats of armed forces and contemporary international law. Netherlands International Law Review, 54(2), 229-277.          https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X0700229X

- Schwebel, S.M. (1994). Justice in International Law. Grotius, Cambridge.

- Sztucki, J. (1983). Interim measures in The Hague Court: An attempt at a scrutiny. 1^st edn. Kluwer Law and Taxation. Deventer.

- Schachter, O. (1982). International Law in theory and in practice: General Course in Public International Law. Recueil des Cours, 20(2), 178 – 179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0731126500007708

- Separate Opinion of Vice President Weeramantry in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Provisional Measures, Order of 13 September 1993. (1993). ICJ Rep 325. International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/91/provisional-measures.

- Thirlway, H. (2012). Article 30. In: Zimmermann A et al. (eds) The Statute of the International Court of Justice – A Commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford

- United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v. Iran). (1979).  International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/64/judgments

- U.S. Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v. Iran), judgment, ICJ Reports. (1980). International Court of Justice. https://www.icj-cij.org/case/64

- Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America), Provisional Measures, ICJ, Reports 1998. (1998). International Court of Justice.

https://www.icj-cij.org/case/99

- Vázquez, C.M. (2008). Less than zero?. American Journal of International Law, 102(3), 563 – 574.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1324310

- Vera Gowl land, Debbas. (1988). The Relationship between the International Court. Journal of Armed Conflict Law, 3(1), 97 – 119.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44508726

- Yearbook of the ILC 1991, vol. II (2), UN Doc A/CN.4/SER. A/1991/Add.1 (Part 2), 29 April– 19 July 1991, p. 56. Yearbook of the ILC 1991, vol. II (2),- Yearbook of the ILC. (1991). UN Doc A/CN.4/SER.A/1991/Add.1 (Part 2).

https://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_1991_v2_p2.pdf

- Zimmermann, A; Tomuschat, C; Oellers-Frahm, K; Tams, C.J. (2012). The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary. 2^nd Edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.