نقش مراجع قضایی داخلی در شناسایی و تضمین عدالت میان نسلی به عنوان رکن اساسی توسعه پایدار
محورهای موضوعی :
حقوق محیط زیست
توکل حبیب زاده
1
,
کیوان اقبالی
2
,
امیر پناهنده ثمرین
3
1 - دانشیار گروه حقوق عمومی، دانشکده معارف اسلامی و حقوق دانشگاه امام صادق (ع) ، تهران، ایران. (مسوول مکاتبات)
2 - دانش‌آموختۀ دکتری حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران. عضو گروه حقوق بشر و بین الملل پژوهشگاه قوه قضاییه.
3 - دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد حقوق محیط زیست، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران.
تاریخ دریافت : 1399/10/28
تاریخ پذیرش : 1400/04/23
تاریخ انتشار : 1402/01/01
کلید واژه:
توسعه پایدار,
محیط زیست,
عدالت میان نسلی,
مراجع قضایی داخلی,
چکیده مقاله :
در دهه های اخیر، افزایش گسترده نابرابری در جهان و تخریب نگران کننده محیط زیست، دولت ها را به بازبینی نحوه تدوین و اجرای برنامه های توسعه واداشته است، بازبینی که ماحصل آن طرح مفهوم جدیدی با عنوان توسعه پایدار می باشد. توسعه پایدار فرایندی از توسعه است که در آن مطلوب بودن و امکانات موجود در طول زمان کاهش پیدا ننموده و نوعی عدالت توزیعی مستلزم تقسیم عادلانه فرصتهای توسعه بین نسل های کنونی و آینده به عنوان یکی از مهمترین اهداف توسعه مزبور برقرار خواهد شد. در این میان، با عنایت به آنکه مراجع قضایی به عنوان تضمین کنند گان اصلی عدالت در هر جامعه تلقی شده، در تحقیق حاضر سعی بر آن گردیده تا با استفاده از روش توصیفی-تحلیلی، نقش و جایگاه این مراجع در ورود به مسئله لزوم رعایت عدالت میان نسلی در پیشبرد هر گونه برنامه توسعه ملی یا محلی و در نتیجه ایجاد التزام به رعایت ملاحظات مرتبط با این بعد از عدالت مورد ارزیابی قرار گیرد. در این راستا، بررسی رویه قضایی موجود در دادگاه های برخی از کشورها حکایت از آن دارد که مراجع مذکور می توانند نقشی اساسی در شناسایی و تضمین برقراری عدالت بین نسل حاضر و نسل های آینده در جریان تدوین و اجرای برنامه های توسعه ملی و ناحیه ای، به عنوان یکی از اهداف اصلی توسعه مبتنی بر پایداری بر عهده گیرند.
چکیده انگلیسی:
In recent decades, growing inequality in the world and the worrying destruction of the environment have forced governments to reconsider the formulation and implementation of development plans. The outcome is the concept of sustainable development that entails a process in which desirability and available possibilities are not diminished over time and a kind of distributive justice requires a fair distribution of development opportunities between current and future generations as one of the most important development goals. Meanwhile, taking into acount that the judiciary is considered as the main guarantor of justice in any society, in this study, using a descriptive and analitical method, the role and the position of judiciary authorities in considering the necessity of the observance of intergenerational justice in the advancment any national or local development program and as a result the commitment to observe the considerations related to this dimension of justice is analized. In this regard, the review of judicial procedure in the courts of some countries indicates that these authorities can play a key role in recognising and ensuring justice between the present and future generations during the codification and the implementation of development plans, as the main goal of the sustainable development.
منابع و مأخذ:
Farahanifar, Saeed, Sustainable development based on justice, Journal of Islamic Economics, 2005, 19, pp.91-122. (In Persian)
Todaro, Michael, Economic Development in the Third World, Translated by Gholamali Farjadi, Volume.1, Tehran: Plan and Budget Organization, 1991. (In Persian)
sen, amartya, development as freedom, Translated by Vahid Mahmoodi, fourth edition, Tehran: University of Tehran Press, 2015. (In Persian)
Zahedi, Shamsolsadat& Najafi, Gholam ali, Conceptual development of sustainable development, Quarterly Journal of Humanities Teacher, 2006, Volume.10, Issue.4, pp.43-76. (In Persian)
Ramezani Ghavam Abadi, Mohammad Hossein & Shafighfard, Hassan, Sustainable Development and Right to a Healthy Environment: Contradiction or Companionship, World Politics: a Quarterly Journal, 2016, Volume.5, Issue:1, pp.241-271. (In Persian)
Emas, Rachel. 2015. The Concept of Sustainable Development: Definition and Defining Principles. In: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5839GSDR%202015_SD_concept_definiton_rev.pdf Last Visited in:2018/11/20
Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project. Hungary/Slovakia. Judgment of 25 September 1997
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Oxford University Press. New York. USA. 1987
Dernbach, John C. 1998. Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance. Case Western Reserve Law Review. Vol. 49. Issue 1. pp.1-103
A/RES/S-19/2. Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. 19 September 1997
United Nations Conference on Environment & Development. Agenda 21. Rio de Janerio. Brazil. 3 to 14 June 1992
Farahanifar, Saeed, Intergenerational justice in the exploitation of natural resources, Journal of Islamic Economics, 2007. Issue.25, pp.125-156. (In Persian)
Fayyazi, Mohammad Taghi& Ali Asghar Ajdari; Mojtaba Bagheri Tudashki, Sustainability of budget based on intergenerational justice in exploiting oil resources; an approach for Iran, Journal of Iran's Economic Essays, 2020,Volume 16, Issue 32, pp.35-59
Maggio, G.F. 1997. Inter/intragenerational Equity: Current Applications under International Law for Promoting the Sustainable Development of Natural Resources. Buffalo Environmental Law Journal. 4. No. 2. pp.161-223
Brown Weiss, Edith 1998. Our rights and Obligations to Future Generations and the Environment. American Journal of International Law. Vol.84. pp.197-207
Farchakh, Loubna.2003. The Concept of Intergenerational Equity in International Law. thesis for Masters of Laws. Faculty of Law. Montreal.Institute of Comparative Law. McGill University
The Constitution of India. 26 November 1949
The Constitution of Philippines. 1987
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Oposa v. Factoran. G.R. No. 101083. 30 July 1993.
Robinson, Nicholas. 1997. Attaining Systems for Sustainability through Environmental Law. Natural Resources & Environment. Vol. 12. No. 2. pp.86-141
Dirth, Elizabeth .2018. Governance for Future Generations: A Global Review of the Implementation of Intergenerational Equity, Course: Sustainable Development – Environmental Governance Track. Thesis for Master of Laws. Utrecht: University of Utrecht
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Third Division, Hilarion M. Henares.Jr., et al. v. Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board and Department of Transportation and Communications. G. R. No. 158290. 23 October 2006
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Resident Marine Mammals of the Protected Seascape Tanon Strait v. Secretary Angelo Reyes. G.R. No. 180771. 21 April 2015
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. Gray v The Minister for Planning and Ores. NSWLEC 720. 27 November 2006
Rose, Anne. 2007. Gray v Minister for Planning: the rising tide, of climate change litigation in Australia. Sydney Law Review. Vol. 29. Issue 4. pp. 725-734
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. Taralaga Landscape Guardians Inc. v. Minister for Planning.NSWLEC 59 (Taralaga). 12 February 2007
District Court of The Hague. Urgenda Foundation v The State of the Netherlands (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment). C/09/00456689. 24 June 2015
Schwartz, John. 2019. In ‘Strongest’ Climate Ruling Yet, Dutch Court Orders Leaders to Take Action. in: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/climate/netherlands-climate-lawsuit.html
Radiation Protection Act. Approved by the Islamic Consultative Assembly of Iran, 10 April 1989(in Persian)
the Court of Administrative justice, the decision of the General Board of the Court of Administrative Justice related to the annulment of the circular No. 73/1/729/14997, 28 July 1992, Case number 63. Case class 21/71. (In Persian)
_||_
Farahanifar, Saeed, Sustainable development based on justice, Journal of Islamic Economics, 2005, 19, pp.91-122. (In Persian)
Todaro, Michael, Economic Development in the Third World, Translated by Gholamali Farjadi, Volume.1, Tehran: Plan and Budget Organization, 1991. (In Persian)
sen, amartya, development as freedom, Translated by Vahid Mahmoodi, fourth edition, Tehran: University of Tehran Press, 2015. (In Persian)
Zahedi, Shamsolsadat& Najafi, Gholam ali, Conceptual development of sustainable development, Quarterly Journal of Humanities Teacher, 2006, Volume.10, Issue.4, pp.43-76. (In Persian)
Ramezani Ghavam Abadi, Mohammad Hossein & Shafighfard, Hassan, Sustainable Development and Right to a Healthy Environment: Contradiction or Companionship, World Politics: a Quarterly Journal, 2016, Volume.5, Issue:1, pp.241-271. (In Persian)
Emas, Rachel. 2015. The Concept of Sustainable Development: Definition and Defining Principles. In: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5839GSDR%202015_SD_concept_definiton_rev.pdf Last Visited in:2018/11/20
Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project. Hungary/Slovakia. Judgment of 25 September 1997
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Oxford University Press. New York. USA. 1987
Dernbach, John C. 1998. Sustainable Development as a Framework for National Governance. Case Western Reserve Law Review. Vol. 49. Issue 1. pp.1-103
A/RES/S-19/2. Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21. 19 September 1997
United Nations Conference on Environment & Development. Agenda 21. Rio de Janerio. Brazil. 3 to 14 June 1992
Farahanifar, Saeed, Intergenerational justice in the exploitation of natural resources, Journal of Islamic Economics, 2007. Issue.25, pp.125-156. (In Persian)
Fayyazi, Mohammad Taghi& Ali Asghar Ajdari; Mojtaba Bagheri Tudashki, Sustainability of budget based on intergenerational justice in exploiting oil resources; an approach for Iran, Journal of Iran's Economic Essays, 2020,Volume 16, Issue 32, pp.35-59
Maggio, G.F. 1997. Inter/intragenerational Equity: Current Applications under International Law for Promoting the Sustainable Development of Natural Resources. Buffalo Environmental Law Journal. 4. No. 2. pp.161-223
Brown Weiss, Edith 1998. Our rights and Obligations to Future Generations and the Environment. American Journal of International Law. Vol.84. pp.197-207
Farchakh, Loubna.2003. The Concept of Intergenerational Equity in International Law. thesis for Masters of Laws. Faculty of Law. Montreal.Institute of Comparative Law. McGill University
The Constitution of India. 26 November 1949
The Constitution of Philippines. 1987
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Oposa v. Factoran. G.R. No. 101083. 30 July 1993.
Robinson, Nicholas. 1997. Attaining Systems for Sustainability through Environmental Law. Natural Resources & Environment. Vol. 12. No. 2. pp.86-141
Dirth, Elizabeth .2018. Governance for Future Generations: A Global Review of the Implementation of Intergenerational Equity, Course: Sustainable Development – Environmental Governance Track. Thesis for Master of Laws. Utrecht: University of Utrecht
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Third Division, Hilarion M. Henares.Jr., et al. v. Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board and Department of Transportation and Communications. G. R. No. 158290. 23 October 2006
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court. Resident Marine Mammals of the Protected Seascape Tanon Strait v. Secretary Angelo Reyes. G.R. No. 180771. 21 April 2015
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. Gray v The Minister for Planning and Ores. NSWLEC 720. 27 November 2006
Rose, Anne. 2007. Gray v Minister for Planning: the rising tide, of climate change litigation in Australia. Sydney Law Review. Vol. 29. Issue 4. pp. 725-734
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales. Taralaga Landscape Guardians Inc. v. Minister for Planning.NSWLEC 59 (Taralaga). 12 February 2007
District Court of The Hague. Urgenda Foundation v The State of the Netherlands (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment). C/09/00456689. 24 June 2015
Schwartz, John. 2019. In ‘Strongest’ Climate Ruling Yet, Dutch Court Orders Leaders to Take Action. in: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/20/climate/netherlands-climate-lawsuit.html
Radiation Protection Act. Approved by the Islamic Consultative Assembly of Iran, 10 April 1989(in Persian)
the Court of Administrative justice, the decision of the General Board of the Court of Administrative Justice related to the annulment of the circular No. 73/1/729/14997, 28 July 1992, Case number 63. Case class 21/71. (In Persian)
