جانشینی دولت ها در مسوولیت بین المللی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه بهشتی

2 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق بین الملل عمومی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

چکیده

با توجه به ماهیت شخصی عمل متخلفانه، هر فعل متخلفانه بین المللی دولت موجب مسوولیت بین المللی همان دولت است. این اصل در موارد جانشینی دولت ها، در خصوص مسوولیت بین المللی دولت سابق، پاسخ مناسبی ارایه نمی دهد. اگر به واسطه ی نبود دولت مرتکب، مسوولیت بین المللی آن نیز فراموش شود، عمل متخلفانه بین المللی بدون جبران رها خواهد شد و حق دولت زیان دیده نسبت به جبران، نادیده گرفته خواهد شد. رویه کنونی دولت ها نشان می دهد که دایره اعمال دکترین عدم جانشینی دولت ها در مسولیت بین المللی، جز در برخی موارد از جمله موجودیت دولت مرتکب (دولت سابق)، بسیار محدود گردیده است و حتی در فرض وجود دولت سابق نیز می توان با احراز رضایت دولت جانشین، ماهیت سرزمینی بودن عمل متخلفانه و توسل به اصل دارا شدن ناعادلانه بحث جانشینی دولت ها در مسولیت بین المللی را مطرح نمود. این مقاله سعی دارد تا با استفاده از قواعد حقوقی و بررسی رویه دولت ها در انواع مختلف جانشینی دولت ها به این چالش اصلی پاسخ دهد که آیا مسوولیت بین المللی که قبل از تاریخ جانشینی برای دولت سابق ایجاد شده است، به دولت جانشین منتقل می گردد؟

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Succession of States in International Responsibility

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mirshahbiz Shafe 1
  • Vahid Bazzar 2
1 Associate Professor of Beheshti University
2 PHD Student of International Law
چکیده [English]

On the basis of a personal nature of wrongful act, every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State. This principle does not provide an appropriate response on the succession of States as to the international responsibility of the predecessor state. If the international responsibility to be forgotten because of absence of doer state, internationally wrongful act will be released without reparation and the right to reparation of injured state will be ignored. Current practice of states show that has been very limited application of the doctrine of non-succession in International Responsibility, but in some cases including existence of doer state (predecessor state) and even on the assumption that there is predecessor state, it is could also raised the subject of succession of States in international responsibility by the consent of the successor state, the nature of territoriality of wrongful act and the principle of unjust enrichment. with using norms of law and state practice in different types of succession of states, this Article is to Endeavour to Responses this main challenge whether international responsibility of predecessor state before the date of the succession has been transferred to the successor state?

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Succession
  • international responsibility
  • State Practice
  • Internationally Wrongful Act
  • Obligation to Reparation
فهرست منابع

Books

1. Crawford, James, 2013. State Responsibility: The General Part, Cambridge University Press.

2. Dumberry, Patrick. 2007, State Succession to International Responsibility, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

3. Jakubowski, Andrzej, 2015. State Succession in Cultural Property, Oxford University Press.

4. O'Connell, D.P. 1967. State Succession in municipal law and international law, Vol. I, Cambridge University Press.

5. Shaw QC, Malcolm N. 2008, International Law, Sixth edition, Cambridge University Press.

Articies

6. Brockman-Hawe, Benjamin E. 2008, “A Comment on State Succession to International Responsibility,”  Boston University School of Law.

7. Brockman-Hawe, Benjamin E. 2010, “European Court of Human Rights Bijelic v. Montenegro and Serbia (Application No 1989005) Judgment of 11 June 2009,International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 59, Issue. 3,.

8. Craven, Matthew C.R. 1998, “The Problem of State Succession and the Identity of States under International Law,” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 9,

9. Czaplinski, Wladyslaw. 1990, “State Succession and State Responsibility,TheCanadian YearBook of  International Law, Vol. 28,.

10. Ebenroth, Carsten Thomas and Kemner, Matthew James. 1996, “The Enduring Political Nature of Questions of State Succession and Secession and the Quest for Objective Standards,”Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 753-819.

11. Dumberry, Patrick. 2005, “Is a New State Responsible for Obligations Arising from Internationally Wrongful Acts Committed Before its Independence in the Context of Secession,The Canadian Yearbook of International Law, Vol. XLIII,.

12. Dumberry, Patrick. 2006, “The Controversial Issue of State Succession to International Responsibility in Light of Recent State Practice,”German Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 49,.

13. Dumberry, Patrick. 2014, “The Consequences of Turkey Being the ‘Continuing’ State of the Ottoman Empire in Terms of International Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts,” International Criminal  Law Review, Vol. 14,.

14. Johari, Ridhima and Dubey, Mudit. 2014, “State Responsibility as aspects human rights violation amidst succession,” International Conference on Law, Management and Humanities (ICLMH'14), Bangkok (Thailand).

15. Mikulka, Vaclav. 1999. “The dissolution of Czehoslovakia and succession in respect of treaties,” Succession of States-edited by Mojmir Mrak,  Martinus Nijhoff Publishers,.

16. Mikulka, Vaklav. 2010, “State Succession and Responsibility,” The Law of International Responsibility-edited by James Crawford, Alain Pellet, and Simon Olleson, Oxford University Press.

17. Milanovic, Marko. 2009, “Territorial Application of the Convention and State Succession,”The UN Genocide Convention-A Commentary-edited by Paola Gaeta, Oxford University Press.

18. Oeter, Stefan. 1991, “German Unification and State Succession,”Houston Journal of International Law, Vol. 51.

19. Quint, Peter E. 1991. “The Constitutional Law of German Unification”, 50 Md. L. Rev.

20. Vladoiu, Nasty Marian. 2015, “State succession to international intergovernmental organizations under the International Public Law,”Law Review, Vol. I, Issue. 1.

21. Volkovitsch, Michael John. 1992. Towards a new Theory of State Succession to Responsibility for International Delicts, 92 The Columbia Law Revi