عنوان مقاله [English]
The research hypothesis can be that in the course of the feasibility of the two Schools of the new Natural law and the legal positivism , the gradual overcome to inference of the legal rules governing international relations leads toward which school.
As contemporary Public International Law recognizes rights and duties to the individuals (as evidenced by the international instruments of human rights), one cannot deny them international personality, without which that recognition could not take place. Also in the American continent, in the XXth century, even before the adoption of the American and Universal Declarations of Human Rights of 1948, doctrinal manifestations flourished in favour of the international juridical personality of the individuals .
Then the evidence denotes that the” Natural Law” overcome the legal positivism, and this is an undeniable fact in the 21st Century. Fortunately, the natural law are irrefrangible linked to new jus gentium. This had led to the emergence of new rules based on the new jus gentium , to international relations. Because the jus gentium recognizes individuals as direct subjects of international relations, and furthermore, beyond the "will" of stats , governs the universal norms and rules are on the individuals.
This hypothesis, regardless of the threat or use of force in the framework of “the new Jus Gentium” "Humans" deployed the transition of individuals relations instead of states in the human global community . Therefore, the natural law and jus gentium are well able to govern global public order in the worldwide.
1-پاسرین إن تروز ، الکساندر.«حقوق طبیعی ، درآمدی برفلسلفۀ حقوق» ، ترجمۀ محمدحسین طالبی ،مجلۀ معرفت، شمارۀ 49 ، دی 1380.
2-طالبی ،محمد حسین .«نظریۀ حقوق طبیعی درفلسفۀ حقوق» ،مجلۀ معرفت، شمارۀ46 ،مهر1380 .
37.Vattel, Emeric du. “The Law of Nations ;or Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct add Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns ”,Trans. Monsieur de VattelA , Sixtht American Edition , No.5, Minor Street.1844.
38. Wolff, C. Jus Gentium Methodo Scientifica Pertractatum(edition of 1764), vol. II, Oxford/ London, Clarendon Press/H. Milford – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Law of Nations Treated According to the Scientific Method,Trans by Joseph H.Drake,1934 .
39. Cançado Trindade, A.A. “A Emancipação do Ser Humano como Sujeito do Direito Internacional e os Limites da Razão de Estado”, 6/7 Revista da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro(1998-1999) .
41.Cançado Trindade, A.A. “The Voluntarist Conception of International Law: A Re-Assessment”, 59 Revue de droit international de sciences diplomatiques et politiques– Geneva ,1981 .
42.Castberg, F. “Natural Law and Human Rights”, 1 Revue des droits de l’homme/Human Rights Law Journal,1968.
43-Charney, J.I. “International Lawmaking – Article 38 of the ICJ Statute Reconsidered”, in New Trends in International Law making – International ‘Legislation’ in the Public Interest(Proceedings of the Kiel Symposium, March 1996), Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1997.
44.Charney, J.I. “Universal International Law”, 87 American Journal of International Law,1993.
45.Crawford, J. “The Criteria for Statehood in International Law”, 48 British Year Book of International Law [BYBIL],1976-1977 .
46.De Visscher, Ch. “Les droits fondamentaux de l’homme, base d’une restauration du Droit international – Rapport”, in Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International ,1947.
47.Dominice, C. The Methodology of International Law ,Encyclopedia of Public International Law,1986 .
48.Ebbesson, J. “The Notion of Public Participation in International Environmental Law”, 8 Yearbook of International Environmental Law,1997 .
49.Eisenmann, Ch. “Une nouvelle conception du droit subjectif: la théorie de M. Jean Dabin”, 60 Revue du droit public et de la science politique en France et à l’étranger ,1954 .
50. Kelsen, H. “Recognition in International Law – Theoretical Observations”, 35 AJIL ,1941 .
51.Lauterpacht, H. “The Grotian Tradition in International Law”, 23 British Year Book of International Law ,1946 .
52.Lauterpacht, H . “The Law of Nations, the Law of Nature and the Rights of Man”, 29 Transactions of the Grotius Society ,1943 .
53.Meron, T. “The Humanization of Humanitarian Law”, 94 American Journal of International Law [AJIL],2000 .
54.Mullerson, R.A. “Human Rights and the Individual as Subject of International Law: A Soviet View”, 1 European Journal of International Law,1990 .
55.Schall, S.J. James V.”National Law and the Law of Nations: Some Theroritical Considerations ” , Fordham Intertional Law Journal,vol.15,1991-1992 .
56.Tammes, A.J.P. “The Legal System as a Source of International Law”, 1 Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Internationaal Recht,1954 .
57.Wolfke, K. “Some Persistent Controversies Regarding Customary International Law”, 24 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,1993 .
Casees and Material
58.As it can be inferred, e.g., from the historical case of the “Street Children” (case Villagrán Morales and Others versus Guatemala) before the IACtHR (1999-2001), the international juridical subjectivity of the individuals is nowadays an irreversible reality, and the violation of their fundamental rights, emanated directly from the international legal order, brings about juridical consequences. 41-Set forth in Article 36(1) of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and linked to the guarantees of the due process of law under Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights.
59.ICJ,Rep. Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Reparations for Damages,1949 .
60.ICJ, Rep. Advisory Opinion of Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,9 July 2004 .
61.Inter-American Court of Human Rights [IACtHR], Castillo Petruzzi and Others versus Perucase (Preliminary Objections) , Judgment of 04.09.1998, Series C, n. 41,Concurring Opinion of Judge A.A. Cançado Trindade.
62.Set forth in Article 36(1) of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and linked to the guarantees of the due process of law under Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights.