تحریم ها

The purpose of this article is to review and evaluate the legal jurisprudence of the economic sanctions of the Security Council based on Article 39 of the United Nations Charter.

This article is descriptive and analytical. Materials and data are also qualitative and data collection was used in collecting materials and data.
Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the text, honesty and trustworthiness are respected.

In Islamic jurisprudence and history, based on the verses of Surah Baqarah and Yusuf, economic embargo has been used and emphasized as a pressure lever, but it should be used with cruelty in the media. In Article 39 of the United Nations Charter, the Council is empowered to determine cases of threats against international peace and security, violations of international peace and security, and acts of aggression. As the case may be, the Security Council can make recommendations or decisions to implement its findings. Therefore, Article 41 of the United Nations Charter foresees that the Council can adopt measures that do not involve military force, including sanctions, against the guilty country. Therefore, it can be said that from the legal point of view, the Security Council, according to the articles mentioned above, has the authority and permission to accept resolutions that include sanctions.

The effects of the implementation of sanctions on third countries, the right to development, as well as its destructive results on basic human rights, including the right to health, and in general the negative humanitarian effects of international sanctions on the most vulnerable people of the target country, is always one of the major concerns of the international community, which requires an intelligent evaluation.

According to numerous international human rights documents, the right to have an adequate level has been recognized as one of the examples of fundamental human rights, and these rights are also today, with their theoretical and philosophical foundations, as well as their new executive mechanisms, supra-sovereign rights and under the constitution. is considered universal; On the other hand, since the post-World War II period, the application of economic sanctions in the field of international relations as one of the guarantees of dealing with violations of the standards and international obligations of governments and with the aim of putting pressure on them to align themselves. With the global order, it has been given serious attention and its importance and application are increasing day by day. The purpose of this research is to examine the violation of the fundamental human right to have an adequate standard of living and the right to food through the application of international economic sanctions against governments. Applying such an executive guarantee itself causes a violation of food security and the fundamental human right to have an adequate standard of living, especially the right to food. Human rights, with their philosophical and theoretical foundations, are protective rights, and it is the duty of governments and domestic, regional, and global political institutions to respect, support, and guarantee their implementation, and the violation, limitation, or deprivation of these rights cannot be justified under any pretext. The legal validity of economic sanctions faces a serious challenge.

The world-circumnavigation mission by the IRIN’s 86th Flotilla – consisting of the frigate IRIS Dena and the forward-base ship IRIS Makran - stands out as a turning point in Iran’s naval history. While long-range naval missions bring many political and strategic advantages, they also pose peculiar legal challenges, many of which were highlighted during the 86th Flotilla’s mission. In the particular case of the 86th Flotilla, the key issue was the sanctioning of Dena and Makran by the United States as they were about to enter the port of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. This paper aims to examine the sanctioning of IRIS Dena and IRIS Makran in relation to the principle of warship immunity. The results of the study indicate that the sanctioning of the two Iranian warships violate international law on several counts but may nevertheless prevent the two vessels from calling at foreign ports in the future. Meanwhile, the two warships enjoy sovereign immunity which prevents the United States or any other state from exercising judicial or enforcement jurisdiction against them. The research method of this study is descriptive – analytical and the information has been collected through library sources.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has well understood the negative effects of war, its consequences such as the influx of refugees and migration flows, because for more than four decades in the absence of international support, under the dire conditions of the eight-year war, unilateral coercive measures and sanctions, He has generously welcomed millions of Afghan refugees. The burden of responsibility of Afghan refugees and the need for a practical approach based on Islamic human rights for sustainable protection of Afghan refugees is well felt in Iran.Based on this, the main question of this research is: "How can the division of responsibility with the approach of Islamic human rights reduce the burden of responsibility of Afghan refugees in Iran as a practical solution?"The research method is descriptive-analytical and collection of documentary and library informationThe findings of the research showed that the division of responsibility, from capacity-building measures at three international levels, non-governmental organizations and governmental organizations, in sync with the principles and provisions of Islamic human rights, can provide practical solutions to reduce the burden of responsibility of Afghan refugees in Iran.

While the efforts of human rights campaigns are aimed at increasing the protection of journalists and providing them with more effective guarantees, in an unprecedented action, several Iranian journalists, including Ali Rezvani, have been sanctioned by Western countries. Before this, Individuals taking part in military and nuclear activities and senior officials have been subjected to smart sanctions, but the recent decision of the U.S. Treasury Department, the EU, and Canada to sanction Iranian journalists has created a new debate in international human rights. In this research, the bases of international protection for journalists, whether independent or affiliated with governments are evaluated in the framework of human rights; then the legal bases of sanctioning Ali Rezvani and its legitimacy are studied based on his actions. According to the findings of the present article, this journalist's actions cannot be categorized as a "gross and systematic violation" of human rights. On the other hand, the prohibition of countermeasures against human rights and the teachings of the theory of labelling challenge the legitimacy of the imposed sanctions. The result of the research shows that these sanctions are not only in conflict with the fundamental human rights of individuals but also inconsistent with the inherent professional task of a journalist that is in the realm of freedom of information. It seems that these sanctions are based on personal grudges toward the activities of certain persons rather than on legal grounds.

Economic sanctions as an economic war have challenged the Islamic system. And the economy is with infidel countries whose political policy is in opposition to the embargoes. The issue at hand is what are the jurisprudential barriers and permissions of these types of agreements and how are they analyzed in dealing with each other? The descriptive-analytical study of this issue shows that the documentation of the permission is strong in the direction of preserving the Islamic system, and it assigns the generality of the upcoming obstacles such as the rule of negation of mustache, negation of the guardianship of infidels and Alaw. Jurisprudential documents, including the rule of urgency, the element of expediency, and maintaining the system, are among the secondary titles of converting the first ruling into the second, which indicate the permissibility and general allocation of obstacles. Also, the rule of repelling corruption from the corrupt, the issue of the conflict between the harmful and the permissibility of taking help from the infidels in war, along with the rule of reason and the construction of reason, indicate the violation of covenants, and it allows the Islamic ruler in terms of government decrees or in the field of "al-Faragh region" to initiate its conclusion.

Economic sanctions have become increasingly prominent policy instruments since the beginning of the 21st century. Major global players, such as United States of America, European Union, and the United Nations, mostly use punitive economic measures to prevent state violence and other state actions deemed intolerable. Sanctions have been a major tool in crises including major human rights violations, terrorism, military aggression, proliferation of nuclear weapons and commercial disputes. Emphasizing on economic means distinguishes struggling against terrorist acts from other measures. Therefore, the economic and military power of states in process of dealing with such actions and the use of various economic tools such as the implementation of economic sanctions make curbing terrorist acts and protecting international security possible. Therefore, along with other effective action and reaction strategies in confrontation with terrorism, the most important strategy is to adopt sanctions approaches or prescribe economic sanctions when facing terrorist acts. Thus, regarding effective struggle against terrorism, economic sanction not only does not lead to violation of human rights, but also it is considered as a strategy to restore lost human rights.

MetaVerse, or the metaverse, is a broad concept of the next generation internet with a three-dimensional and decentralized environment where individuals can engage in buying and selling digital assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs) with full ownership, access services and products regardless of any licensing requirements. Given the political, economic, and sanction-related conditions that obstruct and prohibit the transfer of any capital to the country, and considering the inherent nature of a sales contract where the transfer of ownership occurs simultaneously with the contract's conclusion, it raises questions. Firstly, can sanctions in this context be considered as destruction under the "destruction principle"? Secondly, how can the conditions for the realization of a sale, including the tangibility of the sold item and the practical manifestation of receipt, be justified in this context? This pioneering descriptive-analytical paper interprets and considers sanctions as an embodiment of the term "destruction" in the mentioned principle. It argues that coercive reconciliation and the causative agent of harm cannot be attributed to a specific person, thereby precluding the enforcement of compensatory measures and resulting in a nullified sale and damages incurred by the seller. Furthermore, in accordance with the content of the "destruction" principle, all the conditions for a valid sale exist within the MetaVerse, thus allowing for the extension of the "destruction" principle to the MetaVerse space.

Jurisprudential examination of economic sanctions is necessary in order to provide solutions to deal with these sanctions. Based on this, the current research seeks to examine jurisprudential and legal solutions to deal with economic sanctions. This article is descriptive and analytical. The materials and data are also qualitative and data collection has been used.Ethical Considerations: In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are observed. Productivity, patience and good planning, maximum use of capacities, recognition of managerial priorities, countering the levers of power and unity and cohesion are the most important jurisprudential solutions for dealing with economic sanctions.Nevertheless, in the functioning of the human rights bodies and institutions of the United Nations, it is possible to observe a kind of supervision, albeit indirectly, on the functioning of member states of human rights treaties and the actions of the United Nations itself, especially in the field of economic sanctions. From a jurisprudential and economic point of view, there are solutions for economic sanctions, but their realization requires the development of appropriate economic and legal strategies.

One of the important materials needed in educational activity as well as important chapters in educational jurisprudence is to pay attention to educational methods and solutions that have important solutions in the field of education. Among those solutions that exist in Islamic Sharīʿa, and corroborated by considerable verses and traditions in this field, is "social boycott". It is meant to create some kind of psychological pressure in the context of society as a result of certain deprivations that are created for a person.This research, using the method of qualitative content analysis by collecting verses and narrations related to social boycott and studying their implications, aims to investigate the various dimensions of "social boycott" which should be considered as an educational method. The audience of boycott, the time frame of boycott, the effect and purpose of boycott, the factors responsible for boycott and also the levels of boycott from severe to weak, are the novelties of the research that are derived from verses and hadiths.

Today, the political and legal developments caused by oil sanctions in the field of management, especially the public sector, are one of the main concerns in Iran, so that the highest executive authority of the government confirmed the existence of specialized officers to circumvent political and legal international sanctions in Iran. However, the great powers always define the order governing the international system based on the facts in the world based on what their interests require and can lead to the stabilization of their power, as a result, any actor in the international system who does not follow such an order should be punished and Pay for it. In such a situation, Iran put the transfer of upstream technologies and the manual end of the oil field under unilateral international sanctions by the United States. The main question we are looking for is how the Iranian government can turn the threat it has faced in the field of oil technologies into an opportunity. In response, it should be said: with approaches such as emphasizing the flourishing of technological knowledge-based companies in the oil field, cooperation in training and transfer of high technologies through aligned countries in the international system based on looking to the East, can turn the embargo situation into a golden opportunity for development. It has been presented with a descriptive and analytical approach by providing operational solutions through the study of library method resources.

Today, the science and knowledge production and exchange have encompassed national and international borders. But developed and powerful countries discriminate against developing countries and create inequality in the field of science, which is called scientific apartheid, has become a very important for many countries and common issue for countries as well as in the international community. This discrimination is deeper for some countries for various reasons. Islamic republic of Iran is one of the countries that have faced this phenomenon over the past few decades. This has also created many problems in the domestic field as well as problems in the field of international scientific competitions and achieving scientific status and prevents from the advancement of global knowledge and exchanges information in the global village. Given the importance of this issue, the present study uses a descriptive-analytical approach to answer the questions that Islamic republic of Iran has so far taken against scientific apartheid and discrimination in this area and what legal strategies can be taken against Take this situation? Findings show that in Islamic republic of Iran, no specific legal action and strategy has been adopted in this regard. However, scientific apartheid can be prosecuted internationally, followed up by international legal and penal institutions, binding international legal laws, and reciprocal action to eliminate scientific apartheid.

Following the ban on the principle of non-use of force, governments turned their attention to sanctions - economic coercive measures - as the main means of achieving their foreign policy goals. The desirability of the use of unilateral sanctions by countries now stems from the idea that it is a middle ground between diplomacy and the use of force, and is also a simple and peaceful tool for changing the behavior of governments The method of this research is descriptive and analytical and the method of collecting library and documentary information. The purpose of this research is to investigate economic sanctions with emphasis on its legitimacy from the aspect of human rights. The question is, what is the status of unilateral economic sanctions in terms of human rights documents? According to the investigations of this research, its findings show: (1) Unilateral sanctions are a violation of treaty, customary international law, as well as a violation of the rule of ius cogens. (2) Although in some cases the doctrine of international law in retaliation is invoked for the legitimacy of unilateral sanctions, these sanctions cannot be considered reciprocal action under the theory of international responsibility of the state. It must therefore be argued that unilateral sanctions are completely contrary to international law especially the fundamental documents of human rights.

In some of the legal texts about the principles of legitimation, “stipulation of a contract” is a contract which does not make an unlawful thing lawful or does not prohibit a lawful thing. Different views have been proposed by the jurists about the meaning of “the condition of prohibition of lawful thing”. Becouse of some intricacies in this regard, it is difficult to provide a clear interpretation of the condition of prohibition of lawful thing. The present article tries to provide a proper meaning of prohibition of lawful with the language of legal proofs. This has been done through consideration of the Quranic root of this term, explanation of the origin of this term within the Quranic verses, and paying attention to the traditions related to the prohibition of lawful while making a comparison with the Quranic verses, as well as making a comparison between them and evidences related to the condition against the Book and Sunnah. Next, it tries to evaluate and criticize the important views of the jurists in this regard. Accordingly, the condition “against the Book and Sunnah” and the condition of “making an unlawful thing lawful and prohibition of a lawful thing” are consistent with each other and cover the permissible things too. In fact, the condition of giving up every permissible act which is characterized as lawful before composing the contract and its stipulation, is an example of a condition of making a lawful thing unlawful, specifically about making benefit of the blessings and lawful desires

Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there have been significant changes in the direction of the development of basic human rights. However, despite the great progress, there are still countless gaps and defects, and there are disagreements among international actors for its implementation. One of the most important of them is the Imposing of unilateral economic sanctions. This type of sanctions is inherently a violation of human rights and a tool of negative imposition against the target country and brings irreparable consequences for innocent civilians in the target country. In addition, it leads to restrictions on access to food, disrupts the vital infrastructure of health and life, disrupts the national economy, and it will cause women and children to be deprived of their daily necessities. One of the most important effects of sanctions on countries that are under the pressure of all kinds of sanctions is the reduction of the right to enjoy living standards, that the main victims of this right are women, children and the elderly of every society, as a vulnerable group. In this research, the researchers will examine the behavior of the American government during the Obama and Trump presidency in imposing sanctions that violate the human rights of women and children, and will examine and study its effects on women, children, and the target society.

The increasing progress and development of industry in the third millennium AD has led to the emergence of new technologies in the world. One of these emerging technologies is the complex HAARP Technology, which has various applications and its creators use it against humanity. One of the most important and widely used of them is forced thinking or mental slavery, because in the present era, the Cold War has given way to the war of wills. On the other hand, in terms of its novelty and secrecy, it is somewhat impossible to prove and has faced challenges for the international community. The most important challenge is not to criminalize it, which has been neglected. The religion of Islam, as a complete religion, is passive and reactive to any action. According to the rules of jurisprudence that the holy Shari'a of Islam, the induction of thought is legally forbidden and its criminalization seems necessary. The main purpose of this article is to study the jurisprudence of forced thinking caused by HAARP Technology and the necessity of its criminalization. The research method is descriptive and analytical. The method of research is qualitative and the research findings indicate that forced thinking is not allowed and its criminalization is necessary.

Economic sanctions are one of the major problems and challenges in Iran that have negative impacts on different aspects of society, and coping with its consequences is one of the basic and important issues that should be studied. In this paper, an attempt has been made to examine the jurisprudential legal mechanisms for coping with economic sanctions.

The present paper is analytical-descriptive and library method is used.

The findings of the research show that there is no special approach in dealing with economic sanctions in jurisprudential sources, and to understand the jurisprudential views in this regard, it is necessary to use the general economic principles of jurisprudence, which implies a sound economy. From this view, coping with hoarding, underselling, bribery and economic corruption are among the most important mechanisms that, as components of a sound economy, are effective in creating a platform and mechanisms to counter economic sanctions. From a legal point of view, dealing with economic disorder and money laundering, monitoring financial and economic activities, and coping with smuggling of goods and currency play an important role in achieving a sound economy and creating a suitable environment for production, and therefore in countering economic sanctions.

From a legal point of view, the mentioned solutions have been considered by the legislator, but it is necessary to eliminate the existing legal shortcomings and monitor financial and economic activities to help production more than before.

In the process of Iran's accession to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, known as the Palermo Convention (hereinafter the Palermo Convention) and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (hereinafter the CFT Convention), the Guardian Council has, among the others, two objections regarding the non-accession to the two instruments. First, concerns about potential impediments on the circumvention the United States sanctions and second, obstructing assistance to resistance groups. Given the common provisions of both Conventions on the fulfilment of obligations under the domestic standards of the Member State, there seems to be no reason to worry about them. In this article, while examining the reservation of other States to these instruments, it will be analysed in light of international law rules the Guardian Council's objections to the proposed reservation to the Conventions. The conclusion is that the concerns raised about accession to the conventions can be eliminated in the light of the principles and rules of international law based on the objections raised.

Iran has been under unilateral US sanctions for years, and the scope of these measures is increasing every day. From the seizure of Iranian property and assets to the threat of seizure of Iranian oil tankers shows the growing tensions. In this regard, the main purpose of this study is to examine US actions in imposing sanctions and seizing Iranian oil tankers from the perspective of international law.         

This is a qualitative and applied research in terms of purpose and in terms of collecting information by documentary method and studying international documents, sources related to the subject and the obtained information has been analyzed descriptively-analytically.   

The rule of judicial immunity The government has accepted exceptions following changes in the international legal system, including the exemption of tenure and the adoption of the doctrine of limited immunity. Regarding the imposition of unilateral sanctions, there is no explicit text in the Charter of the United Nations that states agree to exert pressure through sanctions in various fields, and therefore, these actions of the United States have no legitimacy. Regarding the US action in seizing Iran's export oil, it should be said that this measure lacks legitimacy in terms of the principle of equality of states, in terms of international rules of the law of the sea and in terms of the principle of protection of state property from seizure by domestic courts.