نشریه تمدن حقوقی
پیاپی 3 (تابستان 1398)

 International custom, besides treaties, is the principal source of international law among its formal sources. Furthermore, judicial decisions in general and the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals in particular, along with the teachings of the most prominent international jurists, form the subsidiary sources of this branch of law the function of which is to ascertain the existence of legal rules and determine their scope of application. Accordingly, it could be argued that on the one hand, international custom is one of the main sources of international courts/tribunals and on the other, international courts/tribunals define and clarify the scope of customary rules in their judicial decisions. In this regard, the jurisprudence of two international tribunals namely International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), in addition to applying international customary law for the issuance of their judgments, have played a notable role in clarification of some customary rules. Therefore, exploring the performance of these two tribunals as to the application and clarification of international custom seems to be profitable. The reason and cause for choosing the jurisprudence of these two tribunals is the ambiguity in applicability of treaty law in the course of trials and consequently increasing reference to international custom and their notable position in International Criminal Law as well. The first section of the article is describing the legal sources of the tribunals with emphasis on international custom. Second section entails analyzing the approach of these tribunals regarding two-element theory of international customary law. Thereafter, the content of international customary law would be studied in terms of its jurisdiction and nature. Finally, the article ends with concluding remarks. The present study which is a mixture of translation and research, through a descriptive-analytic method, attempts to deal with the application and clarification of international customary law in the jurisprudence of ICTY and ICTR.

Secret information is the most important belongings in the capital market, since it is the basic of decision-making and control of the risk in this market. Most rules and regulations which is related to stock exchange following from this approach, have bound those companies whose stocks are under transaction in stock market to deposit their own secret information constantly and uniformly at disposal of all investors so that they can decide on the basis of this information about transaction or keeping of their own stocks and avoid considerable principal risk in their own transaction. Iran's legislator also in Article 1 (32) of the Market law enacted in 1384 has defined secret information and Article 46 (1) provides criminal protection for this information. In this Article abuse of secret information has been criminlized. Actus rea of this crime is unlawful using and out of its routine, mens rea of this crime is knowingly and purposely using of this information.

The conflict in Yemen has caused a breach of the principle of non-use of force in international law. With the intervention of the Security Council and a few peace-loving states, conflict escalation and the massacre of civilians, the question has arisen of whether the International Criminal Court (ICC/the Court) is able and qualified to play a role to curb the conflict? The feasibility study on the role of ICC is the subject and also the main question of this article. The purpose of feasibility study is the role playing of ICC in the Yemen conflict and to analyze the types of jurisdictions of the Court to investigate the crimes alleged by the international organizations. This manuscript has tried to answer the mentioned question through assessing the alleged violations of Statute and checking the types of jurisdictions and also the elements of crimes according to the Statute of the Court. The pursued hypothesis is that ICC does not have jurisdiction unless the Security Council refers a case to it. The passage of the article demonstrates that if any case is referred to the Court, the probability of fulfillment of the elements of the crimes mentioned under Article 5 of the Statute, namely the mens rea and actus reus, against the coalition is loose. Although the reports of some international organizations suggest the commitment of international crimes in this conflict, states have no tendency to impose universal jurisdiction to proceed with the accusations. Eventually the conclusion is that the role playing of this institution in the Yemen conflict is difficult or even impossible. The impossibility for the Court to play a role in this conflict is mainly due to the lack of ratification of the Rome Statute by the states involved in the Yemen conflict.

In addition to the general criminal and legal laws of each country, smaller societies and institutions have also instituted specific rules to regulate their members, whilst not contravening the general laws, specifying the specific rules of that entity and penalizing them for violations. There are some considerations. Among these specific rules are employment law regulations. The pioneers and leaders of every profession, using their collective wisdom to optimize their jobs and prevent abuse of authority, put in place rules that obliged members to abide by these rules. Among the unjustified and sometimes abandoned law enforcement in our country and the paradoxical nature of which has not received proper attention and has undermined the rights of many of its officials, are the rules of law for attortneys. These rules, introduced in 1936 by the Law of Attorneys and then by the 1956 Independence of the Bar Association Act, have so far been the standard of practice that lagged behind the law of other professional and related bodies such as medicine, engineering, and judgment. In this article, while reviewing two types of law enforcement violations that have major drawbacks to other violations, we have argued the need for the possibility of reinstatement of law enforcement in criminal convictions, and we hope that this will be in line with the enforcement of regulations. The law profession is an effective step.

 Undoubtedly, one of the crimes we face in criminal courts today is the crime of defamation. However, in most of the cases filed after the preliminary investigation and the issuance of a summons to the trial by the prosecutor's office, the case was filed after the trial in the second criminal court, or in the same initial stage, with the argument that "the defendant will apologize." They have filed a complaint. ”They are facing a verdict of innocence or after the sentencing of the court of first instance and the defendant's objection to it, in the appeal stage with the same argument, it leads to the issuance of a verdict of innocence and ends. Rohet The present study, while examining this matter, is in fact a critique of the verdict issued by Branch 27 of the Tehran Court of Appeals regarding the lawsuit No. 9309970222700323- 13/03/1393, which, despite the sentencing of the accused by Branch 1004 of the General Criminal Court of Tehran, The offenders have issued the acquittal with the same reasoning as above. In view of the above and the explicitness of Article 697 of the Islamic Penal Code (Penalties) adopted in 1996, considering that the mentioned Article, including the conditions for the realization of defamation, is considered to be the crime of attribution and also the inability of the court to prove its claim. However, the question that comes to mind here is whether the explicitness of this article also applies in cases where individuals also file a complaint for the purpose of grievances?

The rights of persons eligible for national health care include the right to access to non-discriminatory care and a specific time limit for certain groups such as emergency and scheduled hospital care and similar cases. The 2006 Health Act  accepts this and pursuant to 2012 Act, The National Center for Health is responsible for implementing all policies communicated by the Ministry of Health. Protecting specific patients in this system falls under various frameworks. Public hospitals and are responsible for implementing health services. On the other hand, the Commission on Quality of Health Services monotors the Basic Standards of Safety.  Furthermore, the Local Organization of Health Watchdog monitors the way in which the quality of health care is being implemented. The practice is identified as a pioneer in the country for years to come, providing a variety of medical care. Institutions such as The Marsh Institute work to protect individuals and complaints. Complaints made by individuals against physicians ultimately lead to the imposition of penalties for these individuals in special circumstances under the 1859 Medical Act.