درس‌های برگرفته از وضعیت بانک مرکزی در پروندۀ برخی اموال ایران برای اعمال در قضیۀ نقض‌های ادعایی معاهدۀ مودت ۱۹۵۵

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار، پژوهشکدۀ تحقیق و توسعۀ علوم انسانی (سمت)، تهران، ایران

چکیده

با صدور رأی دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در پروندۀ برخی دارایی‌های ایران در 30 مارس 2023 و احراز نقض تعهدات ناشی از معاهدۀ مودت 1955 میان ایران و ایالات متحده در زمینۀ رفتار غیرمنطقی و تبعیض‌آمیز ایالات متحده با اموال شرکت‌های ایرانی و نقض آزادی تجارت میان دو کشور، امیدها برای احراز نقض‌های مشابهی در پروندۀ دیگر ایران علیه ایالات متحده تحت عنوان «نقض‌های ادعایی معاهدۀ مودت» قوت گرفت. به‌نظر می‌رسد اقدامات قانون‌گذاری و قضایی ایالات متحده که به توقیف اموال دولت ایران و شرکت‌های ایرانی در ایالات متحده منجر شد و زمینۀ انجام هرگونه تجارت میان دو کشور را به‌واسطۀ وضع مقررات سخت‌گیرانه مانند فرمان اجرایی 13599 در سال 2012 به بعد عملاً منتفی ساخت، درنهایت نتیجه‌گیری مشابهی در پروندۀ نقض‌های ادعایی از سوی دیوان مطرح شود. گویا چارچوب ادعاهای ایران در این پرونده و صلاحیت زمانی دیوان برای رسیدگی به ادعاهای ایران حتی پس از خروج ایالات متحده از معاهدۀ مودت در اکتبر 2019، بستر لازم را برای ارزیابی اقدامات تحریمی ایالات متحده تا زمان ختم رسیدگی به این قضیه فراهم آورده است. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Lessons Learned from the Central Bank's Position in the Case of Certain Iranian Assets for Application in the Case of Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity

نویسنده [English]

  • Abdollah Abedini
Assistant Professor, Institution for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT), Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Having rendered the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the case of Certain Iranian Assets on 30 March 2023, and finding a violation of obligations arising from the 1955 Treaty of Amity between Iran and the US in the context of the US’s unreasonable and discriminatory treatment of the assets of Iranian companies and the violation of freedom of trade between the two countries, hopes have been strengthened for the finding of similar violations in another case between Iran and the US entitled Alleged Violations of the Treaty of Amity. It seems that the legislative and judicial actions of the US, which have effectively eliminated the possibility of conducting any trade between the two countries through the imposition of strict regulations such as Executive Order 13599 from 2012 onwards, will ultimately lead to a similar conclusion in the Alleged Violations case by the Court. It also appears that the framework of Iran’s claims in this case, together with the Court’s temporal jurisdiction to consider Iran’s claims even after the US withdrew from the Treaty of Amity in October 2019, provides the necessary basis for assessing the United States’ sanctions measures until the conclusion of the proceedings in this case.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Company
  • Continuing Breach of Obligation
  • Freedom of Trade
  • Sovereignty
  • Temporal Jurisdiction
  1. Abedini, Abdollah (2024). Breach of the Obligation Arising from the Adoption of Inconsistent Domestic Law: Analysis of the Judgment of the International Court of Justice in the Case of Certain Iranian Assets. International Law Review, 73 (1), 11-30.22066/cilamag.2024.2021675.2504 (In Persian).
  2. Amini, Azam & Abedi, Mohammad (2019). Legal Effects of the U.S Withdrawal from Treaty of Amity and its impact on Proceedings in ICJ. Quarterly Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies on Strategic Knowledge, 36 (3), 133-156. 1001.1.24234621.1398.9.36.6.5 (In Persian).
  3. Azari, Hadi (2024). The Potential Impact of the ICJ’s Judgment of Certain Iranian Assets Case on the Impending Judgment in the Case Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity: A Legal Analysis. International Law Review, 73 (1), 257-277. 22066/cilamag.2024.2024779.2527 (In Persian).
  4. Azizi, Sattar (2024). The Individual Opinions of the ICJ Judges in the Certain Iranian Assets Case: Exclusion of Bank Markazi from the Scope of the Treaty of Amity. International Law Review, 73 (1), 157-180. 22066/cilamag.2024.2021502.2503 (In Persian).
  5. Shafiei, Zohreh & Zamani, S. Ghasem (2024). The International Responsibility of the United States of America for the Violations of the Treaty of Amity in the Framework of the Judgment of March 30, 2023, of the International Court of Justice. International Law Review, 73 (1), 205-228. 22066/cilamag.2024.2022816.2515 (In Persian).
  6. Ziaei Bigdeli, Mohammad Bagherzadeh, Reza & Hassan (2019). Theories of States' Compliance with International Law: A Question of Persuasion. International Law Review, 60 (1), 7-34. 22066/cilamag.2019.35076 (In Persian).
  7. Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment on Preliminary objections of 17 March 2016, ICJ Reports 2016.
  8. Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment of 21 April 2022, ICJ Reports 2022.
  9. Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Judgment on Preliminary objections of 3 February 2021.
  10. Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), ICJ Reports 2023.
  11. Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Judgment of 13 February 2019, ICJ Report 2019.
  12. Executive Order 13599—Blocking Property of the Government of Iran and Iranian Financial Institutions February 5, 2012, at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-201200083/pdf/DCPD-201200083.pdf
  13. https://it.usembassy.gov/secretary-pompeos-remarks-to-the-media/
  14. https://www.state.gov/judgment-in-certain-iranian-assets-case/#:~:text=Today%20the%20International%20Court%20of,of%20Iran's%20State%2Dsponsored%20terrorism
  15. https://www.dolat.ir/detail/409690
  16. Oil Platforms (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Judgment of 12 December 1996, ICJ Reports 1996.
  17. Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Momtaz, Certain Iranian Assets, Judgment of 30 March 2023.