مطالعۀ تطبیقی قاعدۀ «عِرق ظالم» در فقه امامیه و تعهد به عدم ‌شناسایی وضعیت ناشی از نقض جدی قاعدۀ آمره در حقوق بین‌الملل

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه حقوق بشر و محیط زیست، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار گروه حقوق بین‌الملل، دانشکدۀ حقوق دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران

3 طلبۀ سطح چهار فقه و اصول، مجتمع فقه، حقوق و قضای اسلامی، حوزۀ علمیه قم، قم، ایران

10.22059/jcl.2025.398395.634785

چکیده

موضوع شناسایی در حقوق بین‌الملل یا حق‌های مکتسبۀ مورد احترام در فقه امامیه، به نحوی به‌عنوان اصل حاکم، در پی تنبیه حقوقی متجاوزان به اصول بنیادین و قواعد آمره در فقه و حقوق بین‌الملل بوده، از طریق مواجه کردن متجاوز با «نقیضِ مقصود»، وضعیت‌ نشئت‌یافته در اثر ظلم یا نقض جدی قواعد آمره را بلااعتبار فرض می‌نماید. بر این اساس، هدف اصلی نگارندگان پژوهش حاضر که با روش توصیفی- تحلیلی و با بهره‌گیری از منابع فقهی و حقوقی نگاشته شده، بررسی تطبیقی قاعدۀ «عرق ظالم» و «تعهد به عدم ‌شناسایی وضعیت ناشی از نقض جدی قاعدۀ آمره» از حیث مبانی، دامنۀ شمول و آثار اجرایی این دو نهاد حقوقی است که می‌تواند در درک بهتر مبانی مسئولیت و تعهدات بین‌المللی در نظام‌های حقوقی مختلف و تقویت عدالت در سطح ملی و بین‌المللی مؤثر باشد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که این دو مفهوم، با وجود برخی اشتراکات ازجمله ماهیت پیشگیرانه- تعقیبی نسبت به نقض قاعدۀ آمره و وقوع ظلم، از حیث گستره واجد برخی تفاوت‌ها هستند؛ برای نمونه، گستردگی دامنۀ شمول قاعدۀ فقهی عرق ظالم به‌واسطۀ تمرکز بر فعل ظالمانه که می‌تواند فراتر از نقض تعهدات قانونی عمل کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

A comparative study of the rule of "Erq Zalim" in Imamiyah jurisprudence and "Commitment to non-recognition of the situation caused by a serious violation of the jus cogens" in international law

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyyed Mohsen Ghaemi Kharegh 1
  • Mohammad Saleh Taskhiri 2
  • Mahdi Khabbaz 3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Human Rights and Environmental Law, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Qom, Iran
3 Level 4 student of Jurisprudence and Usul, Islamic Jurisprudence, Law and Jurisprudence Complex, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran
چکیده [English]

The issue of recognition in international law or the acquired rights respected in Imamiyah jurisprudence, as a governing principle, seeks to legally punish violators of fundamental principles and peremptory rules in jurisprudence and international law, and by confronting the violator with the rejection of the intention, it invalidates the situations arising from oppression or serious violations of peremptory rules. The goal of this descriptive-analytical study, using jurisprudential and legal sources, is to conduct a comparative study of the rule of Erq zalim and the commitment not to recognize the situation resulting from a serious violation of a peremptory rule in terms of the principles and scope of coverage and the executive effects of these two legal institutions, which can be effective in better understanding the principles of international responsibility and obligations in different legal systems and strengthening justice at the national and international levels. The findings show that these two concepts, despite some commonalities, including the preventive-punitive nature of violating the mandatory rule and the occurrence of oppression, have some differences in terms of scope, including the broad scope of Erq zalim due to its focus on the oppressive act, which can go beyond violating legal obligations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Erq zalim
  • International law
  • Imamiyah jurisprudence
  • Jus cogens
  • The Obligation of Non-Recognition of an Unlawful Situation

مراجع

  1. A Group of Researchers (2002). Mawṣūʿat al-Fiqh al-Islāmī Ṭabʿan li-Madhhab Ahl al-Bayt (Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence according to the School of the Ahl al-Bayt). First edition. Qom: Mu'assasat Dā'irat al-Ma'ārif al-Fiqh al-Islāmī (In Arabic).
  2. Ajevski, M. (2008). Serious Breaches, the Draft Articles on State Responsibility and Universal Jurisdiction.  J. Legal Stud., 2 (1), pp. 12-48. https://hdl.handle.net/1814/10138
  3. Allain, J. (2021). Jus Cogens and the International Community “of States” as a Whole. In Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)(pp. 68-91). Netherlands: Brill Nijhoff.
  4. Amili, M. J. (1998). Miftah al-Karama. First edition. Qom: Jamia al-Mudarrasin (In Arabic).
  5. Ansari, M. (1990). Al-Makasib. 1st edition. Qom: Dar al-Muqaddas (In Arabic).
  6. Ansari, M. (1993). Rasa’il al-Fiqhiyah. 1st edition. Qom: Majma’ al-Fikr al-Islami (In Arabic).
  7. Asghari, S. M. (2009). Justice as a principle. 1st edition. Tehran: Etelaat Publication (In Arabic).
  8. Askari, H. (1979). Al-Furuq fi al-Lughah, First edition. Beirut: Dar al-Afaq al-Jadeedah (In Arabic).
  9. Aust, H. P. (2021). Legal Consequences of Serious Breaches of Peremptory Norms in the Law of State Responsibility: Observations in the Light of the Recent Work of the International Law Commission. In Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens)(pp. 227-256). Netherlands: Brill Nijhoff.
  10. Escudero Espinosa, J. F. (2022). The Principle of Non-Recognition of States Arising from Serious Breaches of Peremptory Norms of International Law. Chinese Journal of International Law, 21(1), 79-114. DOI:10.1093/chinesejil/jmac006
  11. Fakhr al-Muhaqqeeqin, M. (1967). Idhah al-Fawa’id. First edition. Qom: Ismailiyan (In Arabic).
  12. Farahidi, Kh. (1988). Al-Ayn. Second edition. Qom: Hijrat (In Arabic).
  13. Gross, O. (1998). Once More unto the breach: the systemic failure of applying the european convention on human rights to entrenched emergencies. Yale J. Int'l L., 23, 437-501.
  14. Hāshemī, M. (1962). Farhang-e Fiqh Muṭābiq-e Madhhab Ahl al-Bayt (The Dictionary of Jurisprudence according to the School of the Ahl al-Bayt). First edition. Qom: Mu'assasat Dā'irat al-Ma'ārif al-Fiqh al-Islāmī (In Arabic).
  15. Hilli, H. (1992). Qavaid Al-Ahkam. First edition. Qom: Islamic Publication (In Arabic).
  16. Hilli, H. (1993). Tazkirah al-Fuqhāha. 1st edition. Qom: Al-Bayt Foundation (In Arabic).
  17. Hurr Amili, M. (1989). Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1st edition. Qom: Al-Bayt Foundation (In Arabic).
  18. Ḥusaynī, M. (1979). ʿInāyat al-Uṣūl (The Care of Principles). Fourth edition. Qom: Fīrūz Ābādī (In Arabic).
  19. Hussaini Shahroudi, M. (2000). Nataij al-Ifkar. 1st edition. Qom: Al Al-Murtada (In Arabic).
  20. Ibn Athir, M.(1988). Al-Nihayyah fi Gharib al-Hadith wa al-Athar. 4th edition. Qom: Ismaili Press Institute (In Arabic).
  21. Ibn Faris, A. (1983). Mu’jam al-Maq’ayyis al-Lughah. 1st edition. Qom: Maktaba al-Ilam al-Islami (In Arabic).
  22. Ibn Ghazairi, A. (1985). Al-Rijal. 1st edition. Qom: Dar al-Hadith Scientific and Cultural Institute (In Arabic).
  23. Ibn Idris, M. (2008). Musoo’ah. 1st edition. Qom: Khurasan (In Arabic).
  24. Ibn Manzur, M.(1993). Lisan al-Arab. 3rd edition. Beirut: Dar Sader (In Arabic).
  25. ICJ (1970), Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276
  26. ICJ (2004), Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Advisory Opinion
  27. ICJ (2024), Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024
  28. ILC (2001), Report of the International Law Commission, 53rd Session, GAOR, 56th Session, Supp. No. 10 (A/56/10), 2001, pp. 283-284
  29. ILC (2022), Draft conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) 2022, s seventy-third session(A/77/10, para. 43), Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2022, vol. II, Part Two
  30. Johari, I.(1989). Al-Sahih Taj al-Lughah and Al-Sahih al-Arabiyah. 1st edition. Beirut: Dar al-Ilm lil-Mala’in (In Arabic).
  31. Karaki, A. (1993). Jāmi' al-Maqāṣid (The Comprehensive of Intents). Second edition. Qom: Āl al-Bayt. (In Arabic).
  32. Kashif al-Ghita’, H. (2001). Anwar al-Fiqaha. First edition. Najaf: Kashif al-Ghita’ al-Amma’ Foundation (In Arabic).
  33. Khoei, S. A. (1992). Mu’jam Rijal al-Hadith. Fifth edition (In Arabic).
  34. Khoei, S. A. (1997). Musoo’ah. First edition. Qom: Ihya’a Athar Imam Khoei (In Arabic).
  35. Khorasani, M. K. (1988). Kifayah al-Asul. First edition. Qom: Al-Bayt Foundation (In Arabic).
  36. Landi, Giulia (2019). Secession and referendum: a new dimension of international law on territorial changes?. Italy: Firenze University Press.‏
  37. Lenzerini, F. (2024). Military Occupation, Sovereignty, and the ex injuria jus non oritur Principle: complying with the Supreme Imperative of Suppressing ‘Acts of Aggression or Other Breaches of the Peace’à la carte?. International Review of Contemporary Law, 6(2), 58-67.
  38. Liwanga, R. C. (2015). The meaning of gross violation of human rights: a focus on international tribunals' decisions over the DRC Conflicts.  J. Int'l l. & Pol'y, 44 (1), 67-81.
  39. Makarem, N. (1991). Al-Qawā’id al-Fiqhiyah. Third edition. Qom: Madrasah al-Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (In Arabic).
  40. Mazaheri, H. (1998). Durus Al-Usul. First edition. Iran (In Arabic).
  41. Moghaddis Ardebili, A. (1982). Majma’ al-Faydah wa al-Burhan. First edition. Qom: Jamia al-Mudrassin (In Arabic).
  42. Momtaz D, Alizadeh M, Zarneshan S. (2018). The Obligation to not Render Aid or Assistance so as to Maintain a Situation Created by the Breach of a Peremptory Norm of General International Law. CLR, 22 (1), 135-154 (In Persian).
  43. Murawwij, H. (1991). Iṣṭilāḥāt Fiqhī (Jurisprudential Terms). First edition. Qom: Bakhshāyesh.
  44. Murphy, S. D. (2020). Peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) and other topics: the Seventy-First Session of the International Law Commission. American Journal of International Law, 114(1), 68-86. DOI:10.1017/ajil.2019.74
  45. Na’ini, M. H. (2000). Al-Rasail al-Fiqhiyah. First edition. Qom: Imam Reza Islamic Education Institute (In Arabic).
  46. Na’ini, M.H. (1989). Ajvad al-Taqrīrat. First edition. Qom: Mustafavi Bookstore (In Arabic).
  47. Najafī, M. Ḥ. (1983). Jawāhir al-Kalām (The Jewels of Discourse) (al-Qadīmah edition). Seventh edition. Beirut: Dār Iḥyā' al-Turāth (In Arabic).
  48. Najashi, A. (1986). Rijal al-Najāshi. Sixth edition. Qom: Jamia al-Mudarrassin (In Arabic).
  49. Pour-Hessari, H. (2024). The basics and application of the rule of the Erq Zalim with emphasis on new examples. Supervisor: Nasrin Fattahi. Qom: Masoumiyyah Seminary (In Persian).
  50. Raghib Isfahani, H (1991). Mufradat Aflaz al-Quran. First edition. Beirut: Dar al-Qalam (In Arabic).
  51. Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights (2004), John Dugard, on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/29, 7 December 2004
  52. Rossi, C. R. (2015). Ex Injuria Jus Non Oritur, Ex Factis Jus Oritur, and the Elusive Search for Equilibrium After Ukraine. J. Int'l & Comp. L., 24 (1), 143-174.
  53. Sahib Ibn Ibbad, I. (1993). Al-Muhit fi al-Laghah. research by Muhammad Hassan al-Yasin. First edition. Beirut: Alam al-Kutb (In Arabic).
  54. Scobbie, I. (2002). The Invocation of Responsibility for the Breach of ‘Obligations under Peremptory norms of General international Law’. European Journal of International Law, 13(5), 1201-1220. https://doi.org/10.1093/EJIL/13.5.1201
  55. Shahid Awal, M. (2019). Al-Qawwa’id wa al-Fawa’id. Second edition. Qom: Majma’ al-Mu’min al-Islamiyyah (In Arabic).
  56. Shahid Thani, Z.(1992). Masalik al-Afham. First edition. Qom: Al-Ma’arif al-Islamiyyah.(In Arabic)
  57. Shahid Thani, Zayn al-Din, M. (1989). Al-Rawdha al-Bahiyyah. First edition. Qom: Maktaba al-Dawri (In Arabic).
  58. Shahrakānī, I. (2008). Mu'jam al-Muṣṭalaḥāt al-Fiqhiyyah (Dictionary of Jurisprudential Terminology). First edition. Qom: Dhawī al-Qurbā (In Arabic).
  59. Sharif al-Radi, M. (2001). Al-Mujazat al-Nabawiyyah. First edition. Qom: Dar al-Hadith (In Arabic).
  60. Shubayri, M. (2001). Kitab Nikah. First edition. Qom: Ra’i Pardaz Research Institute (In Arabic).
  61. Tabarsi, A.(1989). Al-Mu'talaf min al-Mu'ktalaf. First edition. Mashhad: Astana al-Razaviyyah (In Arabic).
  62. Tabasi, N.(1996). Al-Nafi' and Al-Taghrib fi Mas'adir al-Islami. First edition. Tehran: Majma' al-Fikr al-Islami (In Arabic).
  63. Tabataba’i, Qomi, T. (1992). Umdah Al-Matalib. First edition. Qom: Mahallati (In Arabic).
  64. Tabataba’i, Qomi, T. (2007). Mabani Minhaj Al-Salihin. First edition. Qom: Qalam Al-Sharq (In Arabic).
  65. Tabataba'i, A. (1997). Riyadh al-Mas'eel. First edition. Qom: Aal al-Bayt (In Arabic).
  66. Tabataba'i, M. H. (1981). Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Quran. Second edition. Beirut: Al-A'lami Press Foundation (In Arabic).
  67. Talmon, S. (2006). The duty not to ‘recognize as lawful’a situation created by the illegal use of force or other serious breaches of a jus cogens obligation: an obligation without real substance. The fundamental rules of the International Legal Order: jus cogens and obligations erga omnes, 19 (99), 108-10. DOI:10.1163/ej.9789004149816.i-472.33
  68. Tams, C. J. (2002). Do serious breaches give rise to any specific obligations of the responsible state?. European journal of international law, 13(5), 1161-1180.
  69. Tarhini, M. (2006). Al-Zubdah al-Fiqhiyah. 4th edition. Dar al-Fiqh (In Arabic).
  70. Tavallai, A. (2013). The basics and application of the jurisprudential rule of the " Erq Zalim ". Islamic Law Journal, 37 (10), 99-120 (In Persian).
  71. The 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (Friendly Relations Declaration)
  72. The 1970 Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security
  73. The 1974 Definition of Aggression (3314 Resolution)
  74. The 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the Conference of Security and Co-operation in Europe
  75. The 1987 Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations
  76. Tusi, M. (1967). Al-Mabsut fi Fiqh al-Imamiyah. Third edition. Tehran: Maktaba al-Murtadawiyyah (In Arabic).
  77. Tusi, M. (1979). Al-Nihayah. Fifth edition. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Arabi (In Arabic).
  78. Tusi, M. (1986). Al-Khalaf. First edition. Qom: Jamia al-Mudarrasin (In Arabic).
  79. Tusi, M. (1986). Tahdhib al-Ahkam. Fourth edition. Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyyah (In Arabic).
  80. Tusi, M. (2006). Al-Rijal. Third edition. Qom: Jamia al-Mudarrasin (In Arabic).
  81. Vazhna, K. (2021). The Obligation Not to Recognize as Lawful the Situation Which Has Arisen as a Result of Violation of the Peremptory Norm of the General International Law (jus cogens) in the Current International Law.  J. Int'l L., 12 (3), 59-89.
  82. Wong, M. S. (2021). Aggression and state responsibility at the International Criminal Court. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 70(4), 961-990. doi:10.1017/S0020589321000373
  83. Worster, W. (2013). The Effect of Leaked Information on the Rules of International Law. American University International Law Review, 28 (2), 443-488. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2012490
  84. Wyler, E. (2002). From ‘State Crime’to responsibility for ‘serious breaches of obligations under peremptory norms of general international law’. European Journal of International Law, 13(5), 1147-1160.
  85. Zubaidi, M. (1993). Taj al-Arus. First edition. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr (In Arabic).
مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی
دوره 16، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 32
پاییز و زمستان 1404
دی 1404
صفحه 669-693

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار