به آیینی و به سامانی:
درستی - سازش - شادی
نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
This article analyzes the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Certain Iranian Assets case (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), a treaty-based dispute under the 1955 Treaty of Amity arising from U.S. legislative, executive, and judicial measures enforcing terrorism-related judgments against Iranian assets. The study examines the interaction between procedural and substantive issues in treaty-based adjudication and their impact on the Court’s findings and reparations. Using a descriptive–analytical approach based on judicial materials and doctrinal sources, it shows that the preliminary objections phase confined the dispute to treaty claims and excluded those based on customary sovereign immunity. In its 2023 judgment, the Court upheld the objection of lack of jurisdiction ratione materiae concerning the Central Bank, while finding treaty breaches regarding other Iranian entities and ordering compensation. It also treated Article XX as a substantive defence and rejected its invocation. The judgment highlights the decisive role of procedural architecture in shaping the dispute’s substantive scope.
کلیدواژهها English
