<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>University of Tehran</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Public Law Studies Quarterly</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2423-8120</Issn>
				<Volume>46</Volume>
				<Issue>4</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2016</Year>
					<Month>12</Month>
					<Day>21</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Jus Post Bellum and the responsibility to protect victims of armed conflicts</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Jus Post Bellum and the responsibility to protect victims of armed conflicts</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>957</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>976</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">60525</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22059/jplsq.2016.60525</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Pouria</FirstName>
					<LastName>Askary</LastName>
<Affiliation>Assistant Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran</Affiliation>
<Identifier Source="ORCID">0000-0002-7054-3049</Identifier>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2016</Year>
					<Month>02</Month>
					<Day>20</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract>The theory of &quot;Just War&quot; belongs to ancient times that even precede the era of Jus Gentium. This theory had three distinct sections i.e. the Jus ad bellum, with main focus on State&#039;s right to wage to war; Jus in bello, which revolved around means and methods of warfare; and finally, Jus post bellum, which dealt with justice after war. In this article, the main argument is that the modern concept of the Responsibility to Protect is rooted in the theory of &quot;Just War&quot;. As a result, all obligations raised from the mentioned theory must exist in this new concept to protect the war victims. The article discusses the three pillars of R2P and eventually argues that on the basis of R2P&#039;s Responsibility to Rebuild, in addition to the State and the party to conflict who violates the rules of jus in bello, the International community, also has a responsibility to protect the victims of war.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">The theory of &quot;Just War&quot; belongs to ancient times that even precede the era of Jus Gentium. This theory had three distinct sections i.e. the Jus ad bellum, with main focus on State&#039;s right to wage to war; Jus in bello, which revolved around means and methods of warfare; and finally, Jus post bellum, which dealt with justice after war. In this article, the main argument is that the modern concept of the Responsibility to Protect is rooted in the theory of &quot;Just War&quot;. As a result, all obligations raised from the mentioned theory must exist in this new concept to protect the war victims. The article discusses the three pillars of R2P and eventually argues that on the basis of R2P&#039;s Responsibility to Rebuild, in addition to the State and the party to conflict who violates the rules of jus in bello, the International community, also has a responsibility to protect the victims of war.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">International Humanitarian law</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">International Human Rights law</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">just war theory</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">responsibility to protect</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">victims of armed conflict</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://jplsq.ut.ac.ir/article_60525_dcb681466d96c56151f3e3211f4a7616.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
