نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار حقوق بینالملل، گروه حقوق عمومی، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار حقوق بینالملل، گروه حقوق جزا و جرمشناسی دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
The aim of this article is to address the question of whether Iran’s intervention as a third party in the case brought by South Africa against the Israeli regime before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) would imply an implicit recognition of the Israeli regime as a state or not. The central hypothesis of this study is that initiating legal proceedings or third-party intervention, in this context, does not influence the legal matter of recognition. An examination of third-party intervention in the ICJ and the international law governing recognition reveals that neither initiating proceedings nor intervening as a third party would affect Iran’s position of non-recognition of the Israeli regime as a state. This is due to the fact that recognition occurs only through the explicit consent of states and further considering the fact that Iran explicitly insists on non-recognition of the Zionist Regime, intervention in a case as a third party would not imply recognition of the regime. Nonetheless, in deciding whether to intervene in the aforementioned case, it is necessary to consider the possibility that the Israeli regime could initiate an independent claim against Iran under the Genocide Convention as a means of neutralizing Iran’s legal action and influencing South Africa’s case against the regime.
کلیدواژهها English
الف) کتابها
ب) مقالات
Palestine,vol. 70, at 237.