Authors

1 Assistant Prof., Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Human Science, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. in International Law

Abstract

United Nations Security Council (SC) resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter are binding. Whenever SC adopts a resolution under Chapter VII, it will consider significant situations indicated in article 39 and in order to reach to this end, requesting the mere final result from addressees of the resolutions. In this regard, UN member States to enforcement the resolutions select their own available means to achieve the goal of the resolution. Whether and to what extent member States the margin of appreciation to enforce the SC decisions have, would be the main point of this paper which, in turn, will be analyzed from the SC resolutions, States practice and case law perspective as to the sanctions stipulated by SC on Iran.

Keywords

1. فارسی
1. سادات میدانی، سید حسین (1386). صلاحیت قانونگذاری شورای امنیت، دفتر مطالعات سیاسی و بین‌المللی.
2. شایگان، فریده (1380). شورای امنیت سازمان ملل متحد و مفهوم صلح و امنیت بین‌المللی، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
3. شریف، محمد (1373). بررسی دکترین نامحدود بودن صلاحیت شورای امنیت، انتشارات اطلاعات.
 
2. انگلیسی
A) Books
5. Fitzmaurice, Malgosia and et al. (eds). (2010). Treaty Interpretation and the ViennaConvention on the Law of Treaties: 30 Years on, Martinus Nijhoff.
6. Legg, Andrew (2012). The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law, Oxford University Press.
 
B) Articles
7. Boyle, Alan (2012). “International Lawmaking Towards a New Role for the Security Council”, in, Realizing Utopia: The Future of International Law, Antonio Cassese (ed), Oxford University Press, 2012.
8. Graefrath, Bernhard (1984) “International Crimes and Collective Security”, in, International Law: Theory and Practice: Essays in Honour of Eric Suy, Eric Suy and Karel Wellens (eds.), Kluwer.
7. Jacoist, Eugenia López (2012). “The UN Collective Security System and its Relationship with Economic Sanctions and Human Rights”, Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Vol. 14.
8. McLachlan, Campbell, (2005). “The Principle of Systemic Integration and Article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention”, International Comparative and Law Quarterly, Vol. 54.
9. Tzanakopoulos, Antonios (2011). “Domestic Courts in International Law: The International Judicial Function of National Courts”, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, Vol. 34.
10. Hollenbergg, Reporter and Analysis of the judgment “A and ors v Netherlands, 2010, at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/abstract/10.1093/law:ildc/1463nl10.case.1/law-ildc-1463nl10?rskey=PUhRJx&result=2&prd=OPIL
 
C) Cases law
11. A and ors v Netherlands (Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science), First instance judgment, LJN: BL1862/334949; ILDC 1463 (NL 2010) 3 February 2010, Oxford Reports on International Law in Domestic Courts, available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/ORIL
12. Netherlands (Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Education, Culture and Science) v A and ors, LJBQ4781, 26 Apri l 2011, Oxford Reports on International Law in Domestic Courts, available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/ORIL
13. Nada v. Switzerland, Application No. 10593/08, European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, 12 September 2012, Oxford Reports on International Law in Domestic Courts, available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/ORIL
14. Netherlands v A and ors, Appeal, Decision No LJN: BX8351, ILDC 1959 (NL 2012), 14th December 2012, Supreme Court [HR], Oxford Reports on International Law in Domestic Courts, available at: http://opil.ouplaw.com/home/ORIL
15. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Kingdom), ICJ Reports, 1998.
 
D) Documents
16. Agreements and Supplementary Agreements between the Agency and the United Nations, INFCIRC/11, 30 October 1959, at:          https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/documents/infcircs/1959/infcirc11.pdf
17. Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law(CAHDI), France, March 2006, at: http://www.coe.int/t/dlapil/cahdi/Source/un_sanctions/France%20UN%20Sanctions%202006%20F.pdf
18. Committee of Legal Advisers on Public International Law(CAHDI), United Kingdom, September 2010, at: http://www.coe.int/t/dlapil/cahdi/Source/un_sanctions/United%20Kingdom%20UN%20Sanctions%20Sept%202010%20E.pdf
19. S/RES/1591 (2005).
20. S/RES/1737, (2006).
21. S/RES/1973 (2011)
22. S/RES/2134 (2014).
23. S/RES/2153 (2014).
24. S/RES/2176 (2014).
25. Arms Trade Treaty, 2013, at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src =IND&mtdsg_no=XXVI-8&chapter=26&clang=_en
26. International Criminal Court Statute, 1998, at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XVIII-10&chapter=18&clang=_en
27. North Atlantic Treaty, 1949, at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx? objid=080000028016226c
28. Statute of the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, 1956, at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280142abd
 
E) Website
29. http://eur-lex.europa.eu
32. http://opil.ouplaw.com
35. http://www.nato.int
36. https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com