دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران

نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران.

چکیده

حفظ صلح و امنیت از اصلی‌ترین اهداف سازمان ملل متحد است. سازمان در راستای حفظ، اعاده و تحکیم صلح عملیات حفظ صلح را ایجاد کرد. با این حال مأموران حفظ صلح با وجود نقش مهمی که در حفظ و اعادة صلح ایفا کرده‌اند، بعضاً مرتکب نقض حقوق بشر و حقوق بشردوستانه شده‌اند. با توجه به اینکه دولت ارسال‌کنندة نیروهای حافظ صلح همچنان برخی صلاحیت‌ها را برای خود حفظ می‌کند، مسئلة اساسی تحقیق این است که در صورت نقض حقوق بشر و حقوق بشردوستانه ملاک انتساب مسئولیت چیست. با وجود آرای قضایی متعدد صادرشده در این مورد، طبق طرح کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل در مورد مسئولیت سازمان‌های بین‌المللی و رویة قضایی، به‌نظر می‌رسد معیار کنترل مؤثر برای انتساب مسئولیت در عملیات حفظ صلح بیش از سایر ملاک‌ها مورد توجه رویة قضایی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Criteria of Attribution of Responsibility for Peace-Keeping Operations

نویسنده [English]

  • Hossein Rezazadeh

* Assistant Prof., Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran

چکیده [English]

Maintaining peace and security is one of the main goals of the United Nations. The United Nations created peace-keeping operations to maintain, restore and consolidate peace. In spite of the important role they play in maintaining and restoring peace, peacekeepers have committed violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Considering that the sending State of the peacekeeping forces still retains some qualifications, the fundamental question of the research is that if there is a violation of human rights and humanitarian law, what is the criterion for attributing responsibility? Despite the numerous judicial decisions issued in this regard, according to the Draft Articles on the International Law Commission on the Responsibility of International Organizations and judicial procedures, it seems that the effective control criteria of attributing of responsibility for peace-keeping operations is more than any other criteria are the subject of judicial action.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Peacekeeping Operations
  • overall control
  • Effective Control
  • Effective Overall Control
  • Ultimate Control
1. فارسی
الف) کتاب‌ها
1. بیگ‌زاده، ابراهیم (1391)، حقوق سازمان‌های بین‌المللی ، تهران: مجد.
2. زمانی، قاسم (1392)، حقوق سازمان‌های بین‌المللی، تهران: شهر دانش.
3. کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل سازمان ملل متحد (1394)، حقوق مسئولیت سازمان‌های بین‌المللی، ترجمة عبدالله عابدینی، خلیل روزگاری، تهران: خرسندی.
 
ب) مقالات
4. اﻟﻬﻮﯾﯽ ﻧﻈﺮﯼ، ﺣﻤﯿﺪ، اﻣﯿﺮﻓﺎﻣﯿﻞ ﺯﻭﺍﺭ ﺟﻼﻟﯽ (1396)، «مسئولیت بین‌المللی دولت‌های تأمین‌کنندۀ مالی تروریسم»، ﻣﻄﺎﻟﻌﺎﺕ ﺣﻘﻮﻕ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﯽ ، ﺩﻭﺭﻩ ﭼﻬﻞ ﻭ ﻫﻔﺘﻢ ، ش 3، ص 747 – 725.
5. زمانی، قاسم؛ صدیقیان کاشانی، منصوره (1392)، «قربانیان صلح: مسئولیت سازمان ملل و سازوکارهای جبران خسارت»، ﻓﺼﻠﻨﺎﻣة ﺳﺎزﻣﺎنﻫﺎی بین‌المللی، ﺳﺎل اول، ش 1، 172-139.
6. سیفی، جمال؛ عبدالهی، محسن؛  ملکی‌زاده، امیرحسین  (1390)، «قابلیت انتساب مسئولیت در رویة دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در پرتو قضیة ژنوساید  (بوسنی هرزگوین علیه صربستان و مونته‌نگرو)»، تحقیقات حقوقی، ش 5، ص 302-285.
 
2. انگلیسی
A) Books
1. Beigzadeh, Ebrahim  (2012), Law of International Organizations, Tehran, Majd Publications (In Persian).
2. United Nations Commission on International Law  (2015), Responsibility of international organizations, Translated by Abdullah Abedini, Khalil Roozgari, Tehran, Khorsandi Publications (In Persian).
3. Zamani, Ghasem  (2013), Law of International Organizations, Tehran, Shahre Danesh Publications (In Persian).
 
B) Articles
4. Alhooyee Nazari, Hamid & Famil Zavar Jalali, Amir  (2017), “International Responsibility of the States Providing Finance to Terrorism”, the Public Law Studies Quarterly, Vol. 47, Issue 3, pp. 725-747 (In Persian).
5. Cassese, Antonio  (2007), “The Nicaragua and Tadić Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia, The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 18, No. 4, EJIL, 649-668.
6. Danesh Sarooshi  (1999), “The General Legal Framework Governing the Process of a Delegation by the UN Security Council of its Chapter VII Powers”, Clarendon Press Oxford, 3-49.
7. Dannenbaum Tom  (2010), “Translating the Standard of Effective Control into a System of Effective Accountability: How Liability Should Be Apportioned for Violations of Human Rights by Member State Troop Contingents Serving as United Nations Peacekeepers”, Harvard International Law Journal , Vol. 51, 113-192.
8. Gasseling, Kelsey  (2017), “The Legacy of Srebrenica: Potential Consequences of Reducing Liability for Troop Contributing Countries in Modern UN Peacekeeping Operations”, 40 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. pp.343, 343-361.
9. Larsen, Kjetil Mujezinović (2008), “Attribution of Conduct in Peace Operations: The ‘ Ultimate Authority and Control ’ Test”, The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 19, No. 3, EJIL 509-531.
10. Messineo, Francesco (2009), “The house of lords in al-jedda and public international law: Attribution of conduct to un-authorized forces and the power of the security council to displace human rights”, Netherlands International Law Review, pp.35-62.
11. Nollkaemper, Andre  (2011), “Dual Attribution: Liability of the Netherlands for Conduct of Dutchbat in Srebrenica”, Journal of International Criminal Justice 9, pp.1143-1157.
12. Palchetti, Paolo  (2015), “International Responsibility for Conduct of UN Peacekeeping Forces: the question of attribution”, University of Macerata, pp.19-56.
13. Palchetti, Paolo (2016), “Who must bear international responsibility for wrongful conducts of UN peacekeeping forces?”, Право и управление. XXI век, pp.98-114.
14. Ryngaert, Cedric (2017), “Peacekeepers Facilitating Human Rights Violations: The Liability of the Dutch State in the Mothers of Srebrenica Cases”, Netherlands Judicial Developments, pp.453–535.
15. Seifi, Seyed Jamal & Abdollahi Mohsen, Malekizadeh Hossein  (2012), “Ability to assign responsibility in International Court of Justice proceedings in the light of the Geoside case  (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)”, legal research quarterly, Vol. 14, Issue 107, pp. 285-302 (In Persian).
16. Talmon, Stefan  (2009), “The responsibility of outside powers for acts of secessionist entities”, 58 Int'l & Comp. L.Q.493, 493-517.
17. Zamani, Qasem & Sedighiyan Kashani, Mansoureh  (2013), “Victims of Peace: UN Responsibility and Compensation Mechanisms”, Journal of international organizations, Vol. 1, issue 1, pp.139-172 (In Persian).
C) Cases
18. Court of Appeal of The Hague, Nuhanovic´ v. Netherlands, 5 July 2011, No.200.020.174/01, available at: http://www.nuhanovicfoundation.org/user/ file/2011_nuhanovic_court_of_appeal_judgment.pdf
19. Court of Appeal of The Hague, X and Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica v. State of the Netherlands, judgment of 27 June 2017, No.200.160.317.
20. ECtHR, Application No. 71412/01 Agim Behrami and Bekir Behrami v. France, and App. No. 78166/01 Ruzhdi Saramati v. France, Germany and Norway, Grand Chamber decision of 2 May 2007.
21. ECtHR, Case of al-jedda v. the United kingdom, 7 July 2011.
22. ECtHR, Case of Loizidou v. Turkey, No. 40/1993/435/514, 18 December 1996
23. Hague District Court, Mothers of Srebrenica/Netherlands, 16 july 2014, No. 09/295247 / HA ZA 07-2973.
24. ICJ report, Nicaragua v. United States of America, case concerning military and paramilitary activities in and against nicaragua, Judgment of 27 june 1986.
25. ICTY, Appeals Chamber, Tadić case , 15 July 1999 ,Case no. IT-94-1-A.
26. The European Court of Human Rights, Stichting mothers of srebrenica and others against the Netherlands, Application No. 65542/12, 11 June 2013.
 
D) Documents
27. Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations, with commentaries, 2011, A/66/10
28. Remarks of the Secretary-General, 1 December 2016. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2016-12-01/secretary-generals-remarks-general-assembly-new-approach-address.