1. فارسی

الف) کتاب‌ها

۱. پروین، خیرالله (1393). مبنا و منشأ نظام بین‌المللی حقوق بشر و نظام حقوق بشر اسلامی. چ اول، تهران: خرسندی.

۲. جاوید، محمدجواد (1391). نقد مبانی فلسفی حقوق بشر. ج1، تهران: مخاطب.

۳. تاموشات،کریستیان (1391). حقوق بشر. ترجمۀ حسن شریفی طراز کوهی، چ دوم، تهران: میزان.

۴. ضیایی بیگدلی، محمدرضا (1392). حقوق بین‌الملل بشردوستانه. چ دوم، تهران: گنج دانش.

ب) مقالات

۵. زرافشان، شهرام (1397). نسبت میان شرط مارتنس و حقوق بشردرنظم حقوقی بین‌المللی جدید. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی، (۲)، 319-338.

٦. جاوید، محمدجواد و رستمی، مرتضی (1394). ابعاد نظری و آثار عینی حقوق طبیعی در اسناد و آرای حقوق بشری. فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی، ۳، 470-۴94.

7. جلالی، محمود (1382). حقوق بشر در تصمیمات دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری. مجلة حقوقی دادگستری، 44، 33-54.
8. نظری الهویی، حمید (1392). جایگاه اصول کلی حقوقی در آرای دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری. مجلة دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی، (۴)، 37-55.
9. عابدینی، عبدالله (1397). موانع جبران خسارت از افراد زیان‌دیده به‌واسطة نقض‌های فاحش حقوق بشردوستانه. فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی، (۳)، 583-598.
10. موثقی، حسن (1388). تأثیر سازمان ملل متحد بر تعدیل اصل رضایت دولت در التزام به تعهدات بین‌المللی. مجلۀ پژوهش حقوق و سیاست، (26)، 319-354.

2. انگلیسی
3. A) Books
4. Akehurst, M. (1974). Custom as a source of International law. 47 British YBI1,53.
5. Brown lie, I. (1998). Principles of public International law. Oxford University Press, xxxi en 646 blz.;63s.
6. Schachter, Oskar (1982). International law in Theory and Practice in << Recueil des course >>, B5,178.
7. Johansen, S. (2020). The Human Rights Accountability Mechanisms of International Organizations. Universitetet i Oslo pp:1-5.

1. B) Articles
2. Nolte, G. (2020). The European Court of Human Rights and the Source of International Law. Seminar ,The Contribution of the ECtHR to the Development of Public International law, (23), September.
3. Dimitri Jevis, V. (2006). Customary law as an International for the Protection of Human Rights. Institute for studies of Politie International, ISPI working papers 7.
4. Hannum, H. (1995-1996). The Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International law. GA.J.INT'L Q COMP.L.(25), 287-397.
5. Nayar, M. G. (1987). Human Rights: The UN and U.S Foreign Policy.19 Harv IL, 813816-817.
6. Phry, H. (1976). International Bill of Rights: Scope and Implementation. 17 W m Mary LR, 527-529.
7. Zenovic, P. (2012). Human Rights Enforcement via Peremptory Norms a Challenge to State Sovereignty", RGSL RESEARCH PAPERS NO.6.
8. Criddle, E.J- Fox-Decent, E. (2019). A fiduciary theory of Jus Cogens. 34 Yale J. Int'/L, 331-339.
9. Bianchi, A. (2008). Human Rights and Magic of Jus Cogens. The European Journal of International law, 19 (3), OE Jil, 491-503.
10. Sehorana, Joseph (2016). The Determination and Enforcement of Jus Cogens Norma for Effective Human Rights Protection. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 21(𝛿, Ver 7.
11. Parker, K- Neylon, L.B (1989). Jus Cogens: Compelling the law of Human Rights. In Hastings International and Comparative law Review, Vol.12.
12. Cherif Bassiouni, M. (1990). A Functional Approach to General Principles of International Law. Michigan Journal of International Law, 11(3).
13. Simma, Bruno-Alston Philip (1988-89). The Sources of Human Rights law: Custom, Jus Cogens, General Principles. AUYRBK Int Law 5;2 Australian Year Book of International Law 82.
14. Castellino, J. (2006). General Principles Relevant to International law. Iceland human Rights Center. human rights, is /en/ human rights- education-project/human- rights
15. Rumianna, Y. (2017). Challenges in the Identification of the “General Principles of Law Recognized by Civilized Nations”: The Approach of the International Court. CanLIDocs 79,269-323.
16. Eggett, C. (2019). The Role of Principles and General Principles in the ,Constitutional Process of International Law. Netherland International Law Review (66), 197-217.
17. Sinclair,I. (1979).The Effect of Resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly on Customary International Law. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law). (73), 301-309.
18. Scharf, M. (2014). Accelerated the Formation of Customary International Law. ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law, 20(2), 305-341.
19. Kub M Ya ,A.Kadir (2011).The United Nations General Assembly Resolution As a Source of International Law,Toward Reformulation of Sources of International Law. Journal Hakum International, 8 (2), ,275-290.
20. Lillich, R. (1996). The Growing Importance of Customary International Human Rights Law. 25 Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 1. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/gjicl/vol25/iss1/2.
21. Celin Van Den Rul,” Why Have Resolutions of the UN General Assembly if The Are NOT Legally Binding?”p.3,Junary 16 2016.at http://www.e-ir/2016/06/16/why-have-resolutions-of-the-un-general-assembly-if-they-are-not-legally-binding
22. http://www.Cortetidh.or.cr./docs/opinions/sol oc 26 esp

1. C) Documents
2. Cf ,Advisory Opinion OC -21/14, para 60, November,9, 2020.

 Montreal Statement (1988). 9J. INTL COMd'N-Jurist, pp. 94-.59

27. Committee on the Enforcement of Human Rights law (1992), Interim Report on the Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International law, in Report of the sixty-fifth Conference, P.446.
28. Committee on the Enforcement of Human Rights law (1994), Final Report on the Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International law, in Report of the sixty-fifth Conference 524.
29. International American Court, Judicial condition and rights of the undo Commented Migrants, Advisory opinion, OC-18/03 Ser A, No18, 2003.
30. Report No 62/02. Case 12.285, 22 October 2002.
31. Repot on the human rights situation in the republic of Iran by the special representative of the commission Mr. Reynoldo Galindo Pohl, appointed pursuant to resolution 1986/41, U.N.DOC.E/CN.4. 4/1987/23, Para 22.
32. International American Court, Judicial condition and rights of the undo Commented Migrants, Advisory opinion, OC-18/03 Ser A, No 18, 2003.
33. UNSC Resolutions 353(1974) of 20 July 1974 and 360(1974)of 16 August 1974.
34. GA/ Res/73/203, 18,Dec 2018.

1. D) ICJ REPORTS:
2. C.J Rep, 1994: para. 4
3. C.J Rep, 1951: para. 15
4. C.J Rep, 1970: para. 3
5. C.J Rep, 1951: Para. 23
6. C.J Rep, 1980: Para. 42
7. C.J Rep, 1996: Para. 14
8. C.J Rep, 1996: Paras.226-46
9. C.J Rep, 1966: Para.298
10. I.C.J Rep, 1949:para.4
11. I.C.J Rep,1951:para.15
12. I.C.J Rep,1940:,para.3
13. I.C.J Rep,1980:para.3
14. I.C.J Rep,1986:para.14

1. E) Cases

59.Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against (Nicaragua v. U.S.A), merits, ICJ reports 1986 .

60. Report No 62/02. Case 12.285, 22 October 2002.
61. United States، court of appeals of the second circuit, Filartiga v. Pena Irala, 630 Fzd 878/1980.
62. Kadi, at para 22: Yusuf at para227, March 9, 2008.
63. European Court of Human Rights : Al-Adsani v. U.K(2001)34 EHRR 273,para61.International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: Prosecutor v Furundzija Case IT95-17/I-T.38ILM(1999)317
64. Case T-305/01, Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council and Commission 21/9/05.
65. ECtCHR ,Volodina v. Russia,N.41261/17,9 July 2019.
66. Inter-American Court of human Rights: Advisory Opinion OC-18/03,17 September 2003, IACtHR Series A 18(2003) para,101.