مجله حقوقی بین المللی

مجله حقوقی بین المللی

حقوق بین‌الملل تعاملی: رهیافتی غیرسلسله‌مراتبی بر یکجانبه‌گرایی و سلطه‌جویی در حقوق بین‌الملل

نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی

نویسنده
حیدرعلی تیموری
استادیار گروه حقوق بین الملل دانشکده حقوق دانشکدگان فارابی دانشگاه تهران
10.22066/cilamag.2022.247148
چکیده
این نوشتار بر آن است تا با بررسی نظریۀ نوظهور حقوق بین‌الملل تعاملی، به موضوع یکجانبه‌گرایی و افق نویی که این نظریه در این خصوص می‌تواند در پیش روی حقوق بین‌الملل بگشاید بپردازد. طبق این نظریه، یکجانبه‌گرایی، بخشی از خصوصیت ذاتی حقوق بین‌الملل تلقی شده اما چنانچه یکی از قوانین بین‌المللی به‌صورت یکجانبه از سوی قدرت‌های برتر نقض شود، لزوماً از مشروعیت و قانونیت لازم برخوردار نخواهد شد و امکان تداوم در مناسبات بین‌المللی را نخواهد داشت. یکجانبه‌گرایی به خودی خود، نامطلوب نیز تلقی نشده بلکه رفتاری است که در فرایند برساختن قوانین جدید به کار می ­آید اما برای برخورداری از قانونیت و مشروعیت باید با درک مشترک سایر بازیگران نیز در تعامل باشد؛ در غیر این صورت به استثناگرایی-معافیت ­جویی منجر شده و از احراز قانونیت بازمی­ماند. در پایان این نوشتار با عبور از دوگانۀ نقض-مجازات به­ روشنی نشان می‌دهد که قدرت‌های برتر چنانچه بخواهند ارادۀ خود را به‌صورت یکجانبه و به ­دور از فرایند تعامل بین‌المللی بر سایر بازیگران عرصۀ بین‌الملل تحمیل کنند در همراه ­کردن آن‌ها شکست خورده و حتی به‌‌عنوان قدرتمندترین دولت‌ها، ناتوان از توجیه حقوقی برتری خود خواهند بود. بدین منظور به‌‌عنوان پرسش اصلی، این اثر به بررسی این مسئله می ­پردازد که چگونه نظریۀ حقوق بین‌الملل تعاملی به مشکل نقض­های یکجانبه در حقوق بین‌الملل و بازتولید نظام سلطه در این نظام حقوقی پاسخ می­دهد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
یکجانبه‌گرایی
تعامل
سلطه
قانونیت
مشروعیت
تعهد
پایبندی
فهم مشترک

عنوان مقاله English

Interactional International Law: A Non-hierarchical Approach to Unilateralism and Domination in International Law

نویسنده English

Heidarali Teimouri
Assistant Professor, International Law Department, Faculty of Law, Farabi Campus, University of Tehran
چکیده English

The present study attempts to investigate the problem of unilateral violation of international law through the lens of the recently released doctrine of interactional international law and the way this theory deals with unilateralism. According to this theory, international law inherently confirms the necessity of unilateral action, but at the same time, if powerful States violate any principle of law unilaterally, there is no guarantee to enjoy legitimacy and legality and sustain that action in international relations. Also, this phenomenon of unilateralism is useful in the social practice of international law-making; however, to enjoy legality it must conform with the common understandings of other actors. Otherwise, it would end up in exceptionalism-exemptionalism, lacking any degree of legality and legitimacy. Eventually, the research concludes that going beyond the dichotomy of violation-punishment, the impotence of great powers in imposing and legally justifying their behavior would be obvious in case they cannot come along with the common understandings of the whole international interactional network. To do so, as a primary question at stake, this paper attempts to answer the following questions: how will the theory of interactional international law respond to the unilateral violation of international rules by powerful States? Also, how will it cope with the re-emergence of domination within the international legal system?

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Unilateralism
Domination
Legality
Legitimacy
Obligation
Compliance
Shared Understandings

  • - Books

    • Jutta Brunnée & Stephen J. Toope, Legitimacy and Legality in International Law an Interactional Account, CUP, 2010.
    • Crawford, James, "Sovereignty as a Legal Value", in James Crawford and Martti Koskenniemi (eds), The Cambridge Companion to International Law, CUP, 2012.
    • Crawford, James, Brownlie's Principles of Public International Law, OUP, 2012.
    • Tzanakopoulos, Antonios, Disobeying the Security Council Countermeasures against Wrongful Sanctions, OUP, 2011.
    • Fuller, Lon, The Morality of Law, Yale University Press, 1969.
    • Hart, H.L.A, The Conept of Law, 3rd edition, OUP, 2012.
    • Jean, d’Aspermont, International Law as A Belief System. CUP, 2018.
    • Shaw, Malcolm, International Law, 8th edn, CUP, 2017.
    • Koskenniemi, Martti, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960, CUP, 2004.
    • Chesterman, Simon, You, The People, The United Nations, Transitional Administration, and State-Building, OUP, 2004.
    • Lauterpacht, Hersch, "The Place of International Law in Jurisprudence”, in Lauterpacht, Elihu (ed.), International Law: Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht, Vol. 1, CUP, 1970.
    • Lauterpacht, Hersch, The Function of Law in the International Community, OUP, 2011.
    • Stahn, Carsten, The Law and Practice of International Territorial Administration Versailles to Iraq and Beyond, CUP, 2008.
    • Koskenniemi, Martti, From Apology to Utopia; The Structure of International Legal Argument, CUP, 2005.
    • Collins, Richard, “Classical Legal Positivism in International Law Revisited” in Jorg Kammerhofer and Jean D’Aspremont (eds), International Legal Positivism in A Post-Modern World, CUP, 2014.
    • Summers, James (ed), Kosovo: A Precedent? The Declaration of Independence, the Advisory Opinion and Implications for Statehood, Self- Determination and Minority Rights, Martnus Nijhoff, 2011.
    • Orakhelashvili, Alexander, Peremptory Norms in International Law, OUP, 2006.
    • Orakhelashvili, Alexander, "International Law, International Politics and Ideology" in Alexander Orakhelashvili (ed), Research Handbook on the Theory and History of International Law, Edward Elgar, c2011.
    • Crawford, James, "Responsibility for Breaches of Communitarian Norms: An Appraisal of Article 48 of the ILC Articles on Responsibility of States for International Wrongful Acts" in Ulrich Fastenrath and Others (eds), From Bilateralism to Community Interest: Essays in Honour of Bruno Simma, OUP, 2011.
    • Brunnée, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "Interactional Legal Theory, the International Rule of Law and Global Constitutionalism" in Anthony Lang, Jr. and Antje Wiener (eds), Handbook on Global Constitutionalism, Elgar, 2017.
    • Brunnée, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "Constructivism and International Law" in Jeffrey Dunoff and Mark Pollack (eds), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations the State of the Art, CUP, 2013.
    • Goldsmith, Jack and Posner, Eric, The Limits of International Law, OUP, 2007.

     

    - Articles

    • Koskenniemi, Martti, "Constitutionalism as Mindset: Reflections on Kantian Themes about International Law and Globalization", Theoretical Inquiries in Law, Vol. 8(1), 2007‌.
    • Fitzmaurice, Gerald, "The Foundations of the Authority of International Law and the Problem of Enforcement", Modern Law Review, Vol. 19(1). 1956.
    • Dupuy, Pierre-Marie, "The Place and Role of Unilateralism in Contemporary International Law", EJIL, Vol. 11(1), 2000.
    • Chinkin, Christine, "The State That Acts Alone: Bully, Good Samaritan or Iconoclast?’ EJIL, 11(1), 2000.
    • Conklin, William, "The Peremptory Norms of the International Community", EJIL, Vol. 23(3), 2012.
    • Alvarez, Jose, "Multilateralism and Its Discontents", EJIL, Vol. 11(2), 2000.
    • Blum, Gabriella, “Bilateralism, Multilateralism, and the Architecture of International Law”, EJIL, Vol. 49(2), 2008.
    • Whittle, Devon, “The Limits of Legality and the United Nations Security Council: Applying the Extra-Legal Measures Model to Chapter VII Action”, EJIL, Vol. 26(3), 2015.
    • Wedgwood, Ruth, "Unilateral Action in the UN System", EJIL, 11(2), 2000.
    • Hathaway, James, “America, Defender of Democratic Legitimacy?”, EJIL, 11.1, 2000.
    • Krisch, Nico, “The Decay of Consent: International Law in An Age of Global Public Goods”, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 18(1), 2014.
    • Koskenniemi, Martti, "International Law and Hegemony: A Reconfiguration", Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(2), 2004.
    • Bradford, Anu and Posner, Eric, "Universal Exceptionalism in International Law", Harvard International Law Journal, 52(1), 2011.
    • Alvarez, José, "Hegemonic International Law Revisited", AJIL, 97(4), 2003.
    • de Visscher, Charles, ‘Cours général de droit international public, 1972, 136 (ii) Récueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International.
    • Anne Orford, "Book Review Article: International Territorial Administration and the Management of Decolonization", International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 59(1), 2010.
    • Reus-Smit, Christian, “Obligation through Practice”, International Theory, 3, 2011.
    • Dunoff, Jefrrey, “What Is the Purpose of International Law?” International Theory, 3, 2011.
    • Philip Liste, Jutta Brunnée, Stephen J. Toope. “Legitimacy and Legality in International Law”, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 22, Issue 2, May 2011.
    • Brunnée, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "History, Mystery, and Mastery", International Theory, Vol. 3(2),
    • Krisch, Nico, "Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account”. By Jutta Brunnée and Stephen J. Toope, AJIL 106(1), 2012.
    • Adler, Emanuel and Pouliot, Vincent, "International Practices", International Theory, 3(1), 2011.
    • Brunnee, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "Interactional International Law: An Introduction", International Theory, 3(2), 2011.
    • Koskenniemi, Martti, "The Mystery of Legal Obligation", International Theory, 3(2), 2011.
    • Brunnée, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "International Law and the Practice of Legality: Stability and Change", Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 49(4), 2018.
    • Brunnée, Jutta and Toope, Stephen, "Self-Defence against Non-State Actors: Are Powerful States Willing But Unable to Change the Law?’, ICLQ, Vol. 67(2),

     

    - Instruments

    - Cases

    • S. Lotus (France v. Turkey), Judgment of 7 September 1927, PCIJ Series A, No. 10 (1927).
    • Tadic Case (Jurisdiction Appeal) ICTY-94-1, 2 October, 1995.

  • تاریخ دریافت 30 فروردین 1400
  • تاریخ بازنگری 25 مهر 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش 15 آبان 1400