نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
نویسنده
استاد گروه حقوق دانشگاه بوعلی سینا همدان
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
The effort to lift the seizure of nearly two billion dollars of assets of the Central Bank of Iran in the United States of America as perhaps the most important motivation of Iran in filing a lawsuit known as "Certain Iranian Assets" which was brought to the ICJ with the claim of violation of the Treaty of Amity. The majority of judges agreed with the central bank's withdrawal from the scope of the Treaty, and only five of the judges disagreed with the opinion of the majority. The core of the judges' dispute was whether the purchase and holding of twelve bonds by the Central Bank of Iran should be considered a sovereign act or whether it should be described as a commercial act. In order to analyze the arguments of the judges, the individual opinions of each judge will be examined. The result of this research shows that although the opinion of the majority did not secure the material interests of Iran in this case, but the emphasis on the sovereign nature of the purchase of bonds by the Central Bank, which provides the ultimate interests of Iran in maintaining the immunity of the Central Bank of Iran.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)