A Judicial Strategy to Understand ‘Measures Contrary to International Law’ in the Iranian Legal System (Case Study: Economic Sanctions)

Document Type : academic


1 Associate Professor at Islamic Azad University, Science and Researches Branch

2 PhD Student of International Law at Faculty of Law, University of Shahid Beheshti; s.modarress@gmail.com.


Under the recent statute entitled “The Jurisdiction of Iranian Judiciary on Civil Claims against Foreign States”, Iranian courts are competent to rule upon such claims against foreign sovereigns arisen out of ‘measures contrary to international law’, given that other certain conditions are met. This provision will require a domestic court to base its reasoning and ruling upon international law. The statute makes no suggestion as to how the court shall examine and establish the relevant rules of international law. However, judicial function needs to be objective and impartial, and special care should be given to the problem of ‘fragmentation’ when a court deals with international legal issues. Based upon these crucial requirements, it is argued that domestic courts should take notice of ‘international law as applied by international courts’. It is also argued on this basis that Tehran Common Courts would be able to rule upon damages out of economic sanctions, provided that it is shown in each case that measures taken to implement sanctions were contrary to international law.


  • منابع:

    الف) فارسی

    ـ کتاب

    • فلسفی، هدایت‌الله؛ حقوق بین‌الملل معاهدات، فرهنگ نشر نو، چاپ سوم، 1391.
    • کاسسه، آنتونیو؛ حقوق بین‌الملل، ترجمه: حسین شریفی طرازکوهی، میزان، 1385.
    • کلی، جان؛ تاریخ مختصر تئوری حقوقی در غرب، ترجمه: محمد راسخ، طرح نو، چاپ دوم، 1388.
    • هارت، هربرت؛ مفهوم قانون، ترجمه: محمد راسخ، نشر نی، چاپ سوم، 1392.


    ـ مقاله

    • شریفی طرازکوهی، حسین و ساسان مدرس سبزواری؛ «ضرورت و امکان نظارت قضایی بر عملکرد شورای امنیت در نظام ملل متحد»، فصلنامه سازمان‌های بین‌المللی، سال اول، شماره 4، زمستان 1392.
    • عبداللهی، محسن؛ «خسارات تنبیهی در حقوق بین‌الملل»، مجله‌ حقوقی، شماره 30، بهار 1383.
    • میرزاده، مناالسادات؛ «تأملی بر رأی دیوان دادگستری اروپایی در قضیه فولمن و محمودیان: تحقق رؤیای نظارت قضایی بر قطعنامه‌های شورای امنیت»، مجله پژوهش‌های حقوقی، شماره 19، 1390.




    • Kelsen, Hans, Peace through Law, Chapel Hill: Univ. North Carolina Press, 1944.
    • Lowenfeld, Andreas. F., International Economic Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
    • Shaw, Malcolm N., International Law (6th Ed.), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008.
    • Simma, Bruno, et al. (eds.), Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, New York, Oxford University Press, 1995.


    - Articles

    • Benvenisti, E., “Judicial Misgivings Regarding the Application of International Norms: An Analysis of Attitudes of National Courts”, European Journal of International Law, 1993 (4), pp. 159-183.
    • Benvenisti, E. and G. W. Downs, “National Courts, Domestic Democracy and Evolution of International Law”, in European Journal of International Law, vol. 20 (1), 2009, pp. 59-72.
    • Cancado Trindade, A. A., “The Humanization of Consular Law: The Impact of Advisory Opinion No. 16 (1999) of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on International Case Law and Practice”, in Chinese Journal of International Law, vol. 6 (1), 2007, pp. 1-16.
    • Coleman, A., “The International Court of Justice and Highly Political Matters”, Melbourne Journal of International Law, vol. 4 (1), 2003, pp. 1-47.
    • Janis, M. W., “Individuals as Subjects of International Law”, in Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 17, 1984, pp. 61-78.
    • Nollkaemper, A., “The Role of Domestic Courts in the Case Law of the International Court of Justice”, in Chinese Journal of International Law, vol. 5 (2), 2006, pp. 301-322.
    • Simma, B., “From Bilateralism to Community Interests”, Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International (250), 1994.
    • Tzanakopoulos, A., “Preliminary Report: Principles on the Engagement of Domestic Courts with International Law”, International Law Association, 2012.


    -Case Law

    -Awards of PCIJ & ICJ

    • Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia (Merits) [1926], PCIJ Series A, No. 7.
    • The S.S. Lotus, [1927] PCIJ Series A., No. 10.
    • Exchange of Greek and Turkish Nationals, PCIJ, Series B., No. 10.
    • Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 14.
    • Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2002, p. 3.
    • LaGrand (Germany v. United States of America), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2001, p. 466.
    • Avena (Mexico v. United States of America), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2004, p. 12.
    • Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece Intervening), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2012.


    -Awards of Other International Tribunals

    • The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series A, No. 16, 1999.
    • Fulmen and Fereydoun Mahmoudian (Applicant) v. Council of the European Union (Defendant), Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber), 21-Mar-2012 in Joined Cases T-439/10 and T-440/10 Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=celex: 62010tj0439: en:html (retrieved: feb-2014).


    -Awards of Domestic Courts

    -US Courts

    • Edye v. Robertson, 112 U.S. 580 (1884) (Available at: http://caselaw.lp. findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=112&invol=580 –retrieved: Dec-2014).
    • Oetjen v. Central Leather Co., 246 US 297 (1918).
    • Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186 (1962).
    • Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312 (1988) (Available at: http://www.law.cornell.edu/ supremecourt/text/485/312-retrieved: Dec-2014).


    -Canadian Courts

    • Bouzari v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Swinton J.), [2002] OJ No. 1624.


    -Acts and Official Instruments

    • The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, accessible at the following address:

    https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf (retrieved: Dec-2014).

    • Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nations General Assembly: "Declaration on Principles of Friendly Relations"; can be obtained at the following address: http://www.un-documents.net/a25r2625.htm (retrieved: Dec-2014).
    • The Law of Treaty of Amity and Economic and Consular Relations of Iran and the United States (1955); can be obtained at the following address: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/94974 (retrieved: Dec-2014).
    • Executive Order 12544 of the United States President (Libya Embargo, 1986): Executive Order 12544 (Jan 8, 1986), 51 FR 1235, available at: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive order/12544.html (retrieved: Dec-2014).
    • Executive Order 13382 of the United States President (WMD, 2005):

    Executive Order 13382 (Jul. 1, 2005), 70 FR 126, available at: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/135435.pdf (retrieved: Sep-2014).