منابع:
الف. فارسی
ـ کتاب
1. سماوی، اسماعیل. تفسیر پویای معاهدات بینالمللی، تهران: نشر ثالث، 1397.
2. واعظی، احمد. درآمدی بر هرمنوتیک، تهران: پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشة اسلامی، 1386.
ـ مقاله
1. جاوید، محمدجواد و سجاد افشار، «رهیافت متنگرایی در تفسیر حقوقی؛ با تأکید بر قانون اساسی جمهوری اسلامی ایران»، فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق عمومی 20، شمارة 61 (1397).
2. جاوید، محمدجواد و مرتضی رستمی، «ابعاد نظری و آثار عینی حقوق طبیعی در اسناد و آرای حقوق بشری»، فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی 45، شمارة 3 (1394).
3. حبیی مجنده، محمد و ساناز کامیار راد، «قاعدهسازی در دیوان بینالمللی دادگستری از مجرای تفسیر پویا»، مجلة حقوقی بینالمللی 35، شمارة 58 (1397).
4. علمی سولا، محمدکاظم، «هرمنوتیک مدرن و دلایل امکان فهم متن بهتر از ماتن»، الهیات و معارف (مطالعات اسلامی)، شمارة 71 (1385).
5. نوروزی طلب، علیرضا، «پرسش از چیستی هرمنوتیک: تحلیل و بررسی مسائل آن»، باغ نظر، شمارة 7 (1386).
6. هرسیج، حسین، محمودرضا رهبر قاضی و رضا محمود اوغلی، «بررسی و نقد هرمنوتیک فلسفی گادامر از دیدگاه هرمنوتیک انتقادی هابرماس»، دانش سیاسی و بینالمللی 1، شمارة 1 (1391).
ب. انگلیسی
- Books
1. Bjorge, Eirik. The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
2. Gaja, Giorgia. The Protection of General Interests in the International Community: General Course on Public International Law. Boston: Nijhoff Publishers, 2012.
3. Harris, David, and Sandesh Sivakumaran. Cases and Materials on International Law. 8th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2015.
4. Letsas, Georg. A Theory of Interpretation of the European Convention of Human Rights. London: Oxford University Press, 2007.
- Articles
1. Dawidowicz, Martin, “The Effect of the Passage of Time on the Interpretation of Treaties: Some Reflections on Costa Rica v. Nicaragua.” Leiden Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (2011).
2. Dupuy, Pierre-Marie, “Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties: Between Memory and Prophecy.” in: The Law of Treaties beyond the Vienna Convention, Enzo Cannizzaro (ed.), Oxford University Press (2011).
3. Helmersen, Sondre Torp, “Evolutive Treaty Interpretation: Legality, Semantics and Distinctions.” European Journal of Legal Studies 6, no. 1 (2013).
4. Morse, Oliver, “Schools of Approach to the Interpretation of Treaties.” Catholic University Law Review 9, no. 1 (1960).
5. Novy, Zdenek, “Evolutionary Interpretation of International Treaties.” Czech Yearbook of International Law 8 (2017).
6. Quddus, Usman, and Dennis W. K. Khong, “Six Core Values in Natural Law as a Common Concern for Human Development.” Cogent Social Sciences 9, no. 1 (2023).
7. Vidigal, Geraldo, “Hidden Meanings: Evolutionary Interpretation between Norm Application and Progressive Development.” Journal of International Economic Law 24 (2021).
- Cases and Documents
1. Aegean Sea Continental Shelf (Greece v. Turkey), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 1978, p. 80.
2. Alleged violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Right, (Iran v. United States), decision on provisional measures, Separate opinion of Judge Cançado Trindadealleged, 2018.
3. Application of the CERD Convention (Ukraine versus Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J Reports 2017, p. 558.
4. Dispute Regarding Navigational and Related Rights, (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 2009, p. 213.
5. ECR. Case of (Srl CILFIT and Lanificio di Gavardo SpA) v. Ministry of Health (Case 283/81). Judgment 6 October 1982.
6. ECtHR. Loizidou v. Turkey (Application no. 15318/89). Judgment 18 December 1996.
7. ECtHR. Scoppola v. Italy (no.2), (Application no. 10249/03), Judgment, 2010.
8. ECtHR. Soering v. The United Kingdom (Application No. 14038/88). Judgment 07 July 1989.
9. ECtHR. Tyrer v. The United Kingdom (Application no. 5856/72). Judgment, 25 April 1978.
10. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 1997.
11. IACHR. The Right to Information on Consular Assistance. In the Framework of the Guarantees of the due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion of October 1.1999 (OC-16/99) 1 October 1999.
12. IACtHR. Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man within the Framework of Article 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Advisory Opinion of July 14.1989 (OC-10/89). 14 July 1989.
13. IACtHR. The Right to Information on Consular Assistance, In the Framework of the Guarantees of the due Process of Law. Advisory Opinion of 1 October 1999 (OC-16-99). 1 October 1999.
14. Iron Rhine (Belgium v. The Netherland). Final Award. 24 May 2005. PCACase No. 2003-02.
15. Jadhav (India versus Pakistan), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 2017, p. 418.
16. Kasikili-Sedudu Island, (Botswana v. Namibia), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 1999, p. 1045.
17. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia Notwithstanding, Security Council Resolution 276, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J Reports 1971, p. 16.
18. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) Concurring Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Opinion Judge Ranjeva [1996] ICJ Rep 295.
19. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J Reports 2010, p. 14.
20. Third Report on the Law of Treaties by Mr. G.G. Fitzmaurice, Special Rapporteur UN Doc A/CN 4/115 and Corr 1, art. 18-19, Extract from the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II, 1958. Downloaded from the web site of the International Law Commission http://www.un.org/law/ilc/index.htm
21. Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p. 226.
22. WTO. Mexico – Measures Affecting Telecommunications Services, WT/ DS204/R, 1 June 2004.
23. WTO. United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Service. WT/DS285/R. 20 April 2005.
