نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشیار دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

چکیده

استثنای شبه جرم به ترتیب در ماده 11 کنوانسیون اروپایی مصونیت دولت‌ها و ماده 12 کنوانسیون ملل متحد در مورد مصونیت دولت‌ها و اموال آن‌ها به عنوان یکی از استثنائات مهم بر مصونیت دولت‌ها پیش‌بینی شده است؛ اما ابهامات زیادی در خصوص دامنه و گسترة این استثناء دیده می‌شود. در این مقاله در پرتو رأی مصونیت صلاحیتی تلاش شده است به این ابهامات پاسخ داده شود از جمله اینکه، آیا مفاد مواد مذکور به قاعده عرفی تبدیل شده است یا نه؟ آیا این استثناء اقدامات حاکمیتی دولت‌ها را نیز در برمی‌گیرد؟ آیا استثنای شبه جرم شامل اقدامات نیروهای مسلح در زمان مخاصمات مسلحانه نیز می‌شود؟ دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری با بررسی رویه دولت‌ها، تفاسیر طرح کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل و آرای محاکم قضایی داخلی و رویه دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر با پذیرش ضمنی عرفی بودن این استثناء به این نتیجه رسید که استثنای شبه جرم، اقدامات حاکمیتی دولت‌ها را در برمی‌گیرد اما اقدامات نیروهای مسلح در زمان مخاصمات مسلحانه از حوزه شمول این استثناء خارج است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Scope of the Tort Exception in the Law of State Immunity in the Light of the ICJ’s 2012 Judgment on the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State

نویسنده [English]

  • Sattar Azizi

Associate Professor, Bu Ali Sina University

چکیده [English]

The Tort Exception is provided for in Article 11 of the European Convention and Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property as an important exception to the state immunity, but there is much ambiguity on the scope and content of this exception. The present article aims to clarify some aspects of this issue in the light of the ICJ’s 2012 judgment in the case of Jurisdictional Immunities of The State. There are some questions, including, whether this exception is transformed into customary international law, whether there is in customary international law a “tort exception” to State immunity applicable to acta jure imperii, and whether the acts committed on the territory of the forum State by the armed forces of a foreign State in the course of conducting an armed conflict are contained in the tort exception.
The International Court of Justice, by examining state practice, judicial decisions and doctrine, has found that tort exception encompasses acta jure imperii but does not include the acts of armed forces in the course of conducting an armed conflict.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • state immunity
  • United Nations Convention on the Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property
  • Tort Exception
  • Jurisdictional Immunities of the State
  • ICJ’s 2012 Judgment
  1. منابع

    1. عبداللهی محسن؛ مصونیت قضایی دولت در حقوق بین­الملل، اداره چاپ و انتشارات ریاست جمهوری، چاپ اول، 1382.
      1. Bankas K. Ernest, 2005, The State Immunity Controversy in International Law: Private Suits against Soverign States in Domestic Courts, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
      2. Bartsch Kerstin and Bjorn Elberling, 2003, "Jus Cogens vs. State Immunity, Round Two: The Decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Kalogeropoulou et al. v. Greece and Germany Decision", German Law Journal, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 477-491.
      3. Caplan Lee M; 2003, "State Immunity, Human Rights and Jus Cogens", American Journal of International Law, Vol. 97, No. 4, pp. 741–781.
      4. De Sena  Pasquale and Francesca De Vittor, 2005, "State Immunity and Human Rights: The Italian Supreme Court Decision on the Ferrini Case", The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 89-112.
      5. Finke Jasper; 2011, "Sovereign Immunity: Rule, Comity or Something Else?", The European Journal of International Law, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 853-881.
      6. Fox Hazel Cmg QC; 2008, The Law of State Immunity, Oxford University Press, Second Edition.
      7. Garner A. Bryan; 2009, Black`s Law, 9th Edition, A Thomson Reuters business.
      8. Karagiannakis Magdalini; 1998, "State Immunity and Fundamental Human Rights", Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 11, Issue 01, pp. 9-43.
      9. Novogrodsky Noah Benjamin, 2008, "Immunity for torture: Lessons from Bouzari v. Iran", The European Journal Of Human Rights, Vol. 18, No. 5, pp. 939-953.
      10. Orakhelashvili Alexander; 2002, "State Immunity in National and International Law: Three Recent Cases Before the European Court of Human Rights", Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 15, pp. 703-714.
      11. JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF THE STATE (GERMANY v. ITALY: GREECE INTERVENING); 2012, Judgment 3 February.
      12. UN Doc GA Committee, Summary A/C.6/59/SR.13
      13. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1991, Vol. 2.
      14. Bouzari v. Islamic Republic of Iran; 2004, Court of Appeal of Ontario, Dominion Law Reports (DLR),4th Series, Vol. 243.
      15. Kalogeropoulou and others v. Greece and Germany; 2002, Application No. 59021/00, Decision of 12 December, ECHR Reports 2002-X, p. 417, ILR, Vol. 129.
      16. Margellos v. Federal Republic of Germany, case No. 6/2002
      17. McElhinney v. Ireland[GC]; 2001, Application No. 31253/96, Judgment of 21 November, ECHR Reports2001-XI, p. 39; ILR, Vol. 123.
      18. Prefecture of Voiotia v. Federal Republic of Germany; 2000, Case No.11/2000, Areios Pagos (Hellenic Supreme Court)4 May.
      19. Separate Opinion of Judge Keith.
      20. Separate Opinion of Judge Bennouna.
      21. Separate Opinion of Judge koroma.
      22. Dissenting Opinion of Judge Gaja.

     

CAPTCHA Image