United Nations Sanctions Against the International Criminal Court Cooperation: The Impact of Ethical Principles Caused by Human Rights
Subject Areas : Ethics and Islamic EducationMohammad 1 , seyed ghasem zamani 2 , hasan savari 3 , mahdi hadavand 4
1 -
2 - Allameh Tabataba’I University
3 -
4 - Allameh Tabataba’I University
Keywords: Sanctions Committee, targeted sanctions regime, cooperation regimes, International Criminal Court,
Abstract :
The Security Council has, since 1966, exercised its authority to impose international sanctions and in response to the threat to international peace and security, has imposed 26 sanctions regimes against 21 countries, as well as organizations, terrorist organizations and groups. Currently, 13 regimes from the 26 regimes in the areas of hostilities, nuclear proliferation and terrorism are still active. Each regime is run by a sanctions committee headed by a non-permanent member of the Security Council. The author examines the regime of terrorist sanctions, which is generally linked to justice and ethical rules derived from human rights doctrines. The moral mechanisms behind international criminal justice and the United Nations terrorist sanctions regime are tightly intertwined, to a point where friction sometimes occurs. The coordinated relationship between them is in the interest of both institutions and is in line with their goals. According to the author, for this purpose, it is necessary to take several steps. The proposal to establish a Security Council subcommittee with a special mission "Review Mutual Reciprocal Institutions" along with observance of the ethical rules derived from human rights doctrines is in this regard
1. فلاح اسدی، بهداد ، "شورای امنیت سازمان ملل متحد: تحریم و حقوق بشر"، موسسه مطالعات پژوهشی (شهر دانش)، تهران: (1394).
2. Pellet A. & Miron A.,“sanctions”, in: R.Wolfarm (ed.), “The Max plank Ency clopedia of public International law”,Oxford:Oxford University Press (2013).
3. Thakur R.,“The united Nations, peace and security:from collective security to the Respansibility to protect”, Boston:Cambridge University Press (2006).
4. Mancini M.,“UN sanctions Targeting Individuls and Icc proceeding : How to Achieve a Mutually Reinforcing Interaction”, in: Ronzitti N.,(ed.),“coercive Diplomacy, sanctions, and International law”, Leiden/Netherlands:Brill NijHoff (2016).
5. Picchio-Forlati L.& Sicilianos L.A.,(eds.),“Economic sonctions in international law”, Leiden:Brill NijHoff (2004).
6. Clampi A.,“Legal Rules , policy choices and political Realities in The Functioning of the cooperation Regime oF the International criminal court “ , in Bekou O., Birkett D.J.(eds.),“Cooperation and the International Criminal Court:Perspectives from Theory and Practice” Leiden/Netherlands: Brill Nijhoff (2016).
7. Turlan P.,“The International criminal cooperation Regime – Apractical Perspective From The Office of the Prosecutor” , in Bekou O., Birkett D.J.(eds.),“Cooperation and the International Criminal Court:Perspectives from Theory and Practice” Leiden/Netherlands: Brill Nijhoff (2016).
8. Lee Roy S., (ed.),“The International criminal conrt: the making of the statute”, Hague: Kluwer Law International (1999).
9. McCarthy C.,“reparations and victim support in the International Criminal court” , Cambridge: Cambridge Univerdity Press (2012).
10. Cryer R., et al.,(eds.),“An Introduction to International criminal Law and Procedure”(2th ed)UK: Cambridge University Press (2012).
11. Silvers D.,“The Procedure of the UN security Council”(4th ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press (2014)
. 12. Cirlig C.C., “counter-terrorist sanctions regimes:Legal Framework and challenges at UN and EU Levels”, EPRS, October 2016, pp.1-12.
13. GeiB R.,“Humanitarian safequards in sconomic sanctions Regimes- a call for Automatic suspension clause, periodic Henoitoring, and (follow-up Assessment of leng term Effects”, 18 Harvard Human Rights Journal (2005), p.167.
14. Uruenn R.,“International law as Adminstration-the UN’s 1267 sonctions committee and the Making of the Waron Terror” , 4 International organizations Law Review (2007), p.321.
15. Lysen G.,“Targeted UN Sanctions: Application of Legal Sources and Procedure Matters”, 72 Nordic Journal of International Law(2003), p.291
. 16. Marschik A.,“Too much order? The impact of special secondary norms on the unity and efficacy of the international legal sestem”, 9 EJIL (1998), pp.212-239.
17. Gehring Th. &Dorfler Th.,“Division oF Labor and rule-based Decisionmaking wthin the UN Security council:The AL-Queda/ Taliban sanctions Regime”, 19 Global Governance (2013), pp.567-587.
18. Mutyaba R.,“An Analysis of the cooperation Regime of the International criminal court and Its Effectiveness in the courts objective in Securing suspects in its ongoing Investigations and Prosecutions “,12 International Criminal Law Review (2012), pp.937-962.
19. ILSA ., “Comments in the ILA Panel on the ICTY”, ILSA Journal of International & comparative Law 5(1999), p.347
. 20. Cortright D.,“patterns of Implementation:Do Listing practices Impede compliance with UN sanctions? A critical Assessment”, policy Brief No.SSRP 0912-01:(2009), p.10.
21. Keller H. & Fischer A.,“The UN Anti-terror sanctions Regime under pressure”, 9 Human Rights Law Review, NO.2:(2009), pp.257-266
. 22. D.Cortright & et al., “Human rights and targeted sanctions: An action agenda forstrengthening due process procedure”, policy brief No.SSAP 0911-01:(2009), pp.4-5.
23. Uhel M.C., (Ombudsperson Presentation),“From adjudicating International crimes to reviewing delisting by individuals and on the 1267 sanctions list A Comparative A pproach“ (2017), PP. 1-9
. 24. Ooster V., Perry M., McManus J.,“The cooperation of states with the International criminal Court”, 25 Fordham International Law Journal , Issue 3 (2002) , PP.767–839
.
