List of Articles international responsibility

• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  1 - Government's Civil And International Responsibility For The Damages Caused By The Internet
  Rasoul Malakooti Mona Khalilzadeh
  Internet space is a territory in which time and place are meaningless in the conventional sense, so government sovereignty and control are not perfect. However, the government (in a sense) as the sole originator of the international (internet) point of contact in the More

  Internet space is a territory in which time and place are meaningless in the conventional sense, so government sovereignty and control are not perfect. However, the government (in a sense) as the sole originator of the international (internet) point of contact in the country, for the primary oversight of the licensing and provision of Internet services to legal entities such as ISPs or the transfer of sovereignty to some Attendees in cyberspace, including their agents and employees, or duties to ordinary citizens or to certain corporate actions, may have civil liability for damages resulting from the use of the Internet stewardship or retaliation. Also in international crimes that endanger world peace and security, the government will also have international responsibility as a result of acts of harm done personally or by private actors. Cyber-attacks as a Wrongful international act by the government with government bodies have been greatly reduced due to their ability to identify and attribute to the government, and governments are seeking to curb the These nongovernmental actors carry out such attacks in order to avoid responsibility. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  2 - A Comparative Study of the Stare's Ethical Responsibility Caused by Acts of Citizens in Iran and International Law
  Doagu Hossein    
  In general, it is accepted as a principle that the damaging acts of persons are not attributable to the states. So not only states are not responsible for such actions, those who have committed them are held responsible. This is supported by the states doctrines and pra More

  In general, it is accepted as a principle that the damaging acts of persons are not attributable to the states. So not only states are not responsible for such actions, those who have committed them are held responsible. This is supported by the states doctrines and practices as well as international legal procedures and decisions. The international responsibility of state with respect to the damage to other states and their subjects is limited to the acts of its own agents who are acting on behalf of it. However, there are certain circumstances if met the acts of persons can bring about responsibility for states. As stated in the article 8 of the international commission bill, the act of a person or a group of persons is regarded as the act of a state if it is done by the order or under control and guidance of the state. This demonstrates that the conditions of control and guidance are essential and if they are met action or inaction of a national can bring about responsibility for the respected state. The present dissertation studies the cases and forms of the responsibility of states for the acts of nationals within the realm of international and internal law. Furthermore, the actions that bring about responsibility for states are studied. Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  3 - Victims of Peace: UN Responsibility and Remedial Mechanisms
  ghasem zamani
  Occasional violations of international law occur as the United Nations and its peacekeeping forces carry out their important responsibility and mission for protecting global peace and security. Remedial mechanisms become more complicated when the actions of peacekeeping More

  Occasional violations of international law occur as the United Nations and its peacekeeping forces carry out their important responsibility and mission for protecting global peace and security. Remedial mechanisms become more complicated when the actions of peacekeeping forces are attributed to the UN as a result of certain principles of international responsibility. On the one hand, the UN’s responsibility toward victims of such violations requires the world body to be answerable while, on the other hand, its immunity to trial in national and transnational courts, has barred victims from taking legal action. Although the UN has taken steps to solve this problem in order to restore the credit it has lost as a result of the actions of its forces as well as its immunity, the proposed mechanisms have posed new challenges, thus, making the UN target of new criticism. Such criticism seems even more justified as a result of the promotion of human rights in international community and alterations in the aforesaid immunity. The present paper discusses the necessity of introducing new mechanisms or reforms by the UN which would make the existing mechanisms more efficient and fairer Manuscript profile
• Open Access Article
  • Abstract Page
  • Full-Text
  
  4 - International Responsibility of OPCW to Foster Peaceful Cooperation
  شاهرخ شاکریان
  The Chemical Weapons Convention, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1992, constitutes the most important international legal instrument on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. The present pa More

  The Chemical Weapons Convention, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1992, constitutes the most important international legal instrument on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. The present paper intends to explore the commitment of the Convention to fostering peaceful chemical cooperation as envisioned in Articles 8 and 11, and also to assess the international responsibility of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Therefore, the main question of this paper is: “Under what conditions and according to what principles can this Organization be held responsible with regard to its commitment to fostering peaceful international cooperation in the field of chemical activities?” As discussed in this paper, according to the provisions of Article 11 of the Convention, the Organization is under definitive obligations to bolster international cooperation. The paper also shows that the measures taken by the Australia Group, whose members are also Member States of the OPCW, in expanding prohibitions and restrictions of the Convention are incompatible with the provisions of the Convention and, therefore, its members are in violation of the Convention. Manuscript profile