اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 546 |
| تعداد مقالات | 4,734 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 10,588,916 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 6,129,661 |
آسیبشناسی ساختار حقوقی اقدام متقابل علیه جنایات رژیم صهیونیستی در قوانین جمهوری اسلامی ایران | ||
| پژوهشنامه حقوق اسلامی | ||
| مقالات آماده انتشار، پذیرفته شده، انتشار آنلاین از تاریخ 07 آبان 1404 اصل مقاله (798.27 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30497/law.2025.248769.3849 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| علی ربیعزاده* | ||
| دانشآموخته دکتری حقوق عمومی، دانشکده معارف اسلامی و حقوق، دانشگاه امام صادق علیهالسلام، تهران، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| اقدام متقابل در سیاست داخلی، حقوق بینالملل و دیپلماسی، به اقداماتی گفته میشود که یک دولت (گاهی یک بازیگر بینالمللی) در واکنش به رفتار غیرقانونی یا خصمانه طرف مقابل انجام میدهد، تا وی را وادار به توقف آن رفتار یا جبران خسارت کند، بدون آن که این اقدامات بهطور مستقل غیرقانونی تلقی شوند. این اقدامات محدود به عملکرد دستگاههای دیپلماسی نبوده و بهعنوان مجموعهای از راهبردها، راهکارها و کنشها معمولاً در قوانین کشورها نیز منعکس شدهاند. لذا بازشناسی احکام قانونی مرتبط با اقدامات متقابل و سپس آسیبشناسی ساختار حقوقی و قانونی برگرفته از آن در قوانین جمهوری اسلامی ایران ضرورت دارد؛ بهویژه آن که پیشینه قابلتوجه و روشمندی میان آثار علمی موجود در این زمینه وجود ندارد. بر همین اساس سوال اصلی پژوهش عبارت است از اینکه «چه آسیبهایی در ساختار حقوقی و قانونی اقدام متقابل علیه جنایات رژیم صهیونیستی در قوانین جمهوری اسلامی ایران وجود دارد؟». برای پاسخ به این سوال، از روش اسنادی برای گردآوری دادهها و از آسیبشناسی قوانین بر مبنای اصول یا فنون شکلی و ماهوی (تخصصی) قانونگذاری بهعنوان روش تحلیل دادهها استفاده شده است. مهمترین دستاورد تحقیق بدین شرح است که آسیبهای موجود را میتوان در دو دسته «عام و شکلی» و «ماهوی و تخصصی» طبقهبندی نمود و مهمترین مصادیق آن، تورم قوانین، فقدان طرحهای جامع تقنینی و افزایش بار منفی قوانین، درج سیاستهای کلی در قوانین عادی، فقدان ضمانت اجرای مشخص یا تخصصی، و تعدد و تداخل صلاحیت متولیان اجرایی است. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| اقدام متقابل؛ دیپلماسی؛ ساختار حقوقی؛ آسیبشناسی حقوقی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A Legal Pathology of the Regulatory Framework Governing Countermeasures Against the Crimes of Israel Under the Laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Ali Rabiezade | ||
| PhD in Public Law, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Context & Objective: Countermeasures, defined as actions taken by a state in response to another party’s illegal or hostile conduct to enforce cessation or reparations without being independently deemed illegal, are employed in domestic policy, international law, and diplomacy and are typically codified in national legislation. Given Israel’s historical perpetration of unprecedented crimes against Palestinians and countries in the Axis of Resistance, Iran, recognizing Israel as an illegitimate and hostile entity, has implemented various formal countermeasures. The necessity of evaluating the existing legal structure for these prescribed countermeasures has intensified due to the severity of Israel’s regional crimes. The main purpose of this research is to analyze the current legal structure and related statutes concerning countermeasures against Israel's crimes and assess their deficiencies relative to specialized legislative principles. Consequently, the primary research question asks: "What are the weaknesses in the legal and statutory structure of countermeasures against the crimes of Israel in the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran?". Method & Approach: This study utilized a descriptive-analytical approach, gathering data through documentary (library-based) methods. The core analytical method involved the pathology (assessment of weaknesses) of laws based on general/formal and specialized/substantive principles of legislation applicable to countermeasures against Israel’s crimes. The process began by reviewing fundamental norms, including the Constitution and the system’s general policies, to identify explicit or implicit rules governing countermeasures. Subsequently, the study gathered, categorized, and analyzed the specific instances of countermeasures reflected in laws passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly, searching key terms such as Israel, Palestine, and Gaza within official legislative databases. These statutory provisions were organized into two categories: Material Countermeasures and Non-Material Countermeasures, according to established conceptual definitions. Findings: The investigation identified legal provisions regarding countermeasures against Israel’s crimes in 18 statutory titles and over 50 valid legal articles. While the current structure exhibits certain strengths, such as a balance between material and non-material measures, diversity in non-material measures, and general adherence to constitutional principles, it is undermined by numerous deficiencies. The most significant weaknesses are classified into two categories: General and Formal and Substantive and Specialized. Formal weaknesses include the proliferation of laws, often passed as scattered, single-article statutes, leading to redundancy (e.g., repeated economic boycott rules) and an increased negative burden of regulations. Substantive weaknesses include the practice of inserting broad, abstract system policies into ordinary laws, which compromises the law's executive function and leads to ambiguity. Furthermore, there is a pervasive lack of specific or specialized enforcement guarantees (sanctions) or defined deadlines for most state-implementing bodies, with penalties generally limited to criminal sanctions for individuals. Finally, the structure suffers from a multiplicity and overlap of jurisdiction among executing authorities, with some laws broadly tasking "all executive bodies" without specifying clear duties, potentially delaying execution and causing conflicts. Conclusion: Countermeasures are essential tools used for political deterrence, aiming to force hostile parties, such as Israel, to bear costs and deter future unlawful behavior, often relying on non-military strategies. Although Iran's countermeasures are deeply rooted in religious and ideological convictions, past efforts have sometimes been confined to media and cultural rhetoric, failing to fully translate into specialized, technical legislation. The research concludes that the existing legal and statutory structure for countermeasures against Israel is significantly removed from an optimal, efficient, and specialized model due to the identified set of formal and substantive deficiencies. A comprehensive strengthening and revision of the legal framework, employing specialized legislative techniques, is necessary to increase the impact factor, enhance resource management, and ensure a more proportional and effective response to Israel’s crimes. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Countermeasures, Diplomacy, Legal Framework, Legal Pathology | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 169 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 78 |
||