Violation of Barjam and the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 PhD Student in International Law, Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Law, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

Abstract

One of the agreements concluded by the United States of America, which was formally withdrawn more than two years after its conclusion without any practical commitment, is Borjam. There are two conflicting views on Borjam, and the source of each view is The text, form, title, and statements of the parties to the agreement. Over time and in the implementation phase of this document, the capacities and gaps of this document have become more apparent. However, according to the International Court of Justice, the name, title and form of the agreement do not interfere with the process of invoking it. The United States has effectively violated the UN Security Council (UNSC) by imposing new sanctions after the UN Security Council and extending the previous sanctions (ISA), following which Iran has filed a lawsuit with the Court alleging a breach of the 1955 Maudut Treaty between Iran and the United States. However, considering the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from Borjam, it remains to be seen whether it is possible to file a lawsuit with the Court or not? It is not possible in the text of Borjam, but considering the nature of Borjam, it does not seem unlikely to refer to the Court. The Court may not have overlooked the United States's political accountability.

Keywords

Political Sociology of Iran
Volume 5, Issue 10
December 2022
Pages 3073-3085

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics