نوع مقاله : مقالات انگلیسی
نویسندگان
1 کارشناسی ارشد حقوق تجارت بین الملل دانشگاه لایدن
2 استادیار گروه حقوق عمومی و بین الملل ،دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه شیراز فلسفه حقوق
3 استادیار حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه شیراز
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
This research paper examines the legal parameters of State responsibility for omissions during systemic crises, shifting the analytical focus from passive inaction to affirmative administrative choice. Within classical legal doctrine, State responsibility has been predominantly associated with positive acts clear, identifiable conduct attributable to public authorities. However, this approach becomes increasingly inadequate when confronted with contemporary governance structures, where harm frequently arises not from action, but from prolonged and systemic inaction.
Drawing upon the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001), as well as contemporary scholarship particularly the work of Nika D. Sabasteanski and Mila Harding this study challenges the traditional presumption that governmental failures to act are generally exempt from liability. It argues that omission, far from representing a neutral absence of conduct, often reflects a structured administrative decision regarding resource allocation, regulatory priorities, and institutional response.
By analysing the standard of due diligence and the evolving allocation of the burden of proof in relation to resource constraints, the paper proposes a model of functional accountability. Under this model, responsibility arises where a State possesses knowledge of a foreseeable risk and retains the institutional capacity to intervene, yet fails to adopt reasonable preventive or corrective measures. In such circumstances, omission is recharacterised as a legally relevant form of conduct, engaging both domestic and international responsibility.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)