legal position of injured state and State other than an injured State to invoke the international responsibility of the State:  With emphasis on the whaling case (Australia vs Japan)

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate professor of International law, faculty of law, Shahid Beheshti university,Tehran, Iran

2 Ph.D. Candidate of International Law, Shahid Beheshti university,Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This article examines the grounds for raising the international responsibility by the claimant state, in the light of the 2014 judgment of the international court of justice (ICJ) in the case concerning whaling in the Antarctic (Australia vs. Japan; New Zealand intervening). In this context, first the nature of international obligations of states toward each other is discussed, and the position of injured and non-injured states are examined based on the ILC's Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States. The legal position of Australian government and its position in protecting a collective interest, in line with article 48 of the Draft Articles is, thereupon, analyzed in the whaling case. From the analysis and interpretation presented, it follows that Australia has instituted the proceedings as a non-injured state, to protect a collective interest on behalf of the international community.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

منابع
الف. فارسی
ابراهیم گل، علیرضا(1390)، مسئولیت بین‌المللی دولت متن و شرح مواد کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل، تهران: انتشارات شهر دانش.
جمالی، حمیدرضا، (1388)، «نقد نظریه تاریخی حاکمیت در پرتو مفهوم میراث مشترک بشر»، فصلنامه تحقیقات سیاسی و بین‌المللی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شهررضا، 3: 128- 101.
حدادی، مهدی(1389)، «استناد به مسئولیت دولت ناشی از نقض تعهدات عام‌الشمول»، مجله حقوقی بین‌المللی، سال بیست و هفتم، 42: 124- 89.
راعی، مسعود(1390)، «اقدام متقابل و حقوق بین‌الملل»، فصلنامه معرفت، سال بیستم، 165: 116- 103.
رمضانی‌قوام‌آبادی، محمدحسین(1388)، «حمایت از گونه‌های جانوری در ایران»، علوم محیطی، سال هفتم، 2: 94 – 77.
رمضانی‌قوام‌آبادی، محمدحسین(1389)، «نگاهی به مسائل زیست محیطی در رأی دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری در قضیه کارخانه‌های خمیر کاغذ»، مجله نامه مفید، 82: 100 - 79.
سیفی، سید جمال. ابراهیم گل، علی‌رضا(1390)، «تأثیر اقدامات متقابل در اجرای مسئولیت بین‌المللی دولت با تأکید بر مسئولیت ناشی از منافع جمعی»، مجله تحقیقات حقوقی، 6: 189- 137.
فلسفی، هدایت الله(1380)، حقوق بین‌الملل معاهدات، تهران: انتشارات فرهنگ نشر نو.
کرافورد، جیمز، پِل، ژاکلین، اُلسون، سیمون(1381)، «نقدی بر طرح مواد کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل در مورد مسئولیت دولتها برای اقدامات متخلفانه بین‌المللی»، ترجمه زهرا کسمتی، مجله پژوهشهای حقوقی، سال اول، 2: 170-129.
 
ب. انگلیسی
Kiss, A. & Shelton, D (2007), Guide to International Environmental Law, martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Shelton, Dinah, (2009), "Common Concern of Humanity", Iustum Aequum Salutare, Vol.1: 33-40. At: http://ias.jak.ppke.hu/hir/ias/20091sz/05.pdf
Sicilianos, Linos-Alexander, (2002), "The Classification of Obligations and the Multilateral Dimension of the Relations of International Responsibility", EJIL, Vol. 13, No.5: 1127-1145.
Cases & Documents
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (2006) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda) Jurisdiction of the Court and Admissibility of the Application, I.C.J Judgment of 3 February 2006.
Australia application instituting proceedings (2010), Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), 31 May 2010.
Barcelona Traction Case, Light and Power Company, Limited (1970) (Belgium v. Spain), Second Phase, Judgment of 5 February 1970.
Case Concerning East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), I.C.J Reports, Judgment of 30 June 1995. Also available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/84/6949.pdf
Case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic(2014) (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), I.C.J Judgment of 31 March 2014.
Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, (2010), I.C.J Judgment (Argentina v. Uruguay). Also available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/135/15877.pdf
Crawford, James (2000), Third report on State responsibility, Document A/CN.4/507 and Add.1–4. (15 March, 15 June, 10 and 18 July and 4 August 2000)
Declaration of intervention of the Government of New Zealand, in the case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (2012), (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), 20 November 2012.
Dissenting opinion of Judge Bennouna(2014), Case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), I.C.J Judgment of 31 March 2014.
Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (2012) (Germany v. Italy: Greece Intervening), I.C.J Reports, 2012.
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, I.C.J Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004.
Public sitting in the case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), held on Wednesday 26 June 2013.
S.S. "Wimbledon" case, 1923, Permanent Court of International Justice P.C.I.J., (ser. A) No. 1. Also available at: http://www.icj-cij.org/pcij/series-a.php?p1=9&p2=1
Separate opinion of Judge CançadoTrindade, Case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), Order of 6 February 2013.
Separate opinion of Judge Trindade, Case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening), I.C.J Judgment of 31 March 2014,
South West Africa Case, (Liberia v. South Africa; Ethiopia v. South Africa), I.C.J. Judgment of 18 July 1966. At: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/46/4931.pdf
The 1979 Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals.
Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals. http://www.cms.int/en. Last visit: 24 June 2015
The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org. Last visit: 24 June 20
 
 
Journal of Legal Studies
Volume 9, Issue 2 - Serial Number 24
September 2017
Pages 147-175

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics