درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The outbreak of Covid-19 in 2019 raised significant concerns about the transmission of the virus, especially regarding zoonotic diseases. As the third common virus transmitted between humans and animals after SARS and MERS, the perception of Covid-19 as a foodborne illness intensified discussions surrounding food safety and security. This article aims to explore the commitment of states to ensure safe food supply chains. Food safety practices are essential for preventing disease, and the right to food is enshrined in various human rights documents. Although food supply has not been the subject of a specific legal framework, international organizations and conferences have recognized the necessity of regulating food production and distribution methods to ensure that populations have access to adequate and nutritious food, thereby promoting overall health and well-being.

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (IUSCT), throughout its operation, has successfully resolved a significant number of claims and disputes—including claims by nationals against the state and state-to-state disputes—within the sensitive legal and complex political milieus between Iran and the United States. Nevertheless, the Tribunal’s role in the international arena extends beyond this inter-state dimension: its awards and decisions, as widely acknowledged, have played a significant role in the development of law on a global scale, particularly in international arbitration, international investment, and international commercial law. A structured, analytical, and methodological study of the Tribunal’s impact on the development of law in the international arena necessitates an examination of its awards and decisions across various legal fields. These include contract law, international commercial law, and international law—particularly international investment law. The first step in such a study is to assess the status of the Tribunal’s awards and decisions in the international arena, particularly their precedential value, in order to ascertain the reasons for and mechanisms behind their influence on the development of law globally. This article, while clarifying that the awards and judgments of international courts and tribunals—including the IUSCT—are not generally binding precedent, seeks to demonstrate that these decisions may nevertheless serve as persuasive authority relied upon by other arbitral and judicial bodies on both procedural and substantive matters. The criteria for evaluating the nature and extent of this persuasive value are analyzed in this study. It is argued that the Tribunal’s rulings, as decisions rendered on diverse subject matters within the legal framework applicable to various other international commercial or investment disputes—and issued by an international claims tribunal with established external credibility and consistent internal jurisprudence— carry significant persuasive precedential value in the international arena.

The impacts of climate change pose a potential threat to peace as defined in the United Nations Charter. Currently, there are few concrete examples of violent conflicts directly induced by climate change, and our understanding of future projections remains limited. Many researchers contend that it is not climate change itself that precipitates conflict, but rather issues such as poor governance of water resources that serve as the primary drivers. This paper examines the competency of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in addressing the effects of climate change to either mitigate the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases. Various recommendations have been proposed for the UNSC in its dealings with the adverse impacts of climate change. These include refraining from involvement, adopting coercive measures, resorting to military force, ending impunity for environmental crimes, requesting advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), imposing sanctions, opting for non-response, and utilizing legislative competencies or authorizing measures. However, given the existence of multilateral climate treaties and other relevant forums, immediate action by the UNSC may be unnecessary. Additionally, the withdrawal of certain Permanent Members from the Paris Agreement complicates the Council's ability to advocate for compulsory actions in support of climate initiatives.