درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Feminism, as a social uprising, today is being considered by many thinkers and researchers. Proponents of this tendency believe that women are discriminated because of their sex and state they have certain needs that are not fulfilled in the society by governmental administrations. Therefore, fundamental changes must be made in the social, economic and political system to achieve females’ basic rights and needs. Women's rights are among the issues to be addressed in various aspects and dimensions. In Iran, the women's movement has roughly coincided with the Constitutional Movement (1905-11) and continued throughout the Pahlavi regime (1925-79) and thereafter the Islamic Revolution (1979- present) in various forms. Applying a comparative and descriptive-analytical method, the present research aims to study the status of political-social rights of women in Iran before and after the 1979 Revolution, regarding the Iranian Constitution. Findings show that after the Islamic Revolution, the Constitution obliged the government to respect the rights of women in all aspects, including their civil participation, and then ensure and create favorable conditions for the development of women's personality and the revival of her material and spiritual rights. According to the Iranian Constitution, woman as an esteemed human being has the right to enter and control her own destiny. In other words, the guarantee of Iranian females' rights is the Constitution itself, which has initially focused on their political and social rights. Hence, it is proved that the situation of women has improved at least in the area of ​​decision-making, and consequently their general status has grown since the Iranian Islamic Revolution.

Today, the global system is formed based on multilateralism, which is based on international relations and the origin of international organizations and institutions. But this matter is endangered by the unilateralism pursued by the United States of America. Coercive unilateral measures such as sanctions, threats, military intervention, and even measures such as withdrawal from international treaties are exerted at high levels. Therefore, such actions by a country, which considers itself protector of the human rights and interests of the international police, are contrary to the international law and the United Nations Charter and must be opposed by the international community. This study has adopted a descriptive-analytical approach and is based on internationally accepted documents and procedures. Data collection is done using library and internet tools and relying on objective data. In this study, we seek to answer the critical question of whether the United States' unilateral and hostile sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran are legitimate in terms of international law and human rights. Our initial answer (hypothesis) to this question is that the hostile actions of the United States of America against the Iranian people are blatant violations of international human rights law following the resolutions of the UN and the Human Rights Council. The fundamental rights of the Iranian people, such health, life, and the right to development, in all its legitimate respects, have been directly influenced by the hostile and unilateral actions of the United States, and have a worrying impact on the human rights and life of the Iranians. The United States' actions also impede the establishment of lasting and comprehensive peace and security in the international arena. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to examine and evaluate the contradictions between the sanctions as one of the most essential enforced and hostile actions of the United States' government against the economic resources of the Iranian state and nation from the perspective of the international law and human rights.