نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکترای حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قم، قم، ایران.
2 استادیار، گروه حقوق بین الملل، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قم، قم، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The International Court of Justice, after about 6 years have passed since the start of the proceedings on December 1, 2022, issued its verdict in the case of "The dispute regarding the status and use of Silala waters (Chile v. Bolivia)".
In this case, the court sought to find aspects of convergence and bring the views of the parties closer and invited the parties to cooperate in order to actually resolve the dispute and issue a decision regarding the approval or rejection of a claim. Therefore, the court did not decide on most of the questions that were asked to him.
In the case of the Silala River, the court could and should properly address the disputes related to "current use" and "acquired rights" within the framework of the principle of fair and reasonable exploitation and the obligation to inform and consult about planned actions. to pay The question of this research is whether the decision of the International Court of Justice in the above case can lead to the development of cooperation between coastal countries or not. The hypothesis of this research is that the Court's decision not only does not help the governments' obligations regarding the development of international cooperation between coastal countries, but may even hinder it; This study, in a descriptive-analytical way, concludes that the International Court of Justice has not been able to adequately resolve the basic legal issues and properly guide the parties regarding their rights and obligations
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)