Investigating the Legitimacy of the Suspension of Obligations Based on Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action by Iran Using Hermeneutics of Interpretation

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor of International Law Department, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Ph.D. Student in International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

After much effort and long negotiations, on July 14, 2015, the Joint Comprehensive five-plus Action (JCPA) agreement was concluded between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the five plus one states, and the Security Council's nuclear sanctions against Iran were lifted.
Following the change of government in the United States, on May 18, US President Donald Trump officially announced his withdrawal from the JCPA and the return of sanctions. On January 7, 2020, Iran announced a fifth and final step in reducing its obligations under this treaty after four stages of reducing its commitments.
According to Iran's statement, the Islamic Republic of Iran no longer faces any restrictions in its field of operations (including enrichment capacity, percentage of enrichment, amount of enriched material, and research and development).
To examine and analyze the legitimacy of Iran's suspensions, it is necessary to interpret these commitments and obligations under JCPA, which is possible by using the hermeneutic principles of interpretation and the rules of interpretation in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969).
By applying the context of this treaty, the legal principles applicable to it, including the principle of good faith and pacta sunt servanda, examining the circumstances of the time of the conclusion of the treaty, it is concluded that Iran's suspensions are of international legitimacy. In addition, Iran's good faith has been proven by emphasizing the full reversibility of the obligations based on the JCPA agreement.

Keywords

References

فهرست منابع

الف) منابع فارسی
آقایی، کامران. مکتب‌های تفسیری در حقوق بر بنیاد هرمنوتیک حقوقی. تهران: میزان، 1388.
آزاد، علیرضا، تکتم آزاد و فاطمه لعل روشن. «مبانی مشترک اصول فقه و هرمنوتیک کلاسیک در فهم متن». نشریۀ فقه و اصول 105 (1395): 28-9.
آزاد، علیرضا و جهانگیر مسعودی. «بررسی تطبیقی مبانی مشترک تفسیر قرآن و هرمنوتیک کلاسیک». فصلنامة کلام و دین‌پژوهشی 23 (1392): 38-9.
ابراهیم‌گل، علیرضا، مترجم. مسئولیت بین‌المللی دولت‌ها متن و شرح مواد کمیسیون حقوق بین‌الملل. چاپ هفتم. تهران: مؤسسه مطالعات و پژوهشهای حقوقی شهر دانش، 1394.
بیات، عبدالرسول. «اصطلاح‌شناسی هرمنوتیک و قرائت‌های آن». شمیم یاس 5 (1380).
پروین، خیرالله و بهنام مبصری. «بررسی نسبت میان هرمنوتیک حقوقی و آرای تفسیری شورای نگهبان». فصلنامۀ مطالعات حقوق عمومی 2 (1396): 410-377.
درخشه، جلال و محمدصادق نصرت‌پناه. «کاربرد روش تحلیل هرمنوتیک در مطالعات اسلامی». پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی 3 (1392): 62-39.
دلخوش، علیرضا. «برجام و پسابرجام از دیدگاه حقوق بین‌الملل». فصلنامۀ سیاست خارجی 1 (1396): 73-51.
ضیایی بیگدلی، محمدرضا. حقوق معاهدات بین‌المللی. تهران: گنج دانش، 1392.
فلسفی، هدایت‌الله. حقوق بین‌الملل معاهدات. تهران: فرهنگ نشر نو، 1379.
لنگرودی، محمدجعفر. ترمینولوژی حقوق. تهران: گنج دانش، 1388.
محمدی، مهدی، مترجم. هرمنوتیک. تهران: ققنوس، 1393.
واعظی، احمد. «چیستی هرمنوتیک». فصلنامة ذهن 9 (1379): 149-115.
واعظی، احمد. «درآمدی بر هرمنوتیک». فصلنامة کتاب نقد 23 (1381): 146-115.
ب) منابع انگلیسی
Berner, Katharina. “Authentic Interpretation in Public International Law.” ZaöR 76 (2016): 845-878.
Hernánde, Gleider. Interpretation in International Legal Positivism in a Post-Modern World. Chapter 13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Hosseinnejad, Katayoon. “On the Nature of Interpretation in International Law.” Ucl Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 2 (2015): 225-249.
Jonas, David s. and Thomas Saunders. “The Object and Purpose of a Treaty: Three Interpretive Methods.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 43 (2010): 565-609.
Keane, Niall and Chris Lawn. The Blackwell Companion to Hermeneutics. West Sussex: Wiley Black Well, 2015.
Linderfulk, Ulf. On the Interpretation of Treaties. The Netherlands: Springer, 2007.
Panizzon, Marion. Good Faith in the Jurisprudence of the WTO. Portland: Hart Publishing, 2006.
Pauwelyn, Joost and Manfred Elsig. “The Politics of Treaty Interpretation: Variations and Explanations across International Tribunals.” (2011). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1938618. or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.193868.
Regan, Paul. “Hans-Georg Gadamer’s Philosophical Hermeneutics: Concepts of Reading, Understanding and Interpretation.” Meta Journal 2 (2012): 286-303.
Ris, Martin. “Treaty Interpretation and ICJ Recourse to Travaux Préparatoires: Towards a Proposed Amendment of Articles 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.” B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 14(111) (1991): 111-136.
Villiger, Mark. Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009.
Journal of Legal Research
Volume 19, Issue 44
January 2021
Pages 37-59

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics