جدال رئالیسم و فرمالیسم در حقوق بین‌‌الملل معاصر (با تأکید بر رویۀ دیوان بین‌‌المللی دادگستری)

نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران، مازندران، ایران.

10.48300/jlr.2023.393417.2324

چکیده

رئالیسم و فرمالیسم حقوقی به مثابه دو روش تصمیم‌گیری قضایی در محاکم قضایی ملی و بین‌‌المللی در دهه‌های اخیر از مباحث داغ نظری و فلسفی در میان نویسندگان، قضات و حقوق‌دانان بوده است. هر دو روش طرفدارانی داشته و هر یک برای تقویت دیدگاه‌های خویش استدلال‌‌هایی عرضه نموده‌‌اند. در این پژوهش کوشش شده است به این پرسش پاسخ داده شود که حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر در آوردگاه میان رئالیسم و فرمالیسم حقوقی به کدام سو می‌‌رود و دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری به مثابه مقتدرترین و بانفوذترین نهاد قضایی بین‌‌المللی، از چه روشی در صدور آرای خویش تبعیت می‌‌کند؟ پاسخی که بدان دست یافتیم این است که جدال میان این دو روش در حقوق بین‌‌الملل معاصر و به تبع آن در آرای دیوان بین‌‌المللی دادگستری، پیروز و برندۀ کاملاً مشخصی نداشته، هر چند که گرایش بیشتر به سمت فرمالیسم است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Debate Between Realism and Formalism in Contemporary International Law (Emphasizing the Procedure of the International Court of Justice)

نویسنده [English]

  • Sepanta Mojtahedzadeh
Assistant Professor, Department of law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Legal realism and legal formalism as two methods of judicial decision-making in national and international courts have been hot theoretical and philosophical topics among writers, judges, and lawyers in recent decades. Both methods have supporters and each has presented arguments to strengthen their views. In this research, with a descriptive-analytical method and using the library method and using reliable internet sources to collect data, an attempt has been made to answer the question that contemporary international law is at the crossroads between realism and legal formalism Which way is it going and what method does the International Court of Justice, follow in issuing its opinions? The answer that we got in brief is that the debate between these two methods in contemporary international law and as a result in the opinions of the International Court of Justice, has not had a clearly defined winner. However, the tendency is more towards formalism.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Formalism
  • Realism
  • Sources of international law
  • Legal rule
  • Soft law
  • Judicial Decisions
  • School of New Haven
الف) منابع فارسی
کتب
- رضادوست، وحید. دیوان بین‌‌المللی دادگستری، ساختار استدلالی، رویۀ قضایی، سیاست حقوقی. تهران: نشر نگاه معاصر، 1401.
- فلسفی، هدایت الله. سیر عقل در منظومۀ حقوق بین‌‌الملل، اصول اساسی روش‌‌شناسی حقوق بین‌‌الملل. تهران: فرهنگ نشر نو: نشر آسیم، 1396.
مقالات
‌‌- راسخ، محمد و ‌‌ سیدحمید پورسید آقایی. «نگاهی انتقادی به شکل‌‌گرایی در حقوق». فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، 19، 74 (1395)، 69ـ84. 
https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_56339.html
- رضادوست، وحید. «رویکردهای فعال و منفعل در سیاست قضایی دیوان بین‌‌المللی دادگستری». مجلۀ حقوقی بین‌‌المللی، 38، 65(1400)، 31ـ56.
doi: 10.22066/CILAMAG.2021.243892
- محبی، محسن و محمدحسین لطیفیان. «تحول مفهوم اختلاف در پرتو قضیه دعوای جزایر مارشال علیه بریتانیا». مجلۀ حقوقی بین‌‌المللی، 36، 61 (1398)، 7ـ41.
doi: 10.22066/CILAMAG.2019.90539.1557
- محبی، محسن و سهیلا ابراهیمی لویه. «مکتب نیوهیون در حقوق بین‌الملل: بازخوانی رابطۀ قدرت و حقوق بین‌الملل». مجلۀ راهبرد، 26، 82 (1396)، 181ـ206.
doi: 20.1001.1.10283102.1396.26.1.6.3
ب) منابع خارجی
Books
- Aspremont, Jean. Formalism and the Sources of International Law: A Theory of the Ascertainment of Legal Rules. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
- Boyle, Alan and Christine Chinkin. The Making of International Law. Oxford: Oxford university press, 2007.
- Ehrlich, E. Judicial Freedom of Decision: Its Principles and Objects, in Science of Legal Method: Select essays. Editors J.H. Drake et.al. Boston: Boston Book Corporation, 1969.
- Gilmore, G. The Age of American Law, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1977.
- Higgins, R. Problem and Process: International Law and How We Use It. Oxford: Clarendon press, 1995.
- Holmes, O. W. The Common Law. New York: Dover Publications, 1881.
- Liber, F.  Legal and Political Hermeneutics or Principle of Interpretation and Construction in Law and Politics. California: Little Brown Press, 1839.
- Weber, M. Economy and Society. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.
Articles
- Blutman, L. “In the Trap of a Legal Metaphor: International Soft Law”, ICLQ, 59, 3(2010), 605-624. 
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1661681
- Guilaume, Gilbert. “The use of precedent by international judges and arbitrators”.  Journal of international dispute settlement, 2, 1 (2011), 5-23. 
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idq025
- Guzman, A.T. “The Design of International Agreements”. EJIL, 16, 4(2005), 579-612.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi134
- Hutcheson, J.C. “The Judgment Intuitive: The Function of The ‘hunch’ in Judicial Decision”. Cornell Law Journal, 14, 3(1929), 274-288.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol14/iss3/2
- Koskenniemi, Martti. “International Law in a Post Realist Era”. The Australian Yearbook of International Law, 16, 1(1995), 1-19.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/26660229-016-01-900000002
- Miron, Alina. “Establishing the existence of a dispute before the International Court of Justice: Between formalism and verbalism”. QIL, 45(2017), 43-51.
Available at: http://www.qil-qdi.org/establishing-the-existence-of-a-dispute-before-the-international-court-of-justice-between-formalism-and-verbalism/
- Pound, R. “Address to the American Bar Association”. American Law Review, 40(1906).
- Shafer, Gregory. “The New Legal Realist Approach to International law”. Leiden Journal of International Law (Symposium on New Legal Realism), 28, 2(2015),189-210.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156515000035
 - Tamanaha, Brian Z. “The Third Pillar of Jurisprudence: Social Legal Theory”. William & Mary Law Review, 56, 6(2013), 2235-2277.
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2256622 
- Tumonis, Vitalius. “Legal Realism and Judicial Decision-Making”, Jurisprudence, 19, 4(2012),1361-1382.
Available at: https://philpapers.org/rec/TUMLR
Documents and Judicial Cases
- Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Colombia), ICJ Rep 2016.
- Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime Genocide, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, ICJ Reports, 1996, 595 (Bosnian Genocide).
- Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime Genocide (Croatian and Serbia), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, ICJ Report 2008, 412(Croatian Genocide), 85.
- Application of the International Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, ICJ Reports 2011, 70.
- Arrest warrant 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium), Judgment 14 February 2002.
- Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2002, 3, [26].
- Certain German Interests in Polish Upper Silesia, Jurisdiction, Judgment, 1925, PCIJ, Series A, No. 6, 14.
- Dissenting Opinion of Judge Van Den Wyngaert (Arrest warrant case).
- Dissenting Opinion of Vice-President Schwebel (Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons Case).
- General Assembly Resolution 49/75 K of 15 December 1994.
- International Court of Justice, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996.
- Mavromatis Palestine Concessions, Objection to the Jurisdiction of the Court, Judgment of August 30th, 1924, PCIJ, Series A, No.2 (Mavrommatis Case) 34.
- Nuclear Tests (Australia v France), Judgment, 1974, ICJ Reports 253.
- Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v France), Judgment, 1974, ICJ Reports 457.
- Permanent Court of International Justice, Advisory Committee of Jurists, Documents Presented to the Committee Relating to Existing Plans for the Establishment of a Permanent Court of International Justice, April 30, Hmso, London, 1920, Articles 15 Draft Schems Submitted on Behalf of Denmark, Norwegian And 17 Of Swedish And 2 of Neutral powers.
- Prosecutor v Kupreskic, Case No. IT-95–16-T, 14 January 2000.
- Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v Senegal), 2012, ICJ Reports 422.