国际法——伊朗德黑兰人质案

伊朗伊斯兰革命使伊朗和美国由盟友变成仇敌。
SISU Expert Panel , November 10th，2011
21
Chronology(大事年表)
•In November 1979, the United States allowed the deposed Shah to come to America for medical treatment which aroused tremendous rage and opposing in Iran. The religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini and leftists required US to return “deposed and criminal” Shah for trial. •On November 1st, 1979, Khomeini declared that it was up to the dear pupils, students and theological students to expand with all their might their attacks the US so as to force it to return Shah.
• Request for interim measures.
• The United States wanted the immediate release of the hostages pending the final decision of the other charges.
Article I
SISU Expert Panel , November 10th，2011
21
历史八卦
伊朗革命派希望把沙阿引渡回国行刑，美国总统卡特不 再支持沙阿和帮助他重返权力宝座。身患癌症的沙阿要 求入境美国就医，德黑兰的美国使馆人员反对这个请求， 他们坚持要稳定美国和过渡革命政府之间的关系。卡特 虽然同意美国使馆人员的意见，但碍于基辛格、洛克菲 勒及其他支持沙阿的政治人物施加压力，他只得答允了 沙阿的请求，这使得伊朗革命派更坚定地认为前君主政 权是美国的傀儡，导致霍梅尼阵营里的激进学生攻击 美国大使馆。
Jurisdiction declared by the ICJ
• The nonappearance of parties doesa not appear before theto a party to dispute submitted 1.Whenever one of the the Court brings into operation article 53 of the Statute. Court, or fails to defend its case, the other party may •
21
历史八卦
伊朗巴列维王朝——在美国的支持下亲国王的军队 势力逮捕了摩萨台，国王回国。1954年8月，国王同外 国石油公司达成协议，将石油公司归还外商。国王重新 上台后，实行亲美政策。此后在美国的帮助下扩充军 备，设立秘密警察机构国家安全局(即萨瓦克)，实行独 裁专制统治。特务肆意横行，逮捕政治上的反对派和宗 教上层人士，监狱人满为患。一切言论、集会和组织政 党的自由都被取消。在宗教上，严加限制宗教界的权力， 以世俗法律代替伊斯兰教法，接管宗教基金、关闭宗教 学校代以世俗教育，实行“自由化”和“世俗化”的政 策，西方文化和生活方式涌入，使伊朗传统文化和生活 方式受到冲击。
US Applications Submitted to the International Court of Justice
• Request to find that Iran had violated its international legal obligations to the United States and to order corrective action.
call upon the Court to decide in favour of its claim. 2.The Court must, before doing so, satisfy itself, not only that it has jurisdiction in accordance with Articles This directs the Court to "satisfy itself, not only that it 36 and 37, but also that the claim is well founded in has jurisdiction, but also that the case is well founded fact and law.
•
Disputes arising out of the interpretation or application of Article XIII (2) the Convention shall lie within the compulsory offices shall not be jurisdiction The United consular argued the ICJ hadentered by the States TheArticle I jurisdiction of the International Court Article Justice and may accordingly be brought before the of 13 (1)other local 4 treaties: police or on clauses in authorities without the or in this caseDisputes between two or of theStates Parties based arising out more Any Court by an application made by interpretation the dispute anythat in to consent of the of the Convention except lie within the consular officer, the application interpretation or shall of party of concerning the application 1. The Vienna Convention aon Diplomatic Relations Protocol. and 1961, dispute being other to of present case of fire jurisdiction the the or if the local or Party disaster, International Court this compulsory ArticleauthoritiesOptionalprobable is not believe that a 1 ofConvention which the have Protocol cause to settled by concerning the Compulsory of Justice and may accordingly negotiation shall, at the request be brought before the Settlement of Disputes of that Convention. or of one of them, be crime of by an application made by about to is Court violence has been be submitted to arbitration. If withinany party to the six 2. The Vienna Convention on consular Relations of 1963, and Article Consular office, consent months committed in the to entry from dispute being a Party to theof the request for arbitration the 1 of the Optional presumed. In no case Compulsory Settlement or shall be Protocol concerning the shall they examine of parties are unable to agree on the organization of Disputes of that Convention. seize the papers there deposited. the arbitration, any one of those parties may 3. Article XXI the of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and refer (2) dispute to the International Court of Consular Rights between the United States of America and Iran of Justice by request in conformity with the Statute 1955. the Court. of 4. Article 13 (1) of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected persons, including Diplomatic Agents, of 1973.
Jurisdiction of the ICJ
Jurisdiction challenged by Iran
• Iran did not accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. • Iran therefore took no part in the oral pleadings, following a precedent set by other countries. • Iran's basic position was that the hostage dispute had to be considered in its wider context and, consequently, was not appropriate for adjudication by the Court.
Article 53
in fact and law.” • The Court concluded that the data supplied by the U.S. was "a massive body of information”. The court found that that the claims were well founded within the meaning of article 53 of the Statute.
1
美国驻德黑兰外交和领事人员案
SISU Expert Panel , November 10th，2011
Introduction to the Iran Hostage Crisis
Overview
• On November 4 1979, the American embassy in Iran is occupied by Iranian students, taking 66 Americans hostage. • According to the United States this occupation was a violation of customary international law and multiple treaties. • On 29 November 1979 the United States took their dispute to the International Court of Justice.