الف) کتابها
- ضیایی بیگدلی، محمدرضا (1401). حقوق بینالملل عمومی. تهران: گنج دانش.
- فلسفی، هدایتالله (1399). سیر عقل در منظومة حقوق بینالملل. تهران: نشر نو.
ب) مقالات
- پیری، حیدر (1402). بررسی تحلیلی خلأ حقوقی در نظام حقوقی ایران و حقوق بینالملل با تأکید بر سازکارهای رفع آن. مجلة حقوق تطبیقی، 14(2)، 1-20.
- پیری، حیدر؛ دهقانی، پریسا (1401). نقش شرط مارتنس در تدوین و جرمانگاری جرائم بینالمللی. مطالعات حقوقی، 14(4)، 253-288.
- دهقانی، پریسا؛ رمضانی قوامآبادی، محمدحسین؛ علیپور، محمدرضا (1401). شرط مارتنس در حقوق کیفری بینالمللی؛ ماهیت و کارکردهای تفسیری. آموزههای حقوق کیفری، 19(23)، 123-156.
- زرنشان، شهرام (1397). نسبت میان شرط مارتنس و حقوق بشر در نظم حقوقی بینالمللی جدید. فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 48(2)، 319-338.
- انگلیسی
- A) Books
- Alexy, R. (2010). A Theory of Constitutional Rights. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- Atadjanov, R. (2019). Humanness as a Protected Legal Interest of Crimes Against Humanity: Conceptual and Normative Aspect. International Criminal Justice Series, Vol.22, Springer, Asser Press.
- Brownlie, I. (2008). Principles of Public International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Dinstein, Y. (2013). The Principle of Proportionality. In: Larsen K et al (eds.) Searching for a “Principle of Humanity” in International Humanitarian Law. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- Fitzmaurice, S. G (1986). The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice.1, No.1.
- Franck, T. (1998). Fairness in International Law and Institutions, Oxford University Press.
- Gary, D. S. (2010). The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- Kolb, R. (2017). Legal History as a source of International Law: from Classical to Modern International Law. The Oxford Handbook on the Sources of International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Meron, T. (2006). The Humanization of International Law. The Hague Academy of International Law, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
- Sparow, R. (2017). Ethics as a Source of Law; Martens Clause and Autonomous Weapons. Humanitarian Law and Policy Blog.
- B) Articles
- Abi-Saab, R. (1987). The General Principles of Humanitarian Law According to the International Court of Justice. IRRC, (27), 367-375.
- Agarwal, K. (2018). An Analysis of Martens Clause with Respect to International Humanitarian Law. International Journal of Legal Developments and Allied Issues, 4 (5), 230-236.
- Cassese, A. (2000). The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky?’’ EJIL, 11(1), 187-216.
- Cerone, J. (2008). The Jurisprudential Contributions of the ICTR to the Legal Definition of Crimes against Humanity-the Evolution of the Nexus Requirement. New England Journal of International and Comparative Law, 14(2), 191-202.
- Crawford, E. (2006). The Modern Relevance of the Martens Clause. ISIL Yearbook of International Humanitarian and Refugee Law, 6(1), 1-18. <https://ssrn.com/abstract=1810177>.
- Filibeck, G. (1998). Restoring a Just Order in Post-Conflict Situations in the Light of the Social Teachings of the Catholic Church. IRRC, 38(322), 75-81.
- Handeyside, H. (2007). ‘‘The Lotus Principle in ICJ Jurisprudence: Was the Ship Ever Afloat?. Michigan Journal of International Law, 29(1), 71-94.
- Ivanenko, V. (2022). The Origins, Causes and Enduring Significance of the Martens Clause: A view from Russia. IRRC, (104), 1708-1724.
- Leisure, P. (2021). The Martens Clause, Global Pandemics, and the Law of Armed Conflict. Harvard International Law Journal, 62(2), 469-524.
- Lülf, C. (2013). Modern Technologies and Targeting under International Humanitarian Law. Working Paper, 3(3), 1-66.
- Petersen, N. (2008). Customary Law without Custom? Rules, Principles, and the Role of State Practice in International Norm Creation. American University International Law Review, 23(2).
- Pustogarov, V.(1999). The Martens Clause in International Law. Journal of the History of International Law, 1(2), 125–135.
- Quadri, R. (2023). Cours général de droit international public (Vol.113). in: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Consulted online on 21 September 2023 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1875-8096_pplrdc_A9789028615021_03>
- Salter, M. (2012). Reinterpreting Competing Interpretations of the Scope and Potential of the Martens Clause. Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 17(3), 403-437.
- Sarkin, J. (2007). The Historical Origins, Convergence, and Interrelationship of International Human Rights Law, International Humanitarian Law, International Criminal Law, and Public International Law and their Application from at least the Nineteenth Century. Human Rights and Legal Discourse, (1).
- Scobbie, Iain G. M. (1997). The Theorist as Jude: Hersh Lauterpacht’s Concept of the International Judicial Function. EJIL, (2),264-298.
- Smith, T. (2019). Challenges to Identifying Binding Martens Clause Rules from the ‘Dictates of the Public Conscience’ to Protect the Environment in Non-International Armed Conflict. Transnational Legal Theory, 10(2), 184-201.
- Stapleton-coory, M. (2019). The Enduring Legacy of the Martens Clause: Resolving the Conflict of Morality in International Humanitarian Law. Adelaide Law Review, 40 (2), 471-484.
- Ticehurst, R. (1997). The Martens Clause and the Laws of Armed Conflict. IRRC, (37), 125-134.
- C) Cases
- A. Res. 74/306 (Sept. 11, 2020)
- ICC, The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, Appeal Chamber, ICC-01/04-02/06.
- ICC, The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, ICC Trial Chamber, ICC-01/04-02/06-1707, 4 January 2017.
- ICJ Rep, Continental Shelf (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. Malta),1985.
- ICJ Rep, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion), 1996.
- ICJ Rep, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, 1986.
- ICJ Rep. North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany v. Denmark and Netherlands), 1969.
- ICJ, Verbatim Records, 15 November 1995, CR/95/34.
- ICTY, Prosecutor v Delalic et all. (“Čelebići Case”), Appeals Chamber, Case No. IT-96-21-A, 2001.
- ICTY, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic, Decision on the Defence Motion on Jurisdiction, Trial Chamber, Case No. IT-94-1-T, 10 August 1995.
- ICTY, Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic, IT-94--1 -AR72, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (2 October 1995).
- ICTY, Prosecutor v. Kupreškić et al., Case No. IT-95-16-T, 2000.
- ICTY, Prosecutor v. Martić, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61, No.IT–95–11– R61, 1996.
- IMT, Nuremberg Military Tribunal Under Control Council Law No.10, United States of America v Alstötter, Case No.3, 3–4 December 1947.
- IMT, Nuremberg Military Tribunal Under Control Council Law No.10, United States of America v Krupp, Case No.10, 31 July 1948.
- PCIJ Rep, SS ‘Lotus’ (France v Turkey), 1927, (ser A) No.10.
- Statement of Support by 171 UN Member States, Non-Member Observer States, and Observers to the U.N. Secretary-General’s Appeal for a Global Ceasefire amid the COVID-19 Pandemic (2020).
- D) Reports
- UN Report of the ILC on the Work of its Forty-sixth Session, 2 May - 22 July 1994, GAOR A/49/10.
|