"Adl va Ensaf" Comparative Law Researches Quarterly

Abstract In today's world, the existence of principles and rules that can regulate complex and evolving international relations in accordance with the needs of governments is an undeniable necessity. But not everything that paves the way for these interactions is derived from that legal order, but international relations are still, above all, based on the principle of the rule of will of states and the relations of authority between them, which A degree of power is responsible for all events and decisions of governments. In such circumstances, the above-mentioned principles and rules, and consequently the sovereignty of one state, can be violated under certain conditions, or it can violate the sovereignty of other states by using the tools of power, such as using force or coercion. For this reason, Identify the desired performance guarantee in this regard. The results show that despite the extent of liability for violating many principles and rules of international law by coercion, it extends beyond the independence of the will of a particular state to the principle of equality of sovereignty and peace and security between The nation emphasizes. However, so far no desirable executive guarantee has been formed that can combine these responsibilities and the need to comply with these principles and rules, and the return of states that violate these principles to proper international relations is still in the shadow of the principle of sovereignty of states and Peaceful resolution of disputes is possible through methods such as self-help.

Abstract Blocking borders in times of emergency has been associated with conflicting interpretations and approaches, so that its interpretation as a governance-oriented issue is intertwined with criteria such as national security. However, it is necessary to adapt the issue of border movement restrictions to the special situations of immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers in the realm of international law, and to answer the question: Can these restrictions be synonymous with violating human fundamental rights? be considered Therefore, in this research, which is based on a descriptive-analytical method, it was firstly determined that preventing the access of refugees by blocking the borders is a clear violation of Articles 9 and 33 of the Geneva Convention, and governments cannot impose restrictions on their movement. especially that the situation of refugees or asylum seekers is different from ordinary people. Based on the method of analogical reasoning, it was determined: national security cannot act as an element to justify the blocking of borders in widespread epidemics, because the needs of national security must be interpreted based on an objective and potential threat, and in practical terms, the threat against national security has also been raised. from a collective reaction.

Abstract In the legal interaction of human beings with each other and based on their will, the law governing that interaction, that is, the contract, is formed, and people consider themselves loyal and bound by this law, and they consider breaking the covenant reprehensible and those who break the covenant deserve to pay damages; However, it seems that only the individual will is effective in this requirement and obligation, rather, this individual will should be related to the role of the collective will of humans, which manifests itself in the pursuit of attracting public interests. However, the violation of obligations is not something that can be completely eradicated by the formulation of regulations of the society or the serious treatment of the judicial courts. In this regard, it is necessary to state that obligations and contracts have a favorable and real value for the parties to the contract when they have a guarantee of proper and efficient implementation.For a long time, in order to oblige the obligee to fulfill the obligation and not to have the desire to violate the contract, various methods have been used, such as obtaining collateral and mortgage, deposit and so on. Meanwhile, contracts have become common. Each of them, while having its own use, due to the existence of problems in their nature and function, alone do not provide all the intended and desirable goals of the parties