چکیده:
Historical experience and especially the current trend of many societies have shown that the political-social demands of large groups of people have been announced and realized through riots and internal uprisings in numerous cases, especially in countries lacking the necessary mechanisms. On the other hand, governments have been forced to take actions, often violent or violating fundamental human rights, to maintain order and restore security, or to continue their rule. The subject of this article is actually an examination of the limits of the powers and obligations of governments in confronting such situations from the perspective of international law.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Although it is generally accepted that governments have such powers, to the extent that they can declare a state of emergency, this is conditional on the situation requiring it, and only after that can some of the rules of international human rights law be suspended and decisions be made and implemented to restore order.
In other words, the government is committed to observing and applying certain important principles based on humanitarian considerations; principles that have been emphasized to protect the victims of the actions of the powerful state; “persons who are under the protection of the principles of humanity and the call of public conscience enshrined in international human rights documents” (97 Guarantees Reflected in Domestic Laws Regarding States of Emergency According to the draft articles relating to state responsibility, which were approved in their first reading by the International Law Commission of the United Nations, the declaration of states of emergency by a government is only possible if this is “the only means of guaranteeing a fundamental and essential interest [...
Within the scope of fundamental interests, the security of countries requires considering special norms and do's and don'ts that are based on an expanded concept of security on the one hand and impose clear limitations on the freedom of action of states on the other, which requires a global judicial jurisdiction to investigate violations of this type based on fundamental principles governing public order in the international community.
(
, 
, 
)
