چکیده:
Diplomatic protection is a form of support provided by one state to another for the purpose of compensating for damages caused to one of its nationals, whether natural or legal persons, as a result of an internationally wrongful act. This customary rule does not inherently impose an obligation on states; rather, it is a right pertaining to them, subject to specific conditions such as the existence of a nationality relationship and the exhaustion of local remedies by the aggrieved party. The International Court of Justice, in the cases of Barcelona Traction, LaGrand brothers, Auna, and other Mexican nationals, has developed this principle. In 2006, with the adoption of the diplomatic protection project, the traditional view of this principle was transformed and took on more of a human rights aspect so that it would move beyond the monopoly of states; therefore, contrary to traditional perceptions, it considers even stateless persons and refugees entitled to diplomatic protection and does not consider the rule of exhausting local remedies binding under certain specific circumstances. In the Mina tragedy, the mere presence of foreign nationals creates responsibility for the Saudi government, which must adhere to international standards and exercise reasonable effort and necessary measures to protect the lives of foreign nationals. The Saudi government has ignored the right to life, personal security, health, and well-being, as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the freedom to practice religious ceremonies as stated in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration of Human Rights, as well as other human rights listed in the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, and has in some cases violated the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, particularly Article 37. Therefore, it is necessary for the victim's home countries to fulfill their legal duty in protecting these individuals without political considerations.
خلاصه ماشینی:
The Saudi government has ignored the right to life, personal security, health, and well-being, as stated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the freedom to perform religious ceremonies as stated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Declaration of Human Rights and Other Human Rights included in the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights and also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for individuals who are not nationals of a country, and in some cases, it has violated the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, particularly Article 37.
Also, the Court stated in the "Diallo case" that due to the substantive expansion of international law in recent decades regarding the rights granted to persons, the substantive scope of diplomatic protection, which was initially limited to claims of violation of minimum standards of treatment of aliens, has subsequently expanded in such a way that it has become an internationally guaranteed inclusion of human rights (Abdollahi and Hassan-Khani, 2014, p.
In Article 1 of the draft, the Commission has not provided a specific definition of diplomatic protection; rather, it has stipulated its characteristics and stated: "Under international law, if damage is caused to a foreign national due to negligence or the occurrence of a wrongful act, the wrongdoing state is responsible for compensation, and diplomatic protection is a method that the victim's home country employs to seek protection for the individual.
(
, 
, 
)
