Scope of Lawful Sovereignty Based on Compensating Effects of Sovereignty Right Exercise over Natural Resources

Subject Areas : environmental low

Komeil Pourziaei ¹ (PhD student in International Law, Department of Law, Faculty of law, Theology and political science, science and Reserch Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
Seyed Ali Hanjani ² (Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of law, Theology and political science, science and Reserch Branch, Islamic Azad University , Tehran, Iran)
Mohsen Mohebi ³ (Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of law, Theology and political science, science and Reserch Branch, Islamic Azad University , Tehran, Iran)

Received: 2019-07-07 Accepted : 2019-09-25 Published : 2021-02-19

Keywords: Expropriation, sovereignty over natural resources, nationalization, Compensation, international investment,

Abstract :

Sovereignty over natural resources as one of the fundamental principles of international public law has been repeatedly recognized in the resolutions of the General Assembly and other organs of the United Nations since the 1950s, especially in Para 1 under Article 2 of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of the Nations. The principle is mentioned precisely as "the full permanent sovereignty [of  a state] including possession, use and disposal, over all its wealth, natural resources and economic activities", and expresses the issue of the sovereignty of states over their natural resources, so that they have a direct impact on decision-making and economic measures adopted by the states and in relation to other states, to the effect that no other state has priority over the host state with regard to exercising this right. Adopting Resolution 1803 in 1962, the United Nations General Assembly recognized the permanent sovereignty of States over their natural resources to be subject only to compensation. However, as to the compensation, it adopted a moderate solution which was almost close to the views of the capital exporting states. This resolution establishes the appropriate compensation criterion as the prevailing norm of international law. Therefore, the evolution of the notion of sovereignty over natural resources and the exercise of this right by states, which was deemed illegitimate at the beginning of the twentieth century, was ultimately recognized as legitimate but subject to some restrictions.

References:

1. Ghanbari Jahromi, M. j, Wesali Mahmoud, M, The Transformation of Government Accountability in International Investment Law, Journal of Legal Research, 1394, No. 71, p. 1. (In Persian)


2. NIkjah, J, 1394, Compensation in International Investment Law, Institute of Legal Studies and Research of the City of Science, pp. 48-50. (In Persian)


3. Kazemi, M, Fall and Winter 2014, Paper on the Risk of Political Risk on Foreign Investor Recruitment, Iranian Journal of International Policy, p. 73. (In Persian)


4. Kazemi, M., 1393, Paper on the Risk of Political Risk on Foreign Investor Recruitment, Iranian Journal of International Policy, p. 73. (In Persian)


5. 5. Zaidel, Hohenveldren, I, International Economic Law, Translation: Qassem Zamani, Ph.D., Institute of Legal Studies and Research of the Shahre Danesh, 6th Printing, p. 295-298. (In Persian)


6. Mir-Abbasi, B, 2008, International Courts of the International Court of Justice, Volume II, First Edition, Tehran: Jungle Publications, pp. 33-38. (In Persian)


7. Movahed M., Lessons from Oil Arbirtration, Nationalization and Compensation, 2007, Karnameh Publishing, pp. 113-111. (In Persian)


8. Nikjah, j, 1394, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of Knowledge City, Compensation in International Investment Law, p. 65-68. (In Persian)


9. Julian de Lucas, Stephen A. 1391. Adaptive International Commercial Judgment. Translated by Mohammad Habibi Mojandeh, Qom: Useful Publications, First Edition, p.87. (In Persian)


10. Movahed M., Lessons from Oil Arbirtration, Nationalization and Compensation, 1386 Karnameh Publishing, p. 89. (In Persian)


11. Askari, P. 1394, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of Knowledge City, Foreign Investment Rights in International Arbitration Procedure, p. 319. (In Persian)


12. Mohebi, M., an Oil Arbitration Procedure on Compensation, Legal Magazine No. 35, pp. 25-27. (In Persian)


13. Mohebi, M., Oil Refinement Procedure for Compensation, Law Journal, No. 35, pp. 31-30. (In Persian)


14. Mohebi, M., 1393, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of the City of Knowledge, Issues of Oil and Gas Rights in the Light of International Arbitration Procedure, p. 103. (In Persian)


15. Mohebi, M., 2011, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of the City of Knowledge, Iran-United States Arbitral Tribunal, "Nature, Structure, Function", p. 155. (In Persian)


16. Mohebi, M., 2011, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of the City of Knowledge, Iran-United States Court of Arbitration, "Nature, Structure, Function", p. 120. (In Persian)


17. Yukos v. Russia: Issues and legal reasoning behind US$50 billion awards, by Martin Dietrich Brauch.


18. Ibrahim Gul, AS, 2009 Research Institute for Legal Studies and Research of the City of Knowledge, International Government Responsibility, Text and Description of the Materials of the International Law Commission, Translation: Dr. Alireza Ebrahim Gol, p. 184. (In Persian)


19. Askari, P., 1394, Institute for Legal Studies and Research of Knowledge City, Foreign Investment Rights in International Arbitration Procedure, p. 336.(In Persian)