AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): In circumstances where international developments and crises have raised serious questions about the effectiveness and legitimacy of the structures governing the global system, reviewing the performance of international institutions has become more important than ever.
"Hassan Abdipour," an expert in international affairs, in a note examining the structural and legal challenges of the United Nations, addresses issues such as the inefficiency of collective security mechanisms, the right of veto, double standards in the international system, and the necessity of strengthening justice and accountability, and proposes solutions for reviving trust and justice in the global system.
The text of this note is as follows:
Normative Erosion in the Global Order
An examination of the functional practice of the United Nations and its main organs, especially regarding contemporary crises, indicates a "deep crisis of legitimacy and effectiveness." This situation stems from the distancing of decision-making organs from the standards of international law and the transformation of "collective security" mechanisms into tools for imposing the will of hegemonic powers. This situation has caused the erosion of rule-based order in the international system and has confronted the current structure with the following legal challenges:
1. Gross Violation of the Right to Life and Non-Compliance with Peremptory Norms
Targeted terrorist acts and extrajudicial assassinations of political leaders and influential figures are a clear violation of the "principle of the right to life" as one of the most fundamental norms of international human rights law and the four Geneva Conventions. The United Nations, by adopting an approach of "structural passivity" toward these crimes, has in fact refrained from fulfilling its "universal obligations" to prevent the violation of peremptory norms. This failure in practice means the organization's departure from its legal competence and its inability to guarantee global security.
2. Policies of Siege and Collective Punishment
The imposition of all-encompassing sieges against nations is in explicit conflict with the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions and the principles of international humanitarian law. These actions, which lead to the deprivation of civilians from access to medicine, food, and vital facilities, cannot be reconciled with legal standards under any security or political justification. The silence or inefficiency of institutions affiliated with the United Nations in the face of these "collective punishments" means deviation from inherent duties in protecting human dignity and violation of the conventions prohibiting torture and inhuman treatment.
3. Functional Conflict with the Spirit and Text of the UN Charter
The principles contained in Articles 1 and 2 of the UN Charter are based on the "sovereign equality of states" and the "prohibition of the use of force." However, the organization's current performance in many cases is a clear example of exceeding competence (Ultra Vires) and ignoring the pillar of "justice-orientation." The inability to deter military aggression and occupation—by America and Israel—indicates the failure of collective security mechanisms and the organization's deviation from the Charter's objectives for maintaining global peace.
4. Legal Deadlock in the Structure of the "Right of Veto"
The exclusive right of veto in the Security Council, which has become a legacy of the post-war power-sharing era, has in practice distorted the "principle of equality before the law." This mechanism has become a tool for judicial and political obstruction and prevents the application of the "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) toward oppressed nations. From a legal perspective, the existence of this absolute privilege is in conflict with the democratic spirit of global governance and has systematically paralyzed the process of addressing crimes against humanity.
5. Double Standards and Discrimination in the Disarmament System
The application of double standards regarding nuclear and weapons activities is a violation of the "principle of non-discrimination" emphasized in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Focusing on unjustified pressures on independent countries while simultaneously turning a blind eye to the nuclear arsenals of the Zionist regime has severely distorted the credibility of international oversight bodies and turned them from neutral institutions into political tools of great powers.
6. The Mediation Capacity of Religions and International Ethics
In circumstances where formal legal mechanisms have become rigid due to political deadlocks, utilizing the "ethics-oriented" capacity of religions and denominations for mediation is essential. Religions, relying on the principles of "just peace" and "peaceful coexistence," can, as a complement to official diplomacy, provide a space for interfaith dialogue and reducing tensions. This approach is in line with strengthening the "ethical norms of international law" and can facilitate the process of transition to sustainable peace.
Strategic Proposals for Reviving Global Justice
To exit the current situation, the implementation of the following legal measures is essential:
Establishment of Independent Judicial Competence for Truth-Seeking Courts: Granting full competence to international judicial bodies to prosecute the perpetrators of assassination and crimes against humanity, without political immunity and free from the influence of the Security Council.
Structural Reform of the Security Council and Restriction of the Veto Right: Reviewing the internal regulations of the Security Council in order to prevent the use of the veto right in cases of "gross violation of human rights" and "war crimes."
Establishment of the Principle of the Rule of Law: Obligating the international community to treat unilateral actions, extrajudicial sanctions, and inhuman sieges that directly violate international humanitarian law in a uniform manner.
Accountability of Perpetrators and Agents: Creating a mechanism for "criminal accountability of government officials" for any order of aggression, assassination, or violation of the fundamental rights of nations, with the aim of eliminating the atmosphere of judicial immunity for great powers.
Institutionalization of Religious and Interfaith Mediation: Creating a permanent secretariat or mechanism for the participation of religious leaders and peace-seeking religious institutions in crisis mediation processes, in order to prevent armed conflicts.
Conclusion
The international system today is in a situation where the rights of the weak have become the victim of "superior power." Without structural, legal, and procedural reforms, the United Nations will transform from an institution for preserving peace into a powerless agent of the interests of the domineering. The only way to revive global trust is to return to the "sovereignty of justice" and the supremacy of ethical and legal principles over power-based relations.
**************
End/ 345E
