Basis Governing Customs Disputes in the Light of Legal, Ethical and Economic Principles
Akhlāq-i zīstī i.e., Bioethics Journal,
Vol. 11 No. 36 (1400),
17 Mordad 2021
,
Page 1-17
https://doi.org/10.22037/bioeth.v11i36.35330
Abstract
Background and Aim: The customs system is responsible for enforcing the law in the implementation of customs laws and other laws and regulations related to the export, import and international transportation of goods, collection of customs duties and taxes, related taxes and work requirements and facilitating trade. The exercise of state sovereignty by the customs is the root of the conflicts between the person who owns the commercial goods on the one hand and the customs as the legislative-executive body on the other. The purpose of this study is to examine the principles governing customs disputes from the perspective of legal, ethical and economic principles.
Materials and Methods: This research is a theoretical research and the method is descriptive-analytical. The method of collecting information is in the form of a library, which is done by referring to the relevant documents, books and articles.
Ethical Considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.
Findings: The norms of the law world are moving towards specialization; That is why it is now necessary that in some special cases where the relationship between the subjects of the law is very technical and specific, dedicate special authorities to resolve disputes. The authorities concerned taking into account the substantive rules that have a high level of technique, specific rules and procedures are designed and presented, and judges, in addition to mastering legal principles and norms, have a relative scope on the technical aspects of the case.
Conclusion: The principles of special litigation of customs disputes can be considered based on two criteria: "legal-ethical principles" including: "procedural justice" and "specialization" and "economic-ethical principles" including: "principle of access" and "efficiency".
Cite this article as: Valizadeh Falakdehi M, Habibi Darghah B, Pahlevanzadeh Z. Basis Governing Customs Disputes in the Light of Legal, Ethical and Economic Principles. Majale "Akhlāq-i zīstī" (i.e., Bioethics Journal). 2021; 11(36): e8.
- Procedural Justice; Special Proceedings; Customs Disputes; Customs Dispute Resolution Commissions; Specialization
How to Cite
References
Rostami V, Khosravi A. Settlement of Customs Disputes and their Procedure in iranian law. Law Quarterly. 2011; 41(4): 139-157. [Persian]
Beyranvand F. The procedure of National Courts in Confronting with international Soft law with Emphasis on International Humanitarian Law. Ph.D. Dissertation. Tehran: Islamic Azad University; 2020. p.325. [Persian]
Hadavand M, Aghaie Towgh M. Special Administrative Courts in the Light of the Principles and Procedure of Fair Trial. Tehran: Khorsandi Publication; 2016. p.246. [Persian]
Jafari Nadoushan AA, Shirzad O. A Thinking on the structure and jurisdiction of Administrative Tribunals in Iran water law system. Quarterly Journal of Administrative Law. 2019; 6(18): 33-54. [Persian]
Shams A. Civil Procedure. Tehran: Darrak Publication; 2019. p.38-52. [Persian]
Mir Ahmadi F, Mojtahedi MR, Va'ezi SM. A Study of the Theory of Constitutional Law in the Light of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Quarterly Journal of Administrative Law. 2019; 21: 257-283. [Persian]
Mousazadeh R. Administrative law. Tehran: Mizan Publication; 2015. p.280. [Persian]
Mohseni H. Procedural Justice: Some Observations on Civil Justice Theories. Law Quarterly Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science University of Tehran. 2008; 38(1): 286-308. [Persian]
Mackenzie C, Meyerson D, MacDermott T. Procedural Justice and Relational Theory: Empirical, Philosophical and Legal Perspectives. London: Taylor & Francis Group; 2020. p.114-124.
Mazerolle L, Sargeant E, Cherney A, Bennett S, Murphy K, Antrobus E. Procedural Justice and Legitimacy in Policing. London: Springer International Publishing; 2014. p.2-10.
Mohseni H, Ghamami M. Transnational Civil Procedure. Tehran: Sahami Enteshar Publication; 2013. p.62-63. [Persian]
Valizadeh M. The Legal Nature of the Warehouse Receipt. Tehran: Masir Daneshgah Publication; 2019. p.11. [Persian]
Röhl K, Machura S. Procedural Justice. London: Taylor & Francis Group Publication; 2020. p.74-83.
Miller M, Block L, Devault A. Problem-Solving Courts in United States and Around the World: History, Evalution and Recommendations. In: Miller M, Bornstein B. Advances in Psychology and Law. London: Springer; 2020. p.301-372.
Partington M. Introduction to the English Legal System. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p.314-315.
Cohen M. Modern Political Campaigns: How Professionalism, Technology and Speed Have Revolutionized Elections. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; 2021. p.34-38.
Roumina E. The Effect of Specialization on Local Government Functions. Geo Res. 2016; 31(3): 54-94. [Persian]
Romão J. Variety Smart Specialization and Tourism Competitiveness. In: Romao J. Tourism, Smart Specialization and Sustainable Development. Basel: MDPI AG; 2021. p.1-14.
Habibi B. The Concept of the Principle of Access to justice, its Features and its Effects. Journal of Legal Studies. 2018; 10(1): 62-78. [Persian]
Clooney A, Webb P. The Right to a Fair Trial in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2021. p.47-49.
Raaen N. Open and Transparent Judicial Records in the Digital Age: Applying Principles and Performance Measures. In: Gómez C, Hernández M. Achieving Open Justice Through Citizen Participation and Transparency. New York: IGI Global; 2017. p.16-35.
Stiner E. French law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. p.282.
Gramatikov M. A Handbook for Measuring the Costs and Quality of Access to Justice. Torento: Maklu; 2010. p.68-70.
Mohseni, H. Access to justice and government's right of action. Law Quarterly. 2017; 47(3): 531-550. [Persian]
Pour Ostad M, Hesar khani F. Economic Analysis of the Costs of Civil Proceedings. Iranian and International Comparative Law Research Quarterly. 2015; 28(8): 57-69. [Persian]
Badini H, Mehrad M. Economic Efficiency in Private Law; Theory and Instances. Quarterly Journal of Private Law Studies. 2017; 47(1): 32-49. [Persian]
Brandstedt E, Emmelin M. The concept of sustainable welfare. In: Koch M, Mont O. Sustainability and the Political Economy of Welfare. London: Taylor & Francis; 2016. p.15-28.
Bagheri M. Utilitarianism in Private International Law. Mofid Legal Quarterly. 2006; 12(2): 41-60. [Persian]
Venäläinen J, Eskelinen T, Hirvilammi T. Enacting Community Economies Within a Welfare State. London: May Fly Books Ephemera; 2020. p.74-91.
Almasi NA, Habibi Dargah B. Introduction to the Quality of Trial in an Efficient Trial Process. Judicial Law Perspectives. 2012; 17(58): 47-72. [Persian]
- Abstract Viewed: 409 times
- PDF (فارسی) Downloaded: 220 times