The Principle of Equality of Arms, with a Comparative Look at Foreign Judicial Documents and Precedent and Iranian Civil Procedural Law

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Kharazmi University, Tehran

2 Ph.D. Candidate in Private Law, Kharazmi University, Tehran

10.22034/law.2023.55236.3239

Abstract

In order for the proceedings to be fair, the rules derived from the legal principles of civil proceedings must be observed by the litigants and the authority. One of these principles is the principle of equality of arms. This legal principle requires that the procedural rights of the parties be granted to them in a balanced manner, and in case of victory of one of the parties, who unfairly had more effective procedural weapons, the victory won't deserve to be confirmed and implemented; Because the duty of the government is justice, and justice cannot be achieved without granting balanced procedural rights to the litigants. This principle is discussed in legal writings, mostly in criminal proceedings, and in civil proceedings, these questions are also raised: in which documents and judicial procedures of foreign legal systems is this principle reflected and what are its results? What are the effects of the principle of equality of arms in Iran's civil procedure law? And what cases violate this principle? The findings of this research, which was carried out in a descriptive and analytical way, are: This principle originates from the principle of fair trial in the European Convention on Human Rights and is reflected in the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and is included in the French Criminal Procedure Code. The manifestations of this principle in Iran's Civil Procedure Law can be seen from: balancing the procedural rights of the parties, in having the reasonable opportunity to prepare the defense; The duty of the court to prevent the abuse of procedural rights by the parties; Right of the parties to be informed of the proceedings; Right to have an effective legal representative and Right to be heard. This right is violated by limiting one of the parties' access to documents, abusing one of the parties' financial superiority or legal knowledge, and prohibiting search.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. الف) منابع فارسی

    - کتاب‌ها

    1. اسماگدی، افرودایت (2008). مرجع اسناد بین‌المللی حقوق بشر، لندن: مؤسسه بریتانیایی حقوق بین‌الملل و حقوق تطبیقی.
    2. رستمی، هادی (1397). آیین دادرسی کیفری، تهران: میزان.
    3. کاپلتی، مورو و گارث، برایان جی. (1398). آیین دادرسی مدنی، ترجمۀ: حسن محسنی، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    4. متین‌دفتری، احمد (1378). آیین دادرسی مدنی و بازرگانی، تهران: مجمع علمی و فرهنگی مجد.
    5. محسنی، حسن (1389). اداره جریان دادرسی مدنی (بر پایه همکاری و در چارچوب اصول دادرسی)، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    6. نهرینی، فریدون (1400). آیین دادرسی مدنی، فرآیند دادرسی و صدور رأی، تهران: گنج دانش.

    - مقالات

    1. حبیبی درگاه، بهنام (1397). مفهوم اصل دسترسی به دادگستری، ویژگی و جلوه‌های آن. مطالعات حقوقی دانشگاه شیراز، 10(1)، 90-61.

     DOI: 10.22099/JLS.2018.12550.1619­

    1. شمس، عبدا... (1381). اصل تناظر. تحقیقات حقوقی. (36-35)، 86-59.
    2. قنبری، نادر، نصیران نجف‌آبادی داوود و سلطانی، رضا (1399). مطالعه تطبیقی اصل برابری سلاح‌ها در دادرسی مدنی ایران و مقررات دادرسی فدرال آمریکا، مطالعات بین‌المللی پلیس، 11(43)، 140-166.
    3. محسنی، حسن (1385). مفهوم اصول دادرسی و نقش تفسیری آن‌ها و چگونگی تمییز آن اصول از تشریفات دادرسی. نشریۀ کانون وکلای دادگستری مرکز، (24-23)،
    4. محسنی، حسن (1387). عدالت آیینی؛ پژوهشی در نظریه‌های دادرسی عادلانه مدنی، مطالعات حقوق خصوصی (حقوق)، 38(1)، 285-319.

    - قانون

    1. قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی (1379).

    ب) منابع انگلیسی

    - Books

    • Eric Peterson, Luke. (2004). Bilateral Investment Treaties and Development Policy-Making, International Institute for Sustainable Development.
    • Goldhaber, M. D. (2007). A People's History of the European Court of Human Rights. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
    • Lalive, Pierre. (1986). Some Threats to International Investment Arbitration, ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, 26–40. Doi:10.1093/icsidreview/1.1.26.
    • Walde, T. (2010). Procedural Challenges in Investment Arbitration under the Shadow of the Dual Role of the State: Asymmetries and Tribunals' Duty to Ensure, Pro-actively, the Equality of Arms. Arbitration International. 26. 3-42. Doi: 10.1093/arbitration/26.1.3
    • Ledeneva, Alena V. (2006). How Russia Really Works: The Informal Practices That Shaped Post‐Soviet Politics and Business. Cornell University Press. DOI: Doi:10.2307/27652774

    - Articles

    • Hanotiau, Bernard. (2003). Misdeeds, Wrongful Conduct and Illegality in Arbitral Proceedings, in International Commercial Arbitration,: Important Contemporary Questions, Icca Congress Series No. 11, Kluwer.
    • Toma, Elisa. (2011). The Principle of Equality of Arms – Part of a Fair Trial. PSN: International Law: Rule-Making & Rule Interpretation; International Courts.
    • Gottwald, E.J. (2006). Leveling the Playing Field: Is it Time for a Legal Assistance Center for Developing Nations in Investment Treaty Arbitration? American University of International Law Review, 22, 3.
    • Dias Simões, Fernando. (2021). Clandestine Awards, Information Asymmetries, and Equality of Arms in Investment Arbitration. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 0(0), 317-334.
    • (1994). Jurisprudence of the ECHR under Art. 6. Transnational Dispute Management.
    • Mansilla, Ingrid Marie Verdin. (2018). Conducts of Parties in Investment State Arbitration that can Undermine the Principle of Equality of Arms.
    • Dintilhac, Jean-Pierre. (2003). L’égalité des Armes Dans les Enceintes Judiciaires, in Cour de Cassation, Rapport de la Cour de Cassation. Paris: La Documentation Française, 129.
    • Silveria, João Tiago. (2015). Equality of Arms as a Standard of Fair Trials, Seminar on Human Rights and Access to Justice in the EU. European Judicial Training Network.
    • Peterson, Luke E. (2004). Bilateral Investment Treaties and Development Policy-Making, Int’l Inst. for Sustainable Dev.
    • Panayotis, Nicolopoulos. (1989). La Procédure Devant les Juridictions Répressives et le Principe du Contradictoire. Revue de Science Criminelle et de Droit Pénal Compare, 1, 1-26.
    • Franck, Susan. (2005). The Nature and Enforcement of Investor Rights under Investment Treaties: Do Investment Treaties Have a Bright Future. journal of international law & policy, 47.
    • Walde, T. (2010). Procedural Challenges in Investment Arbitration under the Shadow of the Dual Role of the State: Asymmetries and Tribunals' Duty to Ensure, Pro-actively, the Equality of Arms. Arbitration International. 26. 3-42.

    - Law

    • French Code of Criminal Procedure (2000)

    - Dictionary Book

    • A Dictionary of Law (9th ed. 2018).

    - Foreign Treaties, Laws and Legal Documents

    • European Convention of Human Rights.
    • UN Basic Principles on Role of Lawyers (1990).

    - Internet Portal

    • http://www.un.org/icty/tadic/trialc2/judgement/index.htm.

    - Documents

    • Akzo v. European Commissions case (2007) of September 17.
    • Biwater-Gauff v. Tanzania (2006), Procedural Order No. 2 of May 4.
    • Campbell v. United Kingdom.
    • CDC Group plc v. Republic of Seychelles (2003), ICSID Case No. ARB/02/14, Award, December 17.
    • Ekinci & Akalin v. Turkey case (1992) ECHR case of March 25.
    • European Court of Human Rights, Decision from 6 st of May 1985, Bonisch Versus Austria.
    • Generation Ukraine, Inc. v. Ukraine, ICSID Case No. ARB/00/9, Award, September 16, 2003.
    • Golder v. United Kingdom (1975).
    • Libananco Holdings Co. Limited v. Turkey (2008), ICSID Case No. ARB/06/8, Decision on Preliminary Issues, June 23, Published on http://ita.law.uvic.ca.
    • Methanex v. U.S. Final Award (2005), August 3.
    • PETREC case (against NNPC) Gulf Petro Trading Co., Inc. v. Nigerian Nat’l Petrol (2008). Corp, CA 5 (Tex), January 7, 512 F.3d.
    • Pope & Talbot Inc. v. The Government of Canada (2002), Award on Damages, May 31.
    • D. Myers v. Canada, Partial Award (2000), November 13, Paras. 39 et seq.
    • Smirnov v. Russia (2007) (ECHR June 7).
Jurisprudence and Islamic Law
Volume 14, Issue 33
December 2024
Pages 73-96

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics