In the contribution, reference is made to recent concluding observations on Germany in 2004 by the UN Human Rights Committee which monitors civil and political rights. Progress has been made according that committee, but also weaknesses in the implementation were identified and recommendations were formulated. State reporting is coordinated in Germany between the ministries of foreign affairs, justice and other sector ministries (education, health etc.). German and sometimes foreign NGOs send their own appreciation of Germany reality to the relevant UN expert committee which are often taken into account when its members formulate questions to the German government delegation (when a report is being discussed).

In the future, stronger efforts will be undertaken to provide for a more vigorous follow up of UN expert bodies discussions and especially its concluding observations. The German Institute for Human Rights hopes to play a stimulating role to bring together actors from government parliament, academia and civil society.

This article introduces the Inter-American system of human rights to give those outside of the system an understanding of the basic rights guaranteed and mechanisms of enforcement. The article argues that while the Inter-American system has been a useful mechanism for enhancing human rights protections, it remains too weak to ensure that the human rights of all citizens in the Americas are in fact respected. Nonetheless, the Inter-American system offers a useful model of how regional mechanisms can promote human rights. This article proceeds by first providing an historical introduction to the Inter-American system of human rights and a detailed discussion of the protections provided for in the American Convention on Human Rights. The article then turns to the actual institutions of the system and the key cases before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court on Human Rights. Finally, the article considers the place of the United States in the Inter-American system and the protection of human rights more broadly.

The paper also investigates the potentially conflicting areas between the constitution and the 1979 Women’s Convention, which Afghanistan ratified without reservation recently. The Supreme Court has the power to review any international treaty/convention for its compliance with the constitution and Islam is declared as a state religion. There are several areas where conflict could occur. Examples are family, criminal, and inheritance law. It is to be seen how these conflicts could be resolved without either reforming Islamic laws or entering reservation to the Women’s Convention. The paper concludes suggesting how to revamp some of the constitutional provisions to effectively protect women’s human rights.

The invention of Nuclear Technology as epistemological category for the end of the second world war in Far East, has sent shockwaves through the international system. Since then, new military and defence systems were adopted with respect to this power in the Cold War era. The Iranian 1979 revolution, brought a halt to nuclear cooperation which this country had with Germany and France before. Iran halted the construction of Bushehr Facility, and the Iran-Iraq war and few other national security necessities changed the Iran’s discourse in this context. Following this, the Iran Atomic Energy Organization began to fulfil its role effectively again. In this regard, Iran began to make new contracts with Russia.

There were few events which cast a shadow over all nuclear activities of Iran and raised doubts about it from United States and European Union points of view. These new perspectives and voices, emphasize that Iran’s discourse in this field, shakes the pillars of international security. The author of this paper has produced a devastating critique of this general debate in the light of challenges over Iran’s fully cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and specially the European Union/Iran dialogue.

The demise of the Soviet Union, the end of the cold war and collapse of bipolar international system left the U.S. as unrivaled world economic and military superpower. Despite this, the discussions about current international system and how to reshape the world order remain an ongoing process. Considering its only-superpower status, the US will play an important role in any new world order, irrespect of its configuration. Each on of the Triple debates of this article argues US role and intentions in international politics differently.

The first debate that the US neo-conservatives are ascribed to uses a historical approach to justify a world order in which US posses the sole hegemonic status. The second perspective, still applying historical and colonial studies, criticizes US imperial adventurism in different parts of the world since 19th century. From this point of view, US intervention was aimed to impose its own values by promoting protestant Christianism, and raise its stakes in the world markets. The third takes a middle ground of thinking. While criticizing the current Bush and neo-conservatives' unilateralism as counterproductive and harmful to the US national interest, it prescribes an approach using multilateral cooperation and international institutions to promote the US leadership in the world politics.

At this writing, the question of where and how Saddam will be prosecuted remains in play. The “Iraqi Special Tribunal for Crimes against Humanity,” whose statute was adopted by the Iraqi Governing Council on December 10,2003, has prompted wide-ranging debate about where and how he should be tried. There has been seven potential venues for this prosecution range across a broad spectrum.

The author believes that to prosecute Saddam, we must concern many factors: 1- Jurisdiction must be over those accused of specified serious crimes. 2- They must ensure that they will observe the conditions laid down in updated norms on a fair trial. 3- The judges shall be persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity. 4- Favor option is trial before Iraqi courts. 5- To provide for greater international participation and assistance. 6- To foreclose participation by many other countries and by the Unites Nations.

The writer has done all her efforts to introduce the reality of a case which has been brought in European Court of Human Rights. Actually, in short, she refers to what is this liberty and security of persons and explains that freedom is not the destruction of legal despotism. She believes that human Right issues are a key feature of world order in the twenty – first century, but they must be seen through new methods which they could be maximally effective.

Critical theory as a part of Neo-Marxism is a new stream through philosophy, sociology and humanities. The author has structured a debate in away to emphasize the importance of critical theory in international relation’s development and progress. Critical theory scholars like Robert Cox have sought to focus on the importance of society and history. This method also claims to have appropriateness in treatment of any problem. It has challenges to the logic of the process and suggests to determine preferences of employing the social, cultural and political influences. A major theme to consider for this method is to relate certain common premises to capitalism and sovereignal state system, and to ask a rational choice among Marxism and Realism. Robert Cox and Andrew Linklator have adopt the straight forward approach of canvassing historical materialism.