Territorial Disputes: The Role of the International Court of Justice and the Case of the Three Islands in the Persian Gulf

Territorial disputes are among the most sensitive issues in international law, where non-intervention and respect for territorial integrity are crucial. The International Court of Justice(ICJ) has developed consistent jurisprudence emphasizing treaties, effective and continuousexercise of sovereignty, and tacit acquiescence in determining territorial title. This study appliesthese principles to the Persian Gulf dispute over the three Iranian islands ofAbu Musa,GreaterTunb, andLesser Tunb. Although not formally submitted to the ICJ, the dispute can be analyzedin light of the Court’s precedents, highlighting the significance of tangible governmental acts—administrative, military, economic, and legal—in establishing ownership. Mere historical claimswithout effective control hold little weight in international law. The findings indicate that Iran’seffective, manifest, and continuous sovereignty over the three islands consolidates its ownership,and the interruption caused by the British occupation does not impair this sovereignty and title.The UAE’s historical claims predating its establishment cannot be relied upon before the Courtbecause the acts occurred during occupation (not colonial rule) and are inconsistent with historicaland formal documents confirming Iran’s sovereign and ownership rights over the islands..

کلیدواژه ها:

Territorial Disputes ، Iranian Three Islands ، International Court of Justice ، Principle Of Effective Sovereignty ، Uti Possidetis Juris