اﻟﻘﯾﻣﺔ اﻻﺳﺗدﻻﻟﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻘراﺋن اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﯾﺔ دراﺳﺔ ﺗﻘﯾﯾﻣﯾﺔ ﻣن ﻣﻧظور اﻟﻔﻘﻪ واﻟﻘﺿﺎء اﻟدوﻟﯾﯾن

ﺗﻌد اﻟﻘراﺋن ﻣن طرق اﻹﺛﺑﺎت ﻏﯾر اﻟﻣﺑﺎﺷر، ﻓﻬﻲ ﺗﻌﺗﻣد ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳﺗﺧﻼص وﻗﺎﺋﻊ وﺣﻠول ﻣﺟﻬوﻟﺔ ﻣن وﻗﺎﺋﻊ ﻣﻌﻠوﻣﺔ .ورﻏم أﻧﻬﺎ دﻟﯾل إﺛﺑﺎت ﻏﯾر ﻣﺑﺎﺷر، إﻻ أن اﻟﻌدﯾد ﻣن اﻟدول ﺗﻠﺟﺄ إﻟﯾﻬﺎ ﻹﺛﺑﺎت ادﻋﺎءاﺗﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺿﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﺗﻲ ﺗطرح ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻛم اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ﺗﻌﺟز ﻋن ﺗوﻓﯾر اﻟدﻟﯾل اﻟﻣﺑﺎﺷر. وإذا ﻛﺎﻧت اﻟﻘراﺋن اﻟﻘﺿﺎﺋﯾﺔ ﻟم ﺗطرح إﺷﻛﺎﻻ ﻓﻲ اﻋﺗراف اﻟﻘﺎﻧون اﻟدوﻟﻲ ﺑوﺟودﻫﺎ وﻣﻣﺎرﺳﺔ اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻛم اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ، ﻓﺈن اﻹﺷﻛﺎل طرح ﻓﻲ وﺟود اﻟﻘراﺋن اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﯾﺔ ﻣن ﻋدم وﺟودﻫﺎ، ﺳواء ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺎﻧون اﻟدوﻟﻲ أو ﻓﻲ اﻟﻣﻣﺎرﺳﺔ أﻣﺎم اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻛم اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ. ﺗﻬدف ﻫذﻩ اﻟدراﺳﺔ إﻟﻰ اﺳﺗﯾﺿﺎح أﺳﺑﺎب اﺧﺗﻼف اﻟﻔﻘﻪ اﻟدوﻟﻲ ﺣول وﺟود اﻟﻘرﯾﻧﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﯾﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺎﻧون اﻟدوﻟﻲ ﻣن ﻋدم وﺟودﻫﺎ .ﻛﻣﺎ ﺗﻬدف إﻟﻰ ﻣﻌرﻓﺔ ﻣوﻗف اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻛم اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ ﻣن ﺧﻼل اﻟﻣﻣﺎرﺳﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺧﺗﻠف اﻟﻘﺿﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﻣطروﺣﺔ أﻣﺎﻣﻬﺎ. وﻛﺎﻧت ﻧﺗﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﺑﺣث ﻫﻲ رﺟﺣﺎن اﻟﺟﺎﻧب اﻟﻔﻘﻬﻲ اﻟذي ﯾﻘر ﺑوﺟود اﻟﻘرﯾﻧﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﯾﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺎﻧون اﻟدوﻟﻲ .ﻛﻣﺎ ﺗﺑﯾن ﻟﺟوء اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻛم اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻘراﺋن اﻟﻘﺎﻧوﻧﯾﺔ رﻏم أﻧﻬﺎ دﻟﯾل إﺛﺑﺎت ﻏﯾر ﻣﺑﺎﺷر، ﺗﺷﺟﯾﻌﺎ ﻟﻸطراف ﻟﻠﺟوء إﻟﻰ اﻟﺗﺳوﯾﺔ اﻟﺳﻠﻣﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻣﻧﺎزﻋﺎت اﻟدوﻟﯾﺔ وﻟو ﻓﻲ ﻏﯾﺎب أدﻟﺔ اﻹﺛﺑﺎت اﻟﻣﺑﺎﺷرة. Presumption is a method of indirect proof or evidence; it is a way by which unknown facts are deduced out of known ones. Many states are relying on this method to defend their cases before international courts whenever clear evidence is not possible. Although judiciary presumptions are recognized, legal ones seem to be questionable. This study tries to clarify the reasons behind doctrine controversy on the existence of legal presumptions in public international law and cases sought before international courts. The conclusion reached was in favor of the existence of legal presumptions in both public international law and the practice of international judiciary.