Since non-compliance with human rights at sea is not tangible to what is happening on land, it doesnot receive much attention from the international community. While human rights must be taken into account at sea as much as they are on land. Given the fragmentation in international law, the relationship of human rights and law of the sea has provided the necessary grounds for the humanization of the law of the sea. One of the reasons for the fragmentation in international law is the creation of self-contained regimes. Undoubtedly, among these systems are human rights and law of sea, each of which has its own resources and mechanisms, and the collision of these systems with each other in the international system is inevitable. The interaction of the law of the sea with human rights can be seen as an opportunity to develop international law in order to further develop the rule of law. The purpose of the law of the sea is to regulate the relations of states at sea, but our intention is to go in the opposite direction and write about the relation between individual and state in this arena and the interaction between human rights and the law of the sea.

Given the legal reasons, the paper highlights that the Israeli clash with the Gaza strip is not an internationally armed conflict and therefore the Gaza strip blockade is not a legitimate action. Furthermore, if this clash is assumed as an armed conflict, it is not legitimate as the Israeli regime has not met the International Humanitarian Law. Discarding the principle of “ not to use famine as a weapon against civilians” is the main reason to prove illegitimacy of the Israeli attempt to impose a sea blockade against Gaza.

Maritime terrorism is as old as its history. From ancient times to the first decade of the 21st century, perpetrators of all kinds of violence, including kidnapping, sabotage and direct attacks on targets, have inhabited the high seas as well as the wider marine environment. Terrorism at sea becomes important when a significant part of the world's trade is carried out by sea. One of the challenges of dealing with terrorism at sea and the inefficiency of the means to deal with it is found in the Convention on the Law of the Sea. Therefore, security in the seas is also considered a part of this convention; But in it, the issue of maritime terrorism is not addressed separately. Therefore, terrorist crimes in the seas and the fight against them are among the issues raised in international law, especially the international law of the seas, so that the first measures in this direction also go back to the era of the League of Nations. However, this article tries to use the descriptive and analytical research method while measuring the mechanisms of dealing with crimes in the sea territory, and examines the way of dealing with and suppressing terrorist crimes. Of course, according to the concern of coastal communities and international organizations caused by maritime terrorism, a suitable solution can be proposed, which is the participation of private companies to help fight terrorism in the sea, despite the disagreement about this approach and legal basis. It acted in international law.

Transnational organized crime, is one of the most important problem of international community in21 century.at the late of 20 century, international community and united nations organization due to unification, cooperation, harmonization, conclude a convention to combat such actions.This document was named (united nations convention against transnational organized crime), which completed with two protocols. well known as palermo convention.The first protocol was about (prevent, suppress, punish, trafficking in persons specially women and children), and the second protocol was about (smuggling of migrants by land, air and sea).This article evaluate the illegal immigration aspects via sea, which happen by diffrent reasons and the ways that reduc this problem under international cooperation.

Despite a century-long history in international conference, low-tide elevations have received only a few provisions in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This natural piece of land surrounded by water and visible during low tide is a source of disputes among states, as the scope of the components defining and characterizing this formation is unclear. Furthermore, the role of the low-tide elevations in determining a state's maritime zones and delimiting maritime boundaries between states adds to the challenges faced by subjects of international law. This article, using library resources and a descriptive-analytical method, aims to clarify the definition of this insular formation, establish its legal status within international law of the sea, and analyze how it influences the delimitation of maritime areas in light of state practices, decisions from judicial and arbitration bodies, and opinions of legal scholars. The study reveals that the conventional definition of the low-tide elevations has become customary law and is easily considered in determining a state's maritime territory; however, based on state practice and the decisions of adjudicating bodies, low-tide elevations have had limited impact on the delimitation of maritime areas between states, often facing minor or even negligible effects.

Islands and rocks are entitled different maritime zones in international law of the sea. Article 121(3) allocated to rocks has articulated briefly and without indicating any definitions or characters of this feature. Paragraph 3 provided two conditions for rocks in order to create exclusive economic zone and continental shelf zone. The South China Sea tribunal has interpreted this paragraph for the first time and answered some questions such as what does rocks mean? And what is the relationship between rocks and islands and what does human habitation and economic life clauses provided? This article has confirmed some findings of the tribunal and rejected others and reached these conclusions: rocks imply rocky islands. The lack of both human habitation and economic life clauses are needed to deprive rocks of generating broad maritime zones. Tribunal Initiatives like establishing the link between habitants of rocks and economic activities, adding natural condition to “ of its-self” phrase and imposing qualitative standard on “ cannot sustain” are not acceptable based on the text of the article 121 of UNCLOS. The methodology of this research is descriptive-analytical which was done with the help of library source.

Right to detain any vessel is granted to the coastal states by UN Convention in the Law of the Sea (1982). On the contrary, the right to put forward an application for the prompt release is granted to the flag states. This matter can also be found in the General Principals of Law. Therefore not only the members of the convention are committed to abide by but also each country is obliged to do so. In this line some cases were raised to International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and decisions were made. The present paper is an attempt to study the different aspects of such prompt release and its securities based on the 1982 convention, ITLOSs decisions and General principals of law. The obtained result can be applied to the next cases of ITLOS and countries future relations.At last, the terms of prompt release and reasonable bond are brought to light in short based on Iranian internal law in relation to the International law.

Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 involve the necessary tools for the protection and support of the resources of the deep sea area. But international obligations prescribed in the Convention on the law of the sea for the safeguard and protection of the deep sea area environment should be interpreted in a way that covers other existing regulations in the customary international law. Although in the Convention on the law of the sea provisions is no hinder to extend the international customary law obligations on the States parties to the Convention, but branches of International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea are reluctant to extend to the law of the sea. The approach of Seabed Disputes Chamber of International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in 2011 advisory opinion indicate the responsibility of the Member State in protection and protections of the sea environment are limited solely to the provisions of the Convention on the Law of sea and its Executive agreements And the doctrines of customary international law do not work directly in this area. This contradictory approach of Seabed Disputes