Reassessing State Liability for Compensation of War-Related Losses: The Transition from Fault-Based Liability to Liability Based on Distributive Justice in Iranian Public Law

Abstract

Wars have invariably entailed severe consequences for civilian populations, exposing them to both pecuniary losses and loss of life or bodily harm. Legal systems have long faced the challenge of determining how such losses should be compensated. The traditional approach, which predicates state liability on fault, has often proved inadequate in the context of war-related harm, given the complex nature of such losses and the frequent impossibility of attributing them directly to the state. This article aims to reassess state liability for compensation of war-related losses and to explain the transition from fault-based liability to liability grounded in distributive justice within Iranian public law. Employing a descriptive-analytical method, the study first critically examines the traditional fault-based approach to state liability and then, with reference to the fundamental principles of Iranian public and constitutional law, analyzes the theoretical and legal foundations of strict or no-fault state liability, particularly on the basis of risk theory and the principle of the equitable distribution of public burdens. The findings indicate that the principles governing the Iranian legal system, including the principle of equality among citizens and the state’s protective obligations, can provide a robust legal foundation for recognizing state liability to compensate war-related losses irrespective of proof of fault. In this regard, the article also examines existing challenges and proposes practical mechanisms, such as establishing national compensation funds and reforming the legislative framework, with a view to ensuring compensation for war-related losses on the basis of distributive justice.