comparative analyzing of islamic republic of iran’s and united states of america’s laws on state immunity with regards to the united states recent larceny of iranian financial assets

state immunity is considered to be one of the most important issues in contemporary international law. over time, this concept gas been changed due to the evolution of international law and during recent decades, the focus of academic forums and national and international courts has been attached to it. in the meantime, several states including i.r.iran and u.s.a have approved state immunity law in their domestic legislation and their legal exceptions. in this article, the authors seek to answer several questions including what are the similarities and differences of iranian and u.s laws on state immunity and secondly , how can the u.s recent larceny of iranian financial assets ( 2 billion dollars) can be justified . on the other hand, do contemporary international law developments have had any effect on iranian and u.s immunity laws. the conclusion of the topic is that the main differences between u.s and i.r.i state immunity law are the difference in scope of protection of subjected persons, difference in source of legislation, the possibility of confiscation of properties outside the country, the effect of executive branch presence in claims against foreign governments and finally the effect of foreign defendant state in the course of trial hearing. also , u.s recent larceny of iranian financial assets has been contrary to its international obligations in accordance with u.n charter , international customary law and the mutual friendship agreement.