Examining the Requirement of Expediencyin Possessions of a Compulsory Guardianfrom the Perspective of Imami Jurisprudenceand the laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran

The most Imami jurists have insisted on expediency in possessions of the compulsory guardian on incapables' properties, even some have claimed consensus on it. The jurists, following the most Foqahā, have considered the influence of the compulsory guardian's possession conditional on compliance with expediency. In the civil law, the influence of the compulsory guardian's possession in the property of the incapables' properties is conditional on compliance with expediency. On the other hand, some jurists have not set any condition for the compulsory guardian's possessions, but considered it to be absolutely valid. In this research, using a descriptive-analytical method and by collecting library information, while rereading the words of jurists and examining evidence from verses, narrations and consensus, it has been proven that both sayings are incomplete: in the theory of the unconditioned guardianship, the verse and narrations cited in terms of the implication to the claim are confused, in the theory of expediency, the proofs presented are also incomplete: the cited verses and traditions do not imply the claim, the claimed consensus is also incomplete because there is no stablished consensus on this issue and the quoted consensus in terms of realization is doubtful, so this consensus is a documented or at least there is a possibility of documentary about it, so it is not a proof, As a result, the compulsory guardian's possessions in the incapable's properties is neither absolutely valid nor conditional on the existence of expediency, but the mere absence of the corruption is sufficient.