جواد حبیبی تبار

One of the critical issues in discussions related to children's rights is the validation of the authority and interventions exercised by the father and paternal grandfather in matters concerning the child. From a legal and jurisprudential perspective, while the concept of the guardian's authority and the acceptance of their actions is explicitly recognized, there is no uniform interpretation of the extent and nature of the father’s and paternal grandfather’s control. Consequently, questions and debates arise about the scope, characteristics, and manner of the guardian’s actions in child-related affairs. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical approach, aims to explore this issue. The central finding of this research is that the authority of the father and paternal grandfather in matters concerning the child is conditional, and their actions should primarily be assessed based on the child’s best interests rather than merely the absence of harm. This principle also applies in cases of conflict between the father’s and the paternal grandfather’s decisions. From this perspective, the revised provisions of Article 1184 of the Iranian Civil Code still require further review.

This research was  conducted with the aim of examining the judgment of women in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the light of the verses of the Holy Quran, taking into account jurisprudential, Sharia and religious aspects in order to revise, amend and explain Article 163 of the Constitution.
It is an analytical-descriptive type of case study and evaluation, which was done in a library style with content analysis, inference and reasoning.
The findings of the present research showed that there is no verse in the Holy Quran that explicitly and clearly negates the competence of women for the position of judge. Therefore, the prohibition of judging women for women who meet the scientific and moral conditions is one of the verses of the Quran. not received none of the verses related to judgment in the Holy Qur'an have made the correctness of the judgment subject to majesty. Therefore, taking into account that the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is determined according to jurisprudence, Article 163 of the Constitution needs to be amended, revised and explained.

If a mother or another designated woman refuses to breastfeed a baby, this can negatively impact the child's potential benefits that may manifest later in life. Similarly, if a father or another responsible individual fails to provide necessary alimony, it can harm the child’s future well-being. This research employs a descriptive-analytic method to explore how the refusal of breastfeeding and alimony provision can affect children's potential benefits, including intelligence, cognitive development, mental health, and character. The study also examines specific types of alimony, such as clothing, food, health, and medical care. The main contribution of the article is the establishment of criminal responsibility in both cases: while a mother or designated woman who refuses to breastfeed has a legal and religious obligation, she may seek compensation, and the father or responsible individual who neglects their duty to provide alimony bears criminal responsibility.

Autopsy on a corpse has two accepted legal applications: medical and criminal. However, due to the existence of some religious texts, it faces challenges such as the prohibition of mutilation of the corpse, the prohibition of crime against the corpse, the prohibition of desecration of the corpse, the prohibition of delaying the burial of the corpse, and so on. Perhaps for this reason, some contemporary Shiite jurists have considered autopsy as primarily prohibited and have conditioned its permissibility on necessity. The present article attempts, using a descriptive-analytical method, to clarify after examining the reasons whether such challenges can indeed be accepted or not. The results obtained from the investigations indicate that none of the alleged reasons can prove the obligation prohibition of autopsy on a Muslim corpse in general. However, due to the existence of narrations regarding the obligation to pay blood money in cases of severing a limb of a corpse, liability (Zeman) can be proven out of precaution.

From the point of view of Imami jurisprudence, the marriage contract is one of the most necessary contracts, because it cannot be stipulated in it like some other necessary contracts; Rather, the contract is necessary and not optional. Ma'al Wesaf is forcibly dissolved due to cursing, apostasy, illegitimate adoption, or gender change, and it is also voluntarily dissolved due to the termination of divorce or termination of marriage. If the wife is in severe distress during her cohabitation with her husband, she is subject to the rule of negation of distress. The dissolution of marriage is considered in the form of dissolution of marriage; Because this rule, in addition to mandatory rules, includes status rules, including the necessity of marriage. However, the jurists have not accepted the annulment of the marriage by the wife in order to observe caution and to limit the annulment of the marriage to the cases of defects in the text, violation of the terms and conditions, due to hardship. However, this dissolution of marriage is in the form of a judicial divorce, depending on the development of the realm of the rule of negative negation of rulings; Some jurists have accepted it and prescribed divorce ruling regarding the case. According to the opinion of some Sunni scholars, the dissolution of marriage in the case of severe material or spiritual harm to the wife, which is an example of harm, is considered permissible due to judicial separation, which is not necessarily considered a judicial divorce. Some contemporary popular writers have considered this liquidation as an example of the ruler's divorce. The Personal Status Law of Egypt also allows the wife to request a divorce if she claims that the continuation of married life is harmful for her.

The main issue in the current research is to evaluate the performance of family courts regarding the judgments issued regarding the marriage allowance and its current judicial procedure in Iran's legal system. In this article, an attempt is made to analyze and examine the existing practical procedure in the courts as well as the jurisprudential and legal foundations of the demand for marital alimony, and also to express examples of conflicting opinions issued in the judicial courts to evaluate and criticize the legal citations and the existing judicial procedure. Because the existence of loopholes and ambiguities in the field of legislation has caused the lack of uniformity of procedure in the courts and the emergence of confusion and the issuing of mixed opinions from the family courts. In this research, the type of research is basic and the research method is descriptive and analytical, and since judicial procedure is considered as one of the sources of law, it has been tried as much as possible, in addition to introducing the current procedure, as a witness, some joint rulings from the family courts, which are randomly selected, to be cited and the decrees issued in this field should be analyzed, and as a result, by approving and interpreting the laws related to reciprocity and issuing unanimity votes in issues where conflicting opinions have been issued, implementation challenges can be minimized.

Reasons such as an innate lack of hymen, instances of rape, engagement in heavy physical exercises, and past wrongdoings (accompanied by repentance) are factors contributing to the growing demand for hymenorrhaphy or hymenoplasty among girls. The legitimacy of such a surgical procedure hinges on the adherence of both the treatment seeker and the physician to valid jurisprudential principles. To validate such surgery, one approach is to consider the "intentions of Sharia" or the purposes, goals, and objectives of the Sharia legislator in formulating religious rulings. An examination of the written documents related to the physician's actions, the focal point of our research, and a commitment to religious texts, alongside the consideration of intentions like preserving lives, maintaining dignity, concealing flaws, and addressing counterarguments against the legitimacy of the physician's actions (citing concerns such as the prohibition of touching and looking at someone else's genitalia, as well as assisting in sinful acts such as cheating) allows us to justify the physician's actions within the framework of Sharia. This new perspective provides a means to address some of the pertinent issues surrounding this practice.

The main issue in the current research is to evaluate the performance of family courts regarding the judgments issued regarding the marriage allowance and its current judicial procedure in Iran's legal system. In this article, an attempt is made to analyze and examine the existing practical procedure in the courts as well as the jurisprudential and legal foundations of the demand for marital alimony, and also to express examples of conflicting opinions issued in the judicial courts to evaluate and criticize the legal citations and the existing judicial procedure. Because the existence of loopholes and ambiguities in the field of legislation has caused the lack of uniformity of procedure in the courts and the emergence of confusion and the issuing of mixed opinions from the family courts. In this research, the type of research is basic and the research method is descriptive and analytical, and since judicial procedure is considered as one of the sources of law, it has been tried as much as possible, in addition to introducing the current procedure, as a witness, some joint rulings from the family courts, which are randomly selected, to be cited and the decrees issued in this field should be analyzed, and as a result, by approving and interpreting the laws related to reciprocity and issuing unanimity votes in issues where conflicting opinions have been issued, implementation challenges can be minimized.

According to the opinions of the jurists, and based on the principles of the Shiites, the first principle in premeditated killing is retribution. But Islamic law gave this right to the guardians of the murdered, so that they could fully forgive their right or forgive and make their pardon depend on money. However, sometimes there are cases in which it is not possible to carry out "qisas al-nafs" for certain reasons, and the guardians refuse to give up financial matters or pardon.In this case, is it for the guardians of the murdered to ask for a compromise by cutting off the limb instead of self-retaliation? This reconciliation, on the one hand, will heal the pain of the victim's loss of guardians, and on the other hand, it will save the soul of the perpetrator. This new issue clashed with supporters and opponents, and accordingly two opinions were raised, and after explaining and criticizing them, the final opinion was based on the permissibility of replacing self-punishment for amputation with the content analysis method. On the evidence, including the legality of reconciliation, the preponderance of pardon over retaliation, the evidence of the necessity of self-preservation, etc., is a solution to overcome the problems arising from the promise of impermissibility.

Anticipatory breach theory means that in contracts with protensive obligations, whenever, before the time of fulfillment of the obligation, in an acceptable and reliable manner, it is discovered that the obligor in the future does not want or can not fulfill its obligations, the obligee will have the right to suspend his mutual obligations and terminate the contract under certain conditions.The origin of this theory is European law and so far it has not been explicitly entered in Iran law. In feasibility study of the entrance this theory into Iran law, some consider it contrary to the principle of the unilateral irrivocability of contracts. the principle of unilateral of contract is that each party to the contract may not terminate the contract unilaterally , except in cases where it has such legal authority. In this article, the author seeks to specify the concept of this theory and the application of the principle of unilateral irrivocability of contracts, to prove that the theory of anticipatory breach does not contradict the principle of unilateral irrivocability of contracts.

The marriage contract is one of the most necessary contracts. However, the marital relationship is automatically dissolved due to mutual curse, apostasy, foster care, or gender change, and it is also voluntarily dissolved due to termination, divorce, or granting duration in temporary marriage. If the wife is experiencing intolerable difficulty and hardship in her joint life with her husband, she is subject to the rule of negation of hardship. In this case, the dissolution of marriage is considered in the form of annulment of marriage, because this rule, in addition to mandatory rules, embraces status rules including the necessity of marriage. But the jurists have not accepted the annulment of the marriage by the wife due to intolerable difficulty and hardship, because they exercise caution and consider the annulment of the marriage to be confined to defects mentioned in texts, violation of the condition, and deception. But whether this dissolution of marriage is under judicial divorce is dependent on the development of the rule of negation of hardship to non-existent matters in the rulings, which some jurists have accepted and, therefore, prescribed divorce by the ruler in this regard, which is closer to caution. However, according to the jurisprudential pieces of evidence, the prescription of annulment of marriage in the case of intolerable difficulty of the wife is not far from the jurisprudential foundations. Iran's civil law prescribes judicial divorce in accordance with the famous opinion of contemporary jurists in this regard, and accordingly, the effects of divorce will follow such dissolution.

One of the voluntary factors of dissolution of marriage is divorce, which is divided into legal and judicial divorce. Articles 1029, 1030 and 1130 in the Civil Law of Iran deal with evidences of judicial divorce. Moreover, in the amendments applied to this law, by adding a supplementary provision to Article 1130, the definition of distress and constriction intended by the legislator and also the definition of examples regarding the distress and constriction of a wife were added. This supplementary provision to some extent removed the exaggeration and extremes in the interpretation of distress and constriction; however it caused some other ambiguities regarding this issue for the judges of the family courts. Among these ambiguities, the criterion of the rule of negation of distress and constriction in the examples of the distress and constriction is personal, as well as assumption of legality or legality of these examples. Also, it is not clear if the wife and not the husband is the source of her distress and constriction, will it be possible to apply the rule in judicial divorce or not? On the other hand, the common five factors related to distress and constriction including abandoning family life, the man's addiction to drugs or alcohol, the definite sentence of the husband to imprisonment for five years or more, the continuous misbehavior of the husband, and the husband's suffering from incurable mental or contagious diseases, are themselves ambiguities. In this article, it is proved that the examples regarding the foresaid supplementary provision are legal, and the distress and constriction caused by the wife herself can also be the cause of the effects of distress and constriction on her, and the other ambiguities mentioned have also been interpreted.

There are different views on the issue of women's judgment. According to Iranian law derived from famous jurisprudential fatwas, the condition of being male is considered for judges who have the authority to give a verdict. In Islam, one of the necessary conditions for judging is ijtihad (independent reasoning by an expert in Islamic law), which due to the current situation of the society and the lack of sufficient mujtahid judges (judges who are qualified to perform ijtihad) or the unwillingness of mujtahids to judge, the Islamic society of Iran has deviated from this necessary and obligatory condition. In addition, there are differences among the experts regarding the condition of being male for judges, which are discussed briefly in this article. Currently, more than a thousand female judges are working in the judiciary, but judging and giving verdicts about women are not accepted, making their promotion difficult. The present paper, through in-depth interviews with a number of female judges, points out the difficulties of their promotion and identifies the obstacles to their promotion and attaining some judicial positions in the judiciary. Furthermore, by presenting proposals and executive solutions to overcome the mentioned problems, it tries to use the knowledge, science, and experience of women in order to develop and strengthen the judicial system of the country.

What is realized in the punishment of crimes, both partial and partial, does not refer to gender and the sex of the crime can be proposed regardless of the sex of the offender, but after considering the jurisprudential texts and Iranian law on partial punishment for murder, there are gender differences in the amount of punishment. It is obvious that this article is a place of reflection and analysis. From the point of view of jurisprudence and law, the general rule is based on the reduce or intensify this type of responsibility in legislation and punishment, so women are the same as men But in the case of punishments and punishments such as murder, gender can be effective.The legislature, taking into account the gender of a woman or a man in a specific or common crime, has determined the amount and quantity of punishment at the time of enactment, which is more severe and less severe for one sex and less for another. In this article, the effect of women's gender in the punishment of murder has been studied and the cases of mitigation and the difference between the rules and punishments of men and women have been discussed separately.

If a woman commits the murder of a man and the avengers choose the revenge, there are two types of hadiths among the Imamiyya sources regarding the extra payment of wergild. All hadiths, except the narration of Abi Maryam Ansari, indicate that this payment is not necessary, but that hadith emphasizes the necessity of extra payment as its proof. Imamiyya jurists have put many questions about text and authority about this hadith, and the present study tries to answer these questions and examine them by using a descriptive and analytical method with library study method. Based on the writers' point of view, the weaknesses of Abi Maryam's hadith roots from its opposition to the Holy Qur'an and the principles, its coordination with Taqiyya, the lack of clarity in the meaning, its justification with recommended verdicts and financial ability, and the assumption of two murders. Even though, there is a reliable authority for the text but due to its contradiction with the other hadiths, the oppositions of main scholars, and the possibility of distorting, this narration should be discarded and it should be considered not as a vital rule.

Domestic violence against women is one of the social harms threatening the family institution, and programs to combat it are seriously on the agenda of human rights organizations. Despite the fundamental and attitudinal differences between the Islamic-Iranian legal system and international instruments, strengthening the position of women in the home and society and enforcing women's legal rights in all areas, and paying special attention to their constructive role are important concerns for both. In this article, we review domestic laws related to the elimination of violence against women, in particular the Women's Security Bill and the Charter of Women's Rights and Responsibilities in the Islamic Republic, and compare them with international instruments such as the Conference on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and International Covenants. After analyzing their strengths and weaknesses, solutions such as optimal culture-building, criminalization of domestic violence in Iranian laws and international instruments, and appropriate family disciplinary sanctions are proposed with the aim of strengthening the family, promoting arbitration in Iran, and mediation in the international arena.

From the jurisprudential perspective, any sexual enjoyment that is not approved by religious law (sharʿ) is somehow considered sexual deviation, and if one is accustomed to this act in such a way that he is satisfied only in this way and is not normally able to leave it, he/she has a mental illness of sexual deviation disorder. Therefore, when the sexual enjoyment causes difficulty or unconventional harm outside the nature of each couples’ engagement in sexual intercourse, it is sexual deviation and if it becomes a habit, it is a sexual deviation disorder even if they are legally married. The husband’s infection with the illness of sexual deviation disorder is one of the cases that legally removes the obligation of the wife to obey the husband and it deprives the husband of the right to oblige the wife to obey.Although obedience (tamkīn) in jurisprudence means the necessity of sexual submission and obedience of the husband, the wife should not disobey the sexual enjoyment of the husband at any time or place. Also, one of the requirements of marriage is the sexual enjoyment of both parties with all its examples and is not limited to the specific example. The examples that have been excluded from the conventional relationship due to being harmful and difficult are exempt from the inclusiveness of evidence for the necessity of obedience to the husband and wife’s disobedience does not make her nāshizah (disobedient). The husband with a sexual deviation disorder cannot force his wife to accept his unconventional obedience which usually leads to intolerable harm or difficulty and only has the right to demand the enjoyments that are conventional.

The concept of "soft law" has faced difficulties from the beginning and different views have been expressed about it. Some do not consider "soft law" as a legal concept because it does not have the nature of a government obligation. On the other hand, others believe that this concept, despite not having a guarantee of criminal execution, is one of the legal concepts in which voluntary obligation is introduced instead of government obligation. Some have equated soft law with morality because of its binding nature. Using descriptive-analytical method, this research seeks to answer the question: what is the meaning of "soft law" and how does it flow in the family legal system from a religious point of view? To answer this question, while explaining the concept of soft law, we examined its conceptual relationship with hard law and morality, and after reaching the point that soft law has a legal meaning and is different from hard law and morality, we analyzed the application of soft law in the family from a religious perspective. Hence, we have shown that, from a religious point of view, not only "soft law" can be applied in the family law system, but also due to the unresponsiveness of hard law in the family law system and the lack of ethics in family relations, the basic principle in family law system is the softness of rights and laws.

The aim of this study was to investigate family reunification in Imami jurisprudence and to evaluate the positive effects of laws in order to reunite the foundations of the family.

The type of method in this research is analytical-descriptive, which is based on existing books and researches and experiences gained in this field.

The rules governing good communication between couples are: observance of mutual rights and duties of spouses, cohabitation of spouses, inheritance of spouses from each other, obligation of the wife to perform the duties of marriage, financial independence of the wife, support of mothers during pregnancy, custody of children by parents, obligation of parents in raising their children, obligation in paying alimony to wife and children and respect for the child to parents and these are among the laws that have a positive effect on family strength and child rearing.

The laws that are in line with the objectives of Article 1104 are: The couple cohabits and the man must consider the woman's whereabouts. Couples inherit from each other, and women, like men, have financial independence. (1118 BC) and the man is obliged to pay alimony to his wife and children according to Article 642 of the Penal Code. According to Law 1178, parents are also obliged to raise their children, and Law 1168 also refers to the custody and custody of children. Article 21 of the Constitution emphasizes the protection of mothers during pregnancy. The child must respect the parents.

The present article deals with the theoretical structure of the "principle of equality" in secular human rights thought from the perspective of the philosophy of law, and examines the concept of equality of all human beings as well as gender equality, and explores the principles, assumptions and arguments of the principle of equality in the works of modern and contemporary thinkers. Determining a clear conceptual framework and evaluating the argumentative underpinning of the principle of equality are the objectives of this research, which has been done by reference method. Findings show: Firstly, in human rights texts, the word "equality" is used in a general and abstract way without conceptual clarity, which has caused ambiguity in the legislative stage; Secondly, it is not based on argumentative and empirical reasoning, and its argumentative aspect is flawed. Therefore, the modern and contemporary thinkers, under the influence of the ruling ideal discourse, have accepted the principle of equality an accepted basis. The present study also confirms that in the theoretical structure of materialist secularism, due to the objective differences between individuals, there is a discrepancy between the views of human rights and the epistemology of this approach. The principle of equality of all human beings, including men and women, is not provable as well with denial the common human element; the abstract truth confirmed in the revelatory teachings

Child marriage has long been one of the most controversial topics in various sciences, including jurisprudence and law, and this phenomenon has been encountered differently in accordance with customs and traditions in different societies and time periods, Regardless of the subject matter, whether it is permissible or not, whether it is criminalized or not, child marriage means the marriage of minor children. This phenomenon can cause moral damage to the child. The origins of this damage may be from the guardian or the spouse. This research has been done by a descriptive-analytical method through studying jurisprudential and legal texts with the aim of identifying the origins of moral damage caused by child marriage. The findings of the study indicate that "non-observance of the child's interests by the guardian", "general enjoyment of the child", "special enjoyment of the child and deprivation of virginity by the spouse" and sometimes "the principle of child marriage" are the most important origins of moral damage caused by child marriage. During the research, these origins and how they cause damage has been studied from a jurisprudential and legal perspective.

C oronavirus infected all countries, including Iran In 2020 . The disease became a pandemic d espite governments’ efforts to prevent its spread . G overnments are now working to reduce the disease and control its outbreak, and have put programs and measures on the agenda in various are as. In the meantime one of the necessary measures to control the spread of covid - 19 is to regulate the government's relationship with the family. The present study seeks to achieve an effective model in the Meta legal relations of the Islamic government in the control of epidemic diseases with emphasis on the coronavirus.

This article seeks to prove the hypothesis that government - family relations can overcome the duality of law and ethics by using Islamic sources in a descriptive - anal ytical and documentary manner and the relationship between government and family can be considered in another type of relationship called "Soft Law ".

Findings of this study indicate that due to the lack of criminality accountability for familie s unaware of the prevalence of coronavirus on the one hand and lack of pervasive practice of moral norms on the other hand , meta legal and meta moral relations (soft laws) as a social model can play an important role in reducing the spread of epidemic dise ases. In this model, people without fear of punishment and considering the interests of themselves and their families, respect the rights of others and are committed to them. The design of this model has jurisprudential justifications and also the governme nt and family have reciprocal duties which are discussed in this article.

The legal guardian in Islamic government is of certain authorities one of which in penal matters is the right or power to grant pardon to those who are subject to legal (prescribed) punishments. Researches into the books of Islamic jurisprudence reveal the point that the majority of Muslim jurists have had sporadic discussions on different penal issues and have recognized the Immaculate Imams as having the right to pardon the prescribed penalties under certain conditions. So far, the issue in question has not been taken into account as a jurisprudential rule in an organized and orderly manner and has not been spoken of its criteria as done in relation to other jurisprudential rules. Given the establishment of the Islamic government and the necessity of formulating governmental fiqh, it seems necessary to consider the issue in question as rule-governed and to explain its boundaries. The article, presupposing that there are permissions to administer punishments at times of Occultation, along with ascertaining the crime by means of sufficient evidence, tries to propose that the leader of the Islamic government is granted the right to pardon the prescribed punishments, thereby certain issues related to this , including documents and evidence for the rule, stipulation or lack of stipulation of repentance regarding the legitimacy of pardon or amnesty, the question whether the scope of the rule extended to cover such domains as the right of God or right of people and the right to be pardoned by the legal guardian of the one who profess to commit prescribed penalties are explored in this article.

The marriage contract is one of the necessary contracts and therefore, its annulment requires a special reason. In the Imamiyah jurisprudence, special and limited instruments have been mentioned for the annulment of the marriage contract - because of its importance and impact on society. One of the cases that the husband can claim to annul the marriage is the wife's adultery - before or after marriage. In this regard, the present study - using library method and documentary study - is devoted to examining the feasibility of annulment of marriage due to adultery. The results and findings of this study show that, according to most of late jurists, if a man commits adultery before marriage, a man has no right to annul; however, some jurists believe that a man has the right of annulment in this respect, based on the principle of "no harm" and some narratives. From the author's point of view, it is incorrect to refer to the principle of "no harm" with regard to its unproven language. Of course, according to the valid statement of Abdul Rahman and Sahiheh Halabi, if the wife commits adultery before marriage and conceals it while concluding the (marriage) contract, the husband has the right to annul. The contradictory narratives of these two hadiths also relate to not being Makruh or permissible for annulment in order to use the right to annul, but based on Ibn Janid Baghdadi's view, if the wife commits adultery after marriage, the husband can terminate the marriage. Of course, from the author's point of view, the reasons presented to prove this theory are incorrect and the husband does not have the right to terminate the marriage due to consensus, publicity, and Istishab for necessity of the contract.