hossein naseri moghaddam

The majority of jurists hold consensus that divorcing a pregnant woman is permissible in principle, but there is much disagreement regarding its manner and frequency. Four major and several secondary opinions have been proposed within Imāmī jurisprudence regarding this issue. The main source of disagreement lies in the diversity of narrations, which vary not only in their degrees of authenticity and reliability, but also in their content. The present research, conducted through the descriptive-analytical method, supports the preferred detailed view (tafsīl) in this matter, so that if the husband returns to his wife with the intention of divorcing her again, he does not have the right to a second or third divorce before the ending of the period of waiting for a pregnant (ʿiddah). However, if he returns with the intention of reconciling but later changes his mind, he may file for another divorce. This opinion is based on conventional combination (jamʿ ʿurfī) derived from the Quran.

Over time, placing prison in the category of the main punishment has reached a point where not only the goals that the prison was supposed to fulfill have not achieve, but also it has turned into a higher problem that caused many challenges for the prisoners, their families and the governments. The present research focused on de-prisoning from the perspective of the comparative jurisprudence of the Islamic Denominations and was carried out with the descriptive-analytical method and the method of collecting library and documentary information. The obvious result of this approach will be a new theory to reduce the ever-increasing population of prisons and prevent corruption and the consequences of imprisonment. Based on the findings of this study, the imprisonment can be considered as a broad meaning that includes putting a person under care, which we called "imprisonment in the general sense". On the other hand, taking into account that "imprisonment in the special sense" (confinement in a specific place) causes harm and is against self-sovereignty and the principle of personal punishment, and not only it does not usually lead to the realization of the desired goals and philosophy of the Shariah; On the contrary, it has effects against it and has shown its ineffectiveness in practice, "illegitimacy" can be accepted as a rule and the first principle about it. Based on this, if in a certain case, imprisonment is specified in the Shariah evidence, it is necessary to consider its alternative if it is optional, and if it is determined, other examples such as care with new tools and devices should be considered (imprisonment in the general sense); Except for rare cases where the definite necessity of imprisonment in the special sense without considering its function.

The permission of an fallible judge to invoke his personal knowledge for issuing of judgment is one of the long-standing jurisprudential issues, which is still an important issue for the judiciary today.Evidence in criminal matters in the judicial system is the main element of the case before the judge,cause according to Article 37 of the Constitution of the IslamicRepublicofIran:“Innocence is to be presumed,and no one is to be held guilty of a charge unless his or her guilt has been established by a competent court.The knowledge of the judge has a special place as one of the proofs of litigation in contemporary legal systems,especiallyin the Islamic judicial system.This symbol is provided in the Islamic Penal Code in Articles160-211-212of theIPCin 2013.Although the validity of the knowledge of the judge as the reason for proving the claim has been the subjectof discussion and dispute among Imami jurists,but well-known scholars believe in the authority and validityof the knowledge of the judge. Imam Khomeini(RA)considers the knowledge of the judge as an authority,both in the right of God and in the people's rights,this is true for both civil and criminal matters, provided that there is no evidence against his knowledge.In other words, we can say that legislation is superior to judge-made rules.However,the late Abi Salah made a distinction between God’s right and people’s rightandstated thatafallible judge cannot relyon his knowledge in the affairs of the right of God. Examining these statements and explaining the arguments and the final opinion are the topics of this article.

With the outbreak of Covid-19 disease and the spread of health communication, attention to the image rights of patients in media information became particularly important. This right has been exercised in the news of 14 channels of 1 national media.

In the present study, in the first step, it has been done by descriptive-analytical method and in a library by referring to documents, books and articles, and in the second step by quantitative content analysis method and by collecting data through coding texts. Video, the extent of violation of the image right has been investigated in the news of 14 channels of One TV.Ethical Considerations: In all stages of writing the present study, while respecting the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness have been observed.

Although patients 'image rights are recognized in the law of the country and medical documents and executive guarantees are defined for it, but based on the results of T-test, the average observance of patients' image rights in Quid-19 in news section 14 with a significant level ( Sig = 0.002) is less than the test level (0.05).

According to the law of the country, filming of patients in hospitals and its publication must be with the permission of the patient and the head of the hospital and violation of this right will lead to disciplinary, criminal and civil liability. It showed that in a total of one year of broadcasting news related to Corona, in insert images, 45% and in news interviews, 38%, the patients' image rights in this news section have been violated.Please cite this article as:Mohammadi HR, Naseri Moghaddam H. Investigating the Image Rights of Patients in Iranian Law and the Extent to which it is Observed in the Publication of Images of Covid-19 Patients in National Media News (Case Study of News Section 14 of One TV). Medical Law Journal. 2022; 16(57): e43.

Among the cases where Ayatollah Mousavi Ardabili's attention to the requirements and limitations of the society can be observed, it is possible to mention the position of Fass in cases of disagreement between the parties. If there is a dispute between the two sides of the lawsuit, one of the solutions that Ayatollah Mousavi Ardabili always emphasizes is to investigate the dimensions of the case by the judicial system. In today's era, there are many disputes between people that go to the court to solve it. Here, the need to check and search through a tool called experts of the judiciary, lawyers, prosecutors, investigators, judicial officers, etc. is possible. and the judge can refer each case to the appropriate person according to the investigation and search, so that the density of cases is reduced, and as a result, both the work of the judge is reduced and the people are more satisfied with the quick process of judicial decisions. Therefore, examining and searching for the dimensions of the cases, which have always been emphasized by Ayatollah Mousavi Ardabili, can be used as a solution for the quick resolution of judicial cases in the present time.

Despite the consensus of all Muslims on the finality, universality and eternity of Islamic law, in practice the fundamental question arises that if the real interests and corruptions change over time, is it possible to change the Islamic rules? In response to this important question, the present study, in order to refute the place of conflict, first examines the purpose of change and the types and examples of rulings in Imami jurisprudence, then examines the views and strategies of Imami jurists on the possibility of changing Islamic rules and reaches this conclusion According to them, some of the Islamic rulings, such as signed rulings, governmental, judicial rulings, non-enforceable rulings, harmful rulings and rulings issued as a personal matter, can be changed temporarily or permanently, and the mujtahid or Islamic ruler in order to implement the rulings. Islam, with the needs and requirements of the present age, can change such rulings, without this change of ruling being subject to topics such as abrogation, ijtihad against the text or heresy.

The Permission or prohibition of certain Sharia Solution have briefly been affirmed by Shiite and Sunnite Jurisprudence. Essentially, Decrees and Laws of a legal system must not conflict with its objectives, so it is significant to study the authenticity of permission of a Sharia Solution which is outwardly in contradiction with the goal of Sharia. This research tries to clarify and criticize the different standpoints of Islamic Jurisprudents, both Shiite and Sunnite- and concludes that some of permissible cases are are not Sharia Solution in nature, but lexical solutions or transition of a Sharia Decree to another; Assuming naming them as Sharia Solution, it does not cause any conflict with Sharia objectives. On the other hand, some of instances which have been named Sharia Solution, are forbidden in reality because of leading to commiting Haram or if the subject of Haram does not change, as well as their opposition against  Sharia objectives.

From the perspective of civil jurisprudence, the trustee is not liable for any damages unless in case of excessive use or failure of due care. However, a question arises whether a trustee may be liable, by inserting a condition, even in the absence of excessive use or failure of due care? This is a controversial precedented issue in the Islamic jurisprudence and the aspect which makes it up-to-date is its analysis in “banking profit and loss sharing contracts including Mudarabah”. The vast majority of Shiite and Sunni jurists consider the stipulation of the trustee’s liability in the form of a “corollary condition” as “null and void and invalidating” due to its being against the requirements of contract and its contradiction with the requirements of trust, ownership and representation of Mudarabah. The few jurists, under whose fatwa liability in the form of condition about performance is valid, consider this condition as a promise which merely creates a “pure imperative rule” and is not capable of creating “the positive rule of liability”. It appears that the evidence of those who consider this condition as valid are not convincing and the evidence of opponents such as the absoluteness of “Sahiha of Mohammad ibn Ghais” which declares the stipulation of merchant’s liability as the cause of the “transformation of Mudaraba nature” into usurious loan, are preferable. Although the Iranian legislator has also accepted this opinion in article 558 of the Civil Code, article 12 of the Executive Directive of Usury-Free Banking Act passed in 1984, has permitted the trustee's liability which needs amendment. This research is based on a descriptive-analytical method and the use of documentary collection tools. The main approach of this paper is jurisprudential; however, given the need to analyze the relevant Iranian laws, the issue has been studied from a legal perspective as well.

Since the time the ‘ban the use of satellite reception equipment’ has been approved, many discussions have been made about it; and its contradiction with some fundamental concepts and rights (which have firm juridical grounds) such as ownership, privacy, lawfulness of using devices with dual use, human rights, and the right of free access to information has caused important challenges for it. On the other hand, emphasis put by those who support execution of this ban has intensified the controversy. Also, the way this ban may be executed has turned into a serious problem and this adds to ambiguities and complexities of the issue. Based on library methodology and through making a comparison between the above-mentioned ban and other laws and while describing the present method of struggling against satellite reception equipment, the present writing proposes alternative ways instead of gathering satellite reception equipment. The results of this study shows that execution of the above-mentioned ban, since they are of dual use and considered as devices with dual use, is according to Muslim jurisprudents in contradiction to laws concerning people’s privacy, Islamic Penal Code, Statement of Islamic Human Rights and many international conventions which have been accepted by Iran. What is proposed in this study is putting emphasis on alternative ways and in particular cultural ones.

The question of whether utilizing the tahlil marriage is lawful or unlawful is one of the important issues in the field of Islamic jurisprudence and social issues. The Imamite jurisprudents have different answers to this question and are classified in to two groups: those who are against the tahlil and those who are for. Hadith of Cursing the Muhalil is the main evidence which help jurisprudents to give a good judgment. Therefore, it is necessary to determine the erea of indication and also compatibility and incompatibility of the verdict with the purpose of canonical law concerning unlawfulness of getting married with your ex-wife, after you divorced her for the third time. After giving a brief definition of tahlil marriage and speaking about its philosophy, the author of this paper utilizes the Prophetic hadith and explains about the types of tahlil marriage