mohammad nozari ferdowsieh

One of the most fundamental issues in Islamic criminal law is the issue of ta'zirat. The purpose of imposing these punishments is to maintain order and security in society and to ensure the social interests of the Islamic society. From the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence, the imposition of ta'zirat and determining its amount is the authority of the Infallible Imam, ruler, or judge, and accordingly, reductions in such punishments should also be available to them in the first place. A reduction in ta'ziri penalties can have significant individual, social, cultural, political, and especially economic impacts. The aspects of reducing punishment are the subject of Article 38 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013, which have been examined in this study using a descriptive-analytical method. The findings of this research show that the jurisprudential foundations of reducing punishments are of two types: general foundations, which are the legislator's purposes for legislating, which include: divine nearness, worldly and otherworldly happiness, social, economic, and political justice. These principles are not only the basis for reducing punishments, but also, in a way, are considered the red line of all legislative provisions. The second type is specific foundations, which are themselves divided into three categories: Quranic, narrational, and rational foundations, and each is divided into two categories. The first group are the foundations that prove the desirability of the principle of reducing punishment from the perspective of Islamic holy law, and the second group are the verses, narrations, and rational arguments that prescribe reducing some punishments according to the specific circumstances of the criminals.

Various evidences in Islamic law attest to the necessity of intention in aiding and abetting a criminal act considering it as an essential element in committing a crime without which it will be difficult to attribute criminal liability to a person and entitle punishment accordingly. This necessity in realization of abetting a criminal act is a source of disagreement among jurisprudents with Imam Khomeini being one of its opponents.  Whereas vastness of executive works in some actions requires involvement of some other factors for realization of perpetrator’s intension, it is necessary to delve into the issue. This is because the abettor under the influence of the perpetrator’s deceit, or to avert threat, or with an intention of doing good may take action to be accused of committing crime in spite of the absence of an intention but due to entitlement as abetting a criminal act. Findings of this paper, developed through a descriptive-analytical method and library documentation, indicate that the rule on existence of an intention for committing a crime is preferable. A review of Imam Khomeini’s Viewpoints, despite sufficiency of evidence and emphasis on the role of common law in determining complicity in crime, shows his tendency to accept such preference. Therefore, in some cases where intention is absent, the title of complicity in crime and entitlement of punishment may be removed.

The issue of non-halal therapy is one of the important topics of medicine in Islamic societies, which is necessary, to be examined from a jurisprudential point of view. Prohibiting the use of taboos and complying with Shariah rules sometimes make the patient face difficulty and difficulty in treatment. Based on this, the question is raised, how the legitimacy of non-halal therapy can be justified by referring to the rule of "Hardship brings ease?" In what case does it become the basis for a therapist's license? While criticizing and examining the arguments of the opponents of non-halal therapy, the legitimacy of therapy in two stages of the patient's difficulty in accessing and using halal was examined. The presence of obstacles such as sanctions, hoarding of medicine and its supply at exorbitant prices, lack of a same-sex doctor or exorbitant costs of visiting a same-sex doctor makes it difficult for the patient to receive halal treatment. Also, sometimes the type of halal treatment may cause the patient to face difficulties in the treatment due to some reasons. In this article, while accepting the basic principle of halal treatment and prohibiting haram treatment for patients who have halal medicine easily available to them, with reference to verses, narrations and rational evidences, the causes of the patient's suffering and the ways outof the resulting losses have been investigated.

The thinking method of this research is descriptive-analytical and the library data collection method was carried out using Shia and Sunni jurisprudence books.

Ethical Considerations:

 In all stages of writing, while respecting the authenticity of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness have been observed.

Fear of use, lack of permission and excuse in access to permission are among the examples of difficulty and embarrassment in treatment.

The fear of death, organ failure, exacerbation and spread of the disease are among the losses that the removal of such losses causes to replace solutions in treatment; which, despite its original sanctity, its sanctity is negated by referring to the rule of "Hardship brings ease".

One of the important pillars of the theory of proximity of Islamic denominations is the belief in the religious brotherhood of Muslims. Some muhaddith and jurists of the Imamiyyah deny Islam and the opposite faith, because of the denial of guardianship, as one of the main principles of religion or one of the necessities of religion, they consider religious brotherhood as stable only for the followers of Najiya Sect. The present study, by using library studies and content analysis method, seeks to examine and verify the accuracy of the arguments presented by the owners of this view, because the jurisprudential explanation of religious brotherhood will be effective in the way of interaction and social lifestyle of Muslims. The findings of this study suggest that the majority of the arguments presented by the proponents of the denial of religious brotherhood with the opposition are either distorted in terms of the text and the document, and their application has been rejected by the Imamiyah jurists, or because of the special implication of the claim in question. As the majority of Imamiyyah jurists consider the religious brotherhood with the opposition to be established by proving Islam and different levels of faith.

Apostasy is one of the challenges of monotheistic religions, and religion, while emphasizing the acceptance of Islam and faith, forbids disbelief and apostasy. A number of punishments have been considered for apostates in jurisprudential texts. Apostasy is not just a matter of words; its realization requires the existence of conditions of religious obligation, such as reason and will. However, maturity as one of the general conditions of religious obligation in the occurrence of apostasy is the place of disagreement among jurists. Among those who consider maturity as a condition for the realization of apostasy, some have limited themselves to religious maturity and they have not considered intellectual maturity and the expression of Islam after puberty. This issue is so important that its result affects directly the lives of newly matured juveniles and it can put an end to doubts and disagreements about not observing of the rights of this group in Islam. The result of the research shows that maturity is a necessary but not enough condition in the realization of apostasy, and the purpose of Islam in this matter is true Islam; the subordinate Islam alone is not enough. The present research has been done in a descriptive-analytical method with reference to library sources.

According to most experts of the environment, a major part of the environmental crisis in Iran is due to the failure of some environmental laws and regulations, which has created a conflict of interest in the implementation of environmental laws and regulations. In the meantime, in the light of the content of Article 2 of the Environmental Protection Law, some government organizations are considered as one of the main interested parties in the conflict of interests in the implementation of environmental protection laws against the national interests of the country since they are themselves in charge of environmental protection and are permanent members of the High Council for Environmental Protection and are the highest oversight and decision-making authority as well as the undisputed power of policy-making in all aspects of environmental affairs. In this descriptive-analytical study, the most appropriate, least costly and fastest solution for this crisis, which is caused by the failure of some formal environmental laws, is examined, including Article 2, which has provided the basis for selective and discriminatory implementation of laws and regulations. Thus, according to the jurisprudential rule of "La Zarar (no harm)", which is also the content of Article 40 of the Constitution, by reviewing the content of Article 2 of the Law on Environmental Protection, the position of the Supreme Council for Environmental Protection has been upgraded from an internal administrative council to a supranational council. The result is the elimination of conflicts of interest in the implementation of environmental laws and regulations and the proper management of the environmental crisis in the country.

The method of profit and loss sharing in the civil partnership agreement is one of the existing challenges of the banking system. Article 11 of the civil partnership agreement of the Central Bank denotes that, the partner is obliged to pay the expressed interest even if it is not realized. Using a content analysis method, this paper analyzes the relevant jurisprudential views to determine the requirements of the partnership agreement. Many jurists believe that this type of profit and loss sharing is faced with jurisprudential problems, including opposition to the requirements of the contract. Another group of researchers believe that this type of agreement changes the nature of the civil partnership agreement and deprives the traders to the actual uses of the contract; whether stipulated in a partnership agreement or in an independent agreement; since the conventional wisdom or received opinion of real participation in profits and losses is a prerequisite for a company contract. In their view, since this effect is the result of the creation of a contract, its removal by an implicit condition or a necessary external contract makes it void and useless.