mohammad rasaee

The rule of expediency means the principle of observing general custom and it can be a ruling in the form of secondary rulings or government rulings. In Iran's legal system and Imamiyyah jurisprudence, which is considered as the history of this legal system, custom has always had a significant role and position in the field of exploration of Shari'a ruling, recognition of concepts and examples, recognition of issues and interpretation of the will of the parties. On the other hand, criminal sentences, like other Shari'a sentences, are always subject to interests and corruptions, and compliance with interests in criminal policy leads to the realization of justice, reform of the individual and society, benefiting the obligee and preventing harm from him. In general, Islam has presented a dual approach in the penal system in such a way that it has prescribed fixed punishments for crimes that have fixed and unchangeable interests and principles; Because it considers the foundation of a healthy society and social security to be based on it, and for less important crimes or crimes affected by the conditions of time and place, it has defined flexible punishments in terms of the interests of the individual and the society under the title of punishments, that determining the amount of this category of punishments is one of the duties is an Islamic ruler. In this research, the place of custom and expediency in determining punishment from the point of view of jurisprudence and law is investigated with a descriptiveanalytical method. Since Iran's laws are based on the principles of Shia jurisprudence, the role of custom and expediency is evident in jurisprudence and laws, which can have effects such as mitigation, transformation and intensification of punishment.

One of the most important principles of Islam, which needs to be explained in Islamic penalties, is the "exclusivity of the Shari'a of easy and tolerant", which is taken from the Prophetic hadith: I was sent upon the easy and tolerant true Shari’a. The reference of jurists and theologians to this principle shows its high validity. So, this principle has been recognized as one of the factors of Islam distinguished from other religions in the devising primary rulings and also as a rule of negation of hardship in secondary rulings. The effect of this principle on the Islamic penal system, especially penal punishments, is to soften these punishments as compared to pre-Islamic era, and by applying a rule of negation of hardship and creating a facilitating moral principle, it prevents certain punishments from going beyond their goals and provides the context for the upgrade of criminal justice.

One of the types of violence is domestic violence, the most common form of which is male violence against women. Matters used by some to justify violence; Verse 34 of Surah An-Nisa ‘which is in a part of the verse, regarding the treatment of some spouses, said: “And beat them”. This article now seeks to answer the question of whether Islam really commanded domestic violence? This question, while seemingly minor, is a general objection to the body of religion if it is not dispelled. To find the answer, we have conducted research on various interpretive, jurisprudential and legal views and finally, by comparing them, we conclude and justify this view; First, arrogance has a meaning beyond mere sexual disobedience And secondly, the reaction given to such arrogance has three characteristics: being Ta’zir, gradual, and even less than the proof of diyat.