استیفای حق

This article with the aim of identifying and recognizing the possibility of modifying women's rights and the position of the rule of Ṭanqihe Manat (rectifying the effective cause and Elghȃe Khoṣuṣiyyat (abolishing the specificity) in modifying women's legal differences, is examined the jurisprudential documents of dowry adjustment and the dowry adjustment, which has been accepted and documented by the dominant statement in Iranian jurisprudence and law, and a criterion is considered that the Ṭanqihe Manat and Elghȃe Khoṣuṣiyyat in its documents can result in the possibility of adjustment in women's legal differences. This article by descriptive-analytical method and with documentary-library manner is studying the possibility of modifying other women's legal differences by using the rules of Ṭanqihe Manat and Elghȃe Khoṣuṣiyyat and its research community is the sources of jurisprudence and the law and principles of jurisprudence. The main issue is whether the documents cited in the dowry adjustment are specific to the dowry or whether they are general, and these arguments can be used in other legal differences between men and women? Documents for adjusting dowry include the rule of La Zarar(no- harm), La Ḥaraj (no- embarrassment), Ghabn e Ḥadeth (loss occurring), implicit condition, survival originality, priority analogy, adding to the content of the contract (marriage) which is examined from the point of view of Ṭanqihe Manat and the principle of accepting the women's legal differences is proved from the perspective of jurisprudential documents and it was concluded that it is possible to modify women's legal differences in Islamic law, especially material rights by Ṭanqihe Manat and Elghȃe Khoṣuṣiyyat.

“Bribery” and to “receive any item of value” from some one to defend him and to infringe or deny the rights of others is unlawful and against the shari‘a (Islamic law) and the law and all Islamic religions hold that it is unlawful; In another word, there is consensus among Muslim regrinding this rule. Undoubtedly, one who conducts bribery performs an unlawful act. In some cases bribery does not infringe or deny the rights of others, rather it restores the actual rights of some one. Given that, it will not render the bribe lawful for the bribe recipient. But a question arises here as to whether the act of bribe-giver for restoration of his right is also unlawful and forbidden? Sometimes there is no way but to give bribe to restore one’s right and sometimes there are other ways too. It is understood from the review of the arguments , proofs , and the viewpoints of the jurists in this article that in the case that there is no way but to give bribe for the restoration of right, bribery is lawful for bribe-giver to the extent that it is necessary, but it is unlawful for the bribe-recipient.